Stephan Dion has announced his resignation, and it appears the Liberals will have a replacement for him by mid-week. Again, it appears that they are taking the wrong path to do it though. I'm amazed at the crappy decision making they are using to get through this. There must be some real boneheads involved in running that party. It's like a cat in a harness running along a path and you've got to yank them back onto the path.
I was thinking they were reading my blog, or listening to my coffee-shop discussions for a while, as they seem to be dealing with my problems as I bring them up. Getting rid of Dion and making a move toward a quick replacement process is good. But of course, they're picking the wrong process, which leaves them open to criticism of putting a leader, and potentially a PM into place based on the choices of some inner circle of proven-inept organizers.
Bob Rae has been pointing out that it should be a broader voting of all Liberal members - that's the guy who's thinking. I think that Ignatief would still win the vote in that situation, but they really need to understand that the process should be broad and quick. This isn't 1982 - they can easily do a phone/internet thing pretty easily. I could write a javascript form for them with some basic security in about two hours. Why can't they figure this out.
The Bloc and NDP are pretty quiet. Now the talk about the Conservatives is that they messed up by proroguing. If they had kept parliament in session, they may well have won the non-conf vote and still be around. Instead they have focussed the Liberals on their weakness (their leadership) and may still yet get their house in order.
The saga continues. We'll see if they can change their mind a few more times and get this thing settled so that we can get a bit of stability into Canadian Politics.
Tuesday
Sunday
Change of plan
Well things are changing fast. Blogging from my ipod is not optimal but seems to kind of work. Watching the news, it appears that Dion will shortly step aside and iggy will take over. I think the latter is a mistake though. The use of some open process would be more sensible and inclusive. I keep spouting that they can both fix this mess and appear hep and hapnin' by orchestrating it all thru YouTube.
Probably lots more to come tomorrow.
Probably lots more to come tomorrow.
Wednesday
Thanks for the Mess Steve
I'm quite saddened by this whole thing. Watching the goings-on in Thailand, Zimbabwe and various banana-republics, I fear that the Harper cronies will try to throw us into that mix.
I have no political party affiliation or loyalty - but I do recognize dangerous behaviour when I see it. I see blatant lying and more worrisome propagandist messaging coming from the government. Watch for jingoistic language straight out of the Republican play-book. This plus the advertising campaign they are setting off borders on incitement to violence. Have they no respect for our system, our way of government?
Here are my issues:
Now, I'll also wrap up by saying I wish that Stephan Dion had stepped down and that we had an interim Liberal leader, or jeeze even Jack Layton taking the lead on this. But in spite of my distaste for Dion as an attempted leader, I'm prepared to accept the parliamentary tradition of the current leader taking the reins and take him at his word that he's step down in May when Ignatief takes over. (don't get me started on him).
I have no political party affiliation or loyalty - but I do recognize dangerous behaviour when I see it. I see blatant lying and more worrisome propagandist messaging coming from the government. Watch for jingoistic language straight out of the Republican play-book. This plus the advertising campaign they are setting off borders on incitement to violence. Have they no respect for our system, our way of government?
Here are my issues:
- Use of the word 'Canadians' - they've positioned this to be the right-wing conservative sympathizers. It becomes almost threatening to people who don't share their point of view.
- Use of phrases of 'the other' that stereotype and marginalize people based on their thoughts and beliefs: "socialists" "separatists."
- The use of 'the big lie' - their communications take the position of thinking up a hollywood-esque melodromatic scene, and they they happily invent facts to fill in the picture, then repeat it ad nauseum, blatantly ignoring reality, happy to paint their picture around lies. "They wouldn't even include the Canadian Flag in the pictures when they signed their agreement" - Well, first, their was a flag there - and second, what the HELL has that got to do with anything. This smacks of the Republican 'he didn't wear a flag pin' attack upon Obama in the US. I swear they have a US handler brought in on these PR things, who just recycles all their dirty politics.
- The big PR campaign that is just getting into gear now. As I type there are people in sound booths and edit suites piecing together propaganda pieces that are all sad eyed kids and sneering opposition members.
- These are tough times and the gov't made all sorts of orchestrated speeches about cooperative government, but instead they came along with a weak financial statement during a Worldwide Recession and Economic Crisis, and instigated confusion at a time when we need stability and leadership.
- The fervour being whipped up in Alberta serves nobody and hurts our country more than does the 'separatists' vowing to not defeat the coalition. Inclusion in the political process helps pull bloc supporters over to the side of constructive collaboration and positivity, and away from negativity, isolation and hatred. Which way are Albertans being pushed?
- Crazy phraseology about 'democracy' and 'the constitution'. The opposition members represent over 60% of the population, and the parliamentary system around the world sees constant use of coalitions to bring about progress in government. These lies are all attempting to confuse Canadians who are already too influenced by American TV, and in fact are banking on the assumption that they are. This isn't a US presidential system - nobody votes for a PM, we put in parties, and the proposed coalition has support of the vast majority of Canadian voters.
- If anything was anti-democratic it was the move by the gov't to cripple any opposition by removing their funding and trying to push them back into begging for handouts from developers, special interests, lobbyists and cronies.
Now, I'll also wrap up by saying I wish that Stephan Dion had stepped down and that we had an interim Liberal leader, or jeeze even Jack Layton taking the lead on this. But in spite of my distaste for Dion as an attempted leader, I'm prepared to accept the parliamentary tradition of the current leader taking the reins and take him at his word that he's step down in May when Ignatief takes over. (don't get me started on him).
Monday
Pass the Sour Cream
So if Harper Prorogues parliament, does that make him the proroguer and the rest of the MP's prorogies?
Things continue to develop quickly, and its looking that they are ignoring my Layton hand-off to new-Liberal-guy idea, and going with Dion as the new PM. It's also looking like the conservatives are going to prorogue, which is frighteningly like a step toward a dictatorship. Shut down parliament so nobody can dissent and do what you want. I don't know if the PM has to ask the GG to prorogue parliament - I would have thought so. I can't imagine that our GG (really her room full of handlers - she's just a figure-head afterall) has any option, but if she did she'd say that the business of the house has not been completed, and proroguing is inappropriate. Come back with the confidence of the house and we can talk.
It's a surprising turn of events, and hopefully we can see a new government take over who can put a solid plan forward to quiet the markets and add some sense of astute, economic policy in place.
A good question that nobody has asked is will Dion put the Green Shift into play? The NDP would likely support it. It would also be astute to roll back the GST at least one percent to where it was before. Low impact on consumers and good impact on the budget. Hell, they could fund the whole stimulus package on the back of the billions it brings in.
Things continue to develop quickly, and its looking that they are ignoring my Layton hand-off to new-Liberal-guy idea, and going with Dion as the new PM. It's also looking like the conservatives are going to prorogue, which is frighteningly like a step toward a dictatorship. Shut down parliament so nobody can dissent and do what you want. I don't know if the PM has to ask the GG to prorogue parliament - I would have thought so. I can't imagine that our GG (really her room full of handlers - she's just a figure-head afterall) has any option, but if she did she'd say that the business of the house has not been completed, and proroguing is inappropriate. Come back with the confidence of the house and we can talk.
It's a surprising turn of events, and hopefully we can see a new government take over who can put a solid plan forward to quiet the markets and add some sense of astute, economic policy in place.
A good question that nobody has asked is will Dion put the Green Shift into play? The NDP would likely support it. It would also be astute to roll back the GST at least one percent to where it was before. Low impact on consumers and good impact on the budget. Hell, they could fund the whole stimulus package on the back of the billions it brings in.
Saturday
"We've Already Got One," Say Torrie Slugs
I have to respond to the current message track of the Conservatives - as I know Mr. Harper is waiting for me to do :)
His current popular sound bite is that Stephan Dion doesn't have the right to become prime minister. He needs to be voted in by Canadians, not some people in a back room.
He seems to forget that we have a well established parliamentary democracy - and nobody is making up new rules on this.
The prime minister is not on the ballot of any of our elections, and just like how nobody voted for Dion nobody voted for him either. Nobody votes for PM - we vote in a party (his only received 38% of the vote BTW), and the leader of the party (parties?) in power becomes the PM. As usual someone needs to point out to Harper that we do not live in the United States. If the GG asks another group during a minority to form a government, the leader of that group, as chosen by our elected representatives, is the PM. There's no dirty tricks involved, its just how it works... and it's a lot better than going to the polls. Surely he isn't suggesting an election is a better path forward out of their self-dug hole.
I'm always disgusted when he starts throwing around the word "Canadians", it is invariably insulting and divisive, in that he is telling us what to think, and invariably it's something diametrically opposed to how we are thinking.
Plus this constant, constant need to try and contrast the trailer-park, tim hortons crowd against a bunch of lounging greeks with palm fronds and grape-feeders is a pathetic excuse for constructive debate. It's a page right out of the American's republican playbook.
When talking about the funding for parties this morning on CBC's "The House", Pierre Pollievre was doing it as per his script. He says, hockey teams and church groups (or some similarly parochial groups) can raise their own money, so our political parties can as well. As usual - 'salt of the earth folk' against 'silk and velvet ensconced elites'. That is SO Karl Rove.
Well in truth, our parties are supported by a tiny amount of cash from the federal budget to decouple their viability from cheques handed out by powerful businesses seeking favours. The conservatives have no shortage of those from the Alberta oil sands, so they are happy to cut the greens and NDP off of the funds they need to represent their constituents. As I've said before - their prime motivation is to hamstring the Liberals at a point where their finances are already low.
I don't believe in any of the parties' magical abilities to get us out of this current financial situation, but if there's one thing I do believe, it is that these current bums thinking that the best response to the crisis is to claim they fixed already fixed it a year before it started is one of the stupidest things I've heard in my life of listening to political theatre.
His current popular sound bite is that Stephan Dion doesn't have the right to become prime minister. He needs to be voted in by Canadians, not some people in a back room.
He seems to forget that we have a well established parliamentary democracy - and nobody is making up new rules on this.
The prime minister is not on the ballot of any of our elections, and just like how nobody voted for Dion nobody voted for him either. Nobody votes for PM - we vote in a party (his only received 38% of the vote BTW), and the leader of the party (parties?) in power becomes the PM. As usual someone needs to point out to Harper that we do not live in the United States. If the GG asks another group during a minority to form a government, the leader of that group, as chosen by our elected representatives, is the PM. There's no dirty tricks involved, its just how it works... and it's a lot better than going to the polls. Surely he isn't suggesting an election is a better path forward out of their self-dug hole.
I'm always disgusted when he starts throwing around the word "Canadians", it is invariably insulting and divisive, in that he is telling us what to think, and invariably it's something diametrically opposed to how we are thinking.
Plus this constant, constant need to try and contrast the trailer-park, tim hortons crowd against a bunch of lounging greeks with palm fronds and grape-feeders is a pathetic excuse for constructive debate. It's a page right out of the American's republican playbook.
When talking about the funding for parties this morning on CBC's "The House", Pierre Pollievre was doing it as per his script. He says, hockey teams and church groups (or some similarly parochial groups) can raise their own money, so our political parties can as well. As usual - 'salt of the earth folk' against 'silk and velvet ensconced elites'. That is SO Karl Rove.
Well in truth, our parties are supported by a tiny amount of cash from the federal budget to decouple their viability from cheques handed out by powerful businesses seeking favours. The conservatives have no shortage of those from the Alberta oil sands, so they are happy to cut the greens and NDP off of the funds they need to represent their constituents. As I've said before - their prime motivation is to hamstring the Liberals at a point where their finances are already low.
I don't believe in any of the parties' magical abilities to get us out of this current financial situation, but if there's one thing I do believe, it is that these current bums thinking that the best response to the crisis is to claim they fixed already fixed it a year before it started is one of the stupidest things I've heard in my life of listening to political theatre.
Friday
Well, This is Awkward
So fancy meeting you here. Who'd have thunk?
Yesterday, Canada's New, New Government, same as the old government, delivered a fiscal statement in the midst of perhaps the greatest global financial crisis seen since the 1930s, and somehow forgot to include any substantial measures to deal with it. In a CBC interview with the abrasive Mr. Baird. His response to lack of attention to stimulus? Oh, we did that last year.
Now, I'm not sure which of the two implications is more shocking - that he is claiming they knew about the soon to arrive Worldwide Financial Crisis before anyone else, and didn't tell anyone, or that he considers reducing the GST a valuable financial stimulus. That cut creates an almost imperceptible reduction in prices for all but the biggest of big-ticket items, yet robs the government coffers of billions: low incentive for consumers with big negatives for deficit avoidance.
Also buried in the mini-budget speech, was the elimination of funding for political parties. The buck and a bit per vote that each party receives. The whole point of which, is that the parties are then beholden to the taxpayers, rather than to the guy in a suit that can slip them the biggest cheque.
The opportunistic leaders of the CRAP party have realized that the liberals are in a tough financial position. In their usual effort to silence and pummel anything that could be considered opposition, the surely figure that eliminating this source of funding will hamstring them for longer into the future. Just like their earlier elimination of legal support for people who find themselves in subjugated by government and forced to address it in the courts.
Anyway, those are the events that precipitate an untimely return to the consideration of potential elections. Now reports suggest that Messrs. Broadbent and Chretien are working at a potential coalition to take over government. The idea being a confidence vote on Monday, and a new government by next weekend. Clearly while I disagree that the chances of earlier election calls that preceded this last one were not a great concern to Canadians, I'm sure Canadians do not want to go to the polls with the same slate as our last round.
This led me to think there should be a new rule - when a minority government falls, all parties have to change leaders. Ha!
But presumably our GG will accept a proposal that sees a coalition government proposed following the failure of a confidence vote. So who will be PM? Clearly either Dion, Layton or Duceppe. The first and last seem impossible, so are we about to see a PM Layton?! What an amazing turn of events.
I'd suggest that the coalition might agree that Layton gets the keys until the Liberals elect their new guy, then he takes over with a guarantee of no election call until he's done an equivalent period, then it's all bets are off.
Would Duceppe stick it out? It would be preposterous to have a separatist take over the PM role - Ha! So what will they need to give him to keep him on side. The numbers don't work out without him.
There are 308 seats and C=143 while L=76 N=37 B=50 O=2 So clearly it takes em all.
The bottom line though - what kind of government puts us in this situation in the middle of a global financial crisis. Instead of building a concensus, collaborative government to get us through the tough times, they are bitter and divisive and put us into turmoil when we need strength and leadership.
Shame on them.
Who knows where we'll be by next week!
Yesterday, Canada's New, New Government, same as the old government, delivered a fiscal statement in the midst of perhaps the greatest global financial crisis seen since the 1930s, and somehow forgot to include any substantial measures to deal with it. In a CBC interview with the abrasive Mr. Baird. His response to lack of attention to stimulus? Oh, we did that last year.
Now, I'm not sure which of the two implications is more shocking - that he is claiming they knew about the soon to arrive Worldwide Financial Crisis before anyone else, and didn't tell anyone, or that he considers reducing the GST a valuable financial stimulus. That cut creates an almost imperceptible reduction in prices for all but the biggest of big-ticket items, yet robs the government coffers of billions: low incentive for consumers with big negatives for deficit avoidance.
Also buried in the mini-budget speech, was the elimination of funding for political parties. The buck and a bit per vote that each party receives. The whole point of which, is that the parties are then beholden to the taxpayers, rather than to the guy in a suit that can slip them the biggest cheque.
The opportunistic leaders of the CRAP party have realized that the liberals are in a tough financial position. In their usual effort to silence and pummel anything that could be considered opposition, the surely figure that eliminating this source of funding will hamstring them for longer into the future. Just like their earlier elimination of legal support for people who find themselves in subjugated by government and forced to address it in the courts.
Anyway, those are the events that precipitate an untimely return to the consideration of potential elections. Now reports suggest that Messrs. Broadbent and Chretien are working at a potential coalition to take over government. The idea being a confidence vote on Monday, and a new government by next weekend. Clearly while I disagree that the chances of earlier election calls that preceded this last one were not a great concern to Canadians, I'm sure Canadians do not want to go to the polls with the same slate as our last round.
This led me to think there should be a new rule - when a minority government falls, all parties have to change leaders. Ha!
But presumably our GG will accept a proposal that sees a coalition government proposed following the failure of a confidence vote. So who will be PM? Clearly either Dion, Layton or Duceppe. The first and last seem impossible, so are we about to see a PM Layton?! What an amazing turn of events.
I'd suggest that the coalition might agree that Layton gets the keys until the Liberals elect their new guy, then he takes over with a guarantee of no election call until he's done an equivalent period, then it's all bets are off.
Would Duceppe stick it out? It would be preposterous to have a separatist take over the PM role - Ha! So what will they need to give him to keep him on side. The numbers don't work out without him.
There are 308 seats and C=143 while L=76 N=37 B=50 O=2 So clearly it takes em all.
The bottom line though - what kind of government puts us in this situation in the middle of a global financial crisis. Instead of building a concensus, collaborative government to get us through the tough times, they are bitter and divisive and put us into turmoil when we need strength and leadership.
Shame on them.
Who knows where we'll be by next week!
Wednesday
Wrapping it all up
Well, can't say that I'm surprised with the outcome. I can certainly say I've heard enough about it for a few days, with just a couple of hours of coverage. There's not much to report, but every radio program introduces the story of the election as if nobody else is covering it, and treads the same ground.
The fact is that participation is down, and with a small fraction of the total vote, the ruling conservatives have increased their minority government.
But the story is not one that has finished. This is, to an large extent, just a continuation of the same story that has been developing from the day that Paul Martin's cronies decided to attack Cretien while he was still in office. Ever since then the Liberals have been in disarray, and the left side of the spectrum (if such a spectrum really is relevant anymore) has been without a dominant force.
In the coming year (man, do we really have to watch that long?) Dion will be pushed back out, Rae and Ignatief will again split their party in half vying for leadership. What will be different this time? Will Kennedy come up the middle this time as another weak liberal leader? Will Manley throw his hat in the ring and split the party three ways? Will one of the previous guys turn out to have weakened his position letting someone move into a dominant role? Hard to say.
I can't help but think that an 'instant run-off' voting system would have worked so much better. In each riding if voters had picked their first and second choices we'd likely have seen a liberal minority with a substantial green presence and a stronger NDP, leaving government open to form around a coalition of a pair of parties, and we would not have a small percentage of the popular vote resulting in so many seats going conservative.
Such is life.
Something tells me this blog will be coming back to life in the 18months, to chatter about yet another trip to the polls. 'Till then - happy politics! (And enjoy the dog and pony show to the south!)
The fact is that participation is down, and with a small fraction of the total vote, the ruling conservatives have increased their minority government.
But the story is not one that has finished. This is, to an large extent, just a continuation of the same story that has been developing from the day that Paul Martin's cronies decided to attack Cretien while he was still in office. Ever since then the Liberals have been in disarray, and the left side of the spectrum (if such a spectrum really is relevant anymore) has been without a dominant force.
In the coming year (man, do we really have to watch that long?) Dion will be pushed back out, Rae and Ignatief will again split their party in half vying for leadership. What will be different this time? Will Kennedy come up the middle this time as another weak liberal leader? Will Manley throw his hat in the ring and split the party three ways? Will one of the previous guys turn out to have weakened his position letting someone move into a dominant role? Hard to say.
I can't help but think that an 'instant run-off' voting system would have worked so much better. In each riding if voters had picked their first and second choices we'd likely have seen a liberal minority with a substantial green presence and a stronger NDP, leaving government open to form around a coalition of a pair of parties, and we would not have a small percentage of the popular vote resulting in so many seats going conservative.
Such is life.
Something tells me this blog will be coming back to life in the 18months, to chatter about yet another trip to the polls. 'Till then - happy politics! (And enjoy the dog and pony show to the south!)
Tuesday
Done!
Well, I did it. I voted the crap out of that election - boom, in the box.
Did you? Get out there - several minutes remain!
Did you? Get out there - several minutes remain!
Saturday
Election Prediction
I have a lot more confidence in the UBC election stock market than I do any of the polsters for predicting the election results. It's looking like there will be another conservative minority with a slightly diminished seat count for them, but also a substantial diminishment of the Liberal seats. NDP position seems to have strengthened a lot, though no to the historic high which I think was around 45seats under Ed Broadbent.
I'd love to see the conservative numbers drop down to a lower number to create something more interesting for us. Perhaps some sort of coalition government, with some legs to run for a few years... at least long enough for the Liberals to re-group. We need some stronger people in leadership, and the only avenue that I can see producing someone any time soon is probably the Dion door.
That would mean the old Rae vs. Ignatief thing again. Not sure if either of them fit the bill. Perhaps Manley will dust off his old election signs and give it a whirl as well. The country might be hungry enough for someone that he could potentially take a pretty good crack at it. I suspect, however, that his strategy will be to wait for the Rae/Ignatief battle to run a little further through before popping his head above the parapet.
I'd love to see the conservative numbers drop down to a lower number to create something more interesting for us. Perhaps some sort of coalition government, with some legs to run for a few years... at least long enough for the Liberals to re-group. We need some stronger people in leadership, and the only avenue that I can see producing someone any time soon is probably the Dion door.
That would mean the old Rae vs. Ignatief thing again. Not sure if either of them fit the bill. Perhaps Manley will dust off his old election signs and give it a whirl as well. The country might be hungry enough for someone that he could potentially take a pretty good crack at it. I suspect, however, that his strategy will be to wait for the Rae/Ignatief battle to run a little further through before popping his head above the parapet.
Thursday
Stephan does The National
I watched a goodly chunk of the National's Q & A with Stephan Dion yesterday. Insert big sigh here.
I accept that he's passionate for what he believes in. And I also believe that he wouldn't do a bad job. He's utterly charisma-free, which generates a gut reaction in me of "wrong guy for the job" but I can happily over-ride that with my trusty brain which I keep handy for just such moments.
His almost desperate delivery is probably what gives some that sense of passion. I suppose to as an ordinary sort of guy, there is a certain amount of nerves talking on national television perhaps? Plus he was trying to squeeze in 5 pounds of potatoes into a 1 pound bag in most of his responses. The result is that he seemed to be ignoring the question. Sacrificing the answer to cram in some more details.
A more concerning thing personality-wise is that he seems to be utterly humourless at all times. Never cracks a smile. Never seems to calmly ponder the answer to a question. I'm not looking for a creepy Harper smile, but some sense of calm, confidence would be good. Then again, maybe those are traits that get wrapped up in the concept of charisma.
There was a moment when he expressed an answer to one of Mansbridge's questions with a sentence of French. I'm sure he lost a few thousand western voters with that one. I guess the idea was "here's a very a propos proverb that we all know well." Well, it wasn't "comme ci comme ça" - we didn't know that one, and it came across like someone unable to think of the words in English. Not the sign of a strong communicator who will connect with the people from sea-to-sea.
There were some pretty direct questions that he should have been prepared for. Ones for which he could have delivered a nice clean, to the point answer. First, I recall a woman saying she earns $12k a year and has two kids, and inquiring how is she and other poor people going to afford a new carbon tax.
The answer was a gimme! Slam-dunk opportunity. And if delivered with compassion and understanding could have really connected. Instead, he immediately forgot the detail of the question: "I don't remember how much her revenue, er, income was," he began "but let's say it's $20k..." and he launched into how much money she would save based on his green shift shtick.
No Stephan! First - $20k is a lot more than $12k. Surely you could have retained that nugget from a 15second clip. And the right answer was an emphatic: "With our green shift you get to keep more of your hard earned money - it is not a tax on your income." He could even have slammed Harper's lie and deny approach (straight from his US republican advisors no doubt) "Mr. Harper repeats at every opportunity the lie that the green shift is a tax on individuals. This is not true."
There, done - say it with some compassion and you're through the question. But no go.
The other question I saw was a small biz owner with an aviation company asking if the green shift was going to tax his business out of existance. Dion's response was totally off topic, talking about airplane manufacturing jobs at Bombardier doing well 'cause they were building more green planes.
He had actually given the right answer earlier in his conversation - where he pointed out that the green shift is phased in. While a small businessman has no ability to drop his plane and buy a new state-of-the-art bio-plane, he should have suggested that he could alter his business to embrace more green friendly processes, and the green shift would not knock him out of business. He could have also projected a tough line to say though, that if his business was unable, over the long term, to become more green friendly, that was a cost of doing business in the new reality, but they weren't going to hit him over the head right away. Perhaps throw in some comment about a special element of the Green shift plan to help small businesses of fewer than 5 employees or something. Done.
Poor guy - can't project his way out of a soggy paper bag. I don't doubt that he'd do a decent job. I just don't know that an average voter can see the strength in the platform beyond the anti-charisma that their leader exudes.
Hope you get out and vote next week. Remember to take a look at the polls in your riding and just pick the strongest non-conservative and go with it.
Seriously, just think what fun it would be to have an awkward, bookish PM! Really, it would truly make me proud to have someone totally charisma free representing us world-wide. There's nothing that says 'integrity' like someone who doesn't come across like a used-car salesman... or a creepy cult-religion pastor like our current guy. So perhaps putting your vote behind Stephan is not such a bad thing!
I accept that he's passionate for what he believes in. And I also believe that he wouldn't do a bad job. He's utterly charisma-free, which generates a gut reaction in me of "wrong guy for the job" but I can happily over-ride that with my trusty brain which I keep handy for just such moments.
His almost desperate delivery is probably what gives some that sense of passion. I suppose to as an ordinary sort of guy, there is a certain amount of nerves talking on national television perhaps? Plus he was trying to squeeze in 5 pounds of potatoes into a 1 pound bag in most of his responses. The result is that he seemed to be ignoring the question. Sacrificing the answer to cram in some more details.
A more concerning thing personality-wise is that he seems to be utterly humourless at all times. Never cracks a smile. Never seems to calmly ponder the answer to a question. I'm not looking for a creepy Harper smile, but some sense of calm, confidence would be good. Then again, maybe those are traits that get wrapped up in the concept of charisma.
There was a moment when he expressed an answer to one of Mansbridge's questions with a sentence of French. I'm sure he lost a few thousand western voters with that one. I guess the idea was "here's a very a propos proverb that we all know well." Well, it wasn't "comme ci comme ça" - we didn't know that one, and it came across like someone unable to think of the words in English. Not the sign of a strong communicator who will connect with the people from sea-to-sea.
There were some pretty direct questions that he should have been prepared for. Ones for which he could have delivered a nice clean, to the point answer. First, I recall a woman saying she earns $12k a year and has two kids, and inquiring how is she and other poor people going to afford a new carbon tax.
The answer was a gimme! Slam-dunk opportunity. And if delivered with compassion and understanding could have really connected. Instead, he immediately forgot the detail of the question: "I don't remember how much her revenue, er, income was," he began "but let's say it's $20k..." and he launched into how much money she would save based on his green shift shtick.
No Stephan! First - $20k is a lot more than $12k. Surely you could have retained that nugget from a 15second clip. And the right answer was an emphatic: "With our green shift you get to keep more of your hard earned money - it is not a tax on your income." He could even have slammed Harper's lie and deny approach (straight from his US republican advisors no doubt) "Mr. Harper repeats at every opportunity the lie that the green shift is a tax on individuals. This is not true."
There, done - say it with some compassion and you're through the question. But no go.
The other question I saw was a small biz owner with an aviation company asking if the green shift was going to tax his business out of existance. Dion's response was totally off topic, talking about airplane manufacturing jobs at Bombardier doing well 'cause they were building more green planes.
He had actually given the right answer earlier in his conversation - where he pointed out that the green shift is phased in. While a small businessman has no ability to drop his plane and buy a new state-of-the-art bio-plane, he should have suggested that he could alter his business to embrace more green friendly processes, and the green shift would not knock him out of business. He could have also projected a tough line to say though, that if his business was unable, over the long term, to become more green friendly, that was a cost of doing business in the new reality, but they weren't going to hit him over the head right away. Perhaps throw in some comment about a special element of the Green shift plan to help small businesses of fewer than 5 employees or something. Done.
Poor guy - can't project his way out of a soggy paper bag. I don't doubt that he'd do a decent job. I just don't know that an average voter can see the strength in the platform beyond the anti-charisma that their leader exudes.
Hope you get out and vote next week. Remember to take a look at the polls in your riding and just pick the strongest non-conservative and go with it.
Seriously, just think what fun it would be to have an awkward, bookish PM! Really, it would truly make me proud to have someone totally charisma free representing us world-wide. There's nothing that says 'integrity' like someone who doesn't come across like a used-car salesman... or a creepy cult-religion pastor like our current guy. So perhaps putting your vote behind Stephan is not such a bad thing!
Wednesday
A Peep from the Finance Minister
Well, RH Harper took the shackles off Flaherty long enough for him to pipe up and issue some firm words against deficits.
I had a funny moment standing in my kitchen a couple of days ago, listening to the news when I suddenly couldn't think who the finance minister was. Wow, I thought, we didn't have that issue back in liberal days. I was not a big PM as PM fan - but it's hard to fault Paul Martin on his fiscal policy, and solidity as a Finance Minister. They churned out surpluses over and over, and left things in pretty good shape when they decided to turn inwards and set their own offices ablaze with in-fighting.
A few moments later Flaherty's name came to mind, and my heart sunk recalling all the childish sniping at Ontario's government. Oh grow up, you lost that election and new guys are doing a better job of it than you did. Scuttling a province by generating bad press from the feds isn't going to make people sing the praises of the Harris government of yesteryear.
So, the knitted curtain (made out of surplus sweaters don't you know) was lifted long enough for Flaherty to say "We will maintain a surplus in Canada and we will continue to pay down debt." Great, thinks I, that sounds reasonable enough. But so much of a country's perception in a volatile market is the confidence that the outward facing officials can generate. A government that keeps the media out of all its activities, does not evoke a sense of transparency.
Truth be told, I'd prefer the finance ministers of yesteryear. I like Martin in the role, I thought too that Michael Wilson, to go back a few years, did a decent job as a Conservative FM (ie non-CRAP conservative). I even remember Allan MacEachen appearing decent. Granted I didn't have as much flesh in the game in those distant years past, so may not have noticed all the nuances.
There's a good resource to be found here, a list of all the FM's.
I would have preferred if, in the Martin years, we had inched a bit more towards debt repayment, when those multi-billion dollar surpluses were rolling in. And we could have done with somewhat less habitual under-estimation.
And out of all of the special interests I can think of, I would loved to have seen a few billion dropped into modernizing Canadian Transportation. Not creating the Mississauga Palace of Versailles that Pearson Airport turned into (I was all for updates, but I think they went a bit overboard there) Rather they should have focussed on steel and rubber transportation on the ground. A world class railway - like we had in the 50's (you can still see it if you want, it's pretty much the same stuff). And some heavy-handed, micromanaged municipal transit build-outs to get me out of my car would have been a good use for those things as well. (Municipal governments would gobble the cash up unless it's well wrapped in strings).
Now we've heard of some infrastructure money in the past few years, but I think it's still an order of magnitude lower than it should be.
Greens and NDP are both talking up a re-investment in these areas. Dion is also talking a green streak - so what the hell, go pick the one that's leading in your area and cast your vote next week.
Let's just avoid buying the sweater thing and putting them back in.
I had a funny moment standing in my kitchen a couple of days ago, listening to the news when I suddenly couldn't think who the finance minister was. Wow, I thought, we didn't have that issue back in liberal days. I was not a big PM as PM fan - but it's hard to fault Paul Martin on his fiscal policy, and solidity as a Finance Minister. They churned out surpluses over and over, and left things in pretty good shape when they decided to turn inwards and set their own offices ablaze with in-fighting.
A few moments later Flaherty's name came to mind, and my heart sunk recalling all the childish sniping at Ontario's government. Oh grow up, you lost that election and new guys are doing a better job of it than you did. Scuttling a province by generating bad press from the feds isn't going to make people sing the praises of the Harris government of yesteryear.
So, the knitted curtain (made out of surplus sweaters don't you know) was lifted long enough for Flaherty to say "We will maintain a surplus in Canada and we will continue to pay down debt." Great, thinks I, that sounds reasonable enough. But so much of a country's perception in a volatile market is the confidence that the outward facing officials can generate. A government that keeps the media out of all its activities, does not evoke a sense of transparency.
Truth be told, I'd prefer the finance ministers of yesteryear. I like Martin in the role, I thought too that Michael Wilson, to go back a few years, did a decent job as a Conservative FM (ie non-CRAP conservative). I even remember Allan MacEachen appearing decent. Granted I didn't have as much flesh in the game in those distant years past, so may not have noticed all the nuances.
There's a good resource to be found here, a list of all the FM's.
I would have preferred if, in the Martin years, we had inched a bit more towards debt repayment, when those multi-billion dollar surpluses were rolling in. And we could have done with somewhat less habitual under-estimation.
And out of all of the special interests I can think of, I would loved to have seen a few billion dropped into modernizing Canadian Transportation. Not creating the Mississauga Palace of Versailles that Pearson Airport turned into (I was all for updates, but I think they went a bit overboard there) Rather they should have focussed on steel and rubber transportation on the ground. A world class railway - like we had in the 50's (you can still see it if you want, it's pretty much the same stuff). And some heavy-handed, micromanaged municipal transit build-outs to get me out of my car would have been a good use for those things as well. (Municipal governments would gobble the cash up unless it's well wrapped in strings).
Now we've heard of some infrastructure money in the past few years, but I think it's still an order of magnitude lower than it should be.
Greens and NDP are both talking up a re-investment in these areas. Dion is also talking a green streak - so what the hell, go pick the one that's leading in your area and cast your vote next week.
Let's just avoid buying the sweater thing and putting them back in.
Tuesday
A Platform! Wow. Is that The Kind of Election We Want?
In a bizarre, unexpected moment of sanity, the governing Conservative party has scrambled around and is going to actually announce a platform in this election. Sure the advanced polls have already closed, so many thousands of people have had to vote without knowing what their party was suggesting for the future. And sure we're in the midst of one of the most significant financial industry collapses in history, without any real recognition of it from that same party. But hey, what more do those little people need to know anyway.
Seeing the poll graph that flashes past the screen each night on CBC, I see that the Conservative line is dipping, and the NDP & Liberal ones are cranking up. The Greens gained a bit, but there's a sharp snap back on them too. Since nothing specific has happened, I'd expect that's a statistical error - something within their margin of uncertainty. Those graphs should really be drawn with error bars to give us an idea of their uncertainty. Since the Conservative number is 32% and the liberals 25%, if the margin of error is 3 or 4 points, it could be that the conservatives are at 29 and the liberals at 28. I'm sure that is not the case, but we can't really tell what is within the realm of possibility.
So two comments to make that really outline what I'm feeling most strongly about during this campaign. First, how everyone in the country should vote - Yes, I'm talkiing to you, and second my read on how ideology driven people think.
First you need to find a source of polling data for your riding. Now remember, these things are never bang on - but that's okay you just need a rough idea. Since I assume everyone else in your riding is reading this as well, all will be fine.
If you can't find one check here. It's not very scientific but it might fit the bill. The discussions in each riding often include some recent numbers that someone mentions. Otherwise, just google "riding polls" and click the "pages from Canada" search button.
How every you do it, just look at your riding's numbers. This part is the easy step:
simply vote for the leading non-conservative party. That's it. Done.
So, if the conservatives are ahead (my condolences) but look at the next number down, and cast your vote for that party, regarless of which way you are otherwise leaning.
If the conservatives are not leading, simply vote for the leading party in the polls. This avoids the vote splitting. Plus it's pretty democratic really. Since we don't have a proper "first choice, second choice" instant run-off voting system like we SHOULD have if we were in the 21st century, this deals with the challenge of 'anyone but the conservatives' without splitting the vote and letting them come up the middle.
Problem solved.
My fundamental fear of a conservative majority is their ideology driven agenda. It's been very carefully hidden for a few years now. They've effectively cut the media off from being able to participate in the democracy. There are no more scrums in the house. The local MP's in the their ridings don't talk to any media. Thus no media will hear when one of their many loose cannons spews vitriol at minorities, aboriginals, gay/lesbian communities, or immigrants, or when they spout some crazy right wing conspiracy theory about the jews, or advocate adopting the US currency (wouldn't that be great right now as their banking system falls apart.)
What motivates the leaders of this party? I beleive it is an ideology that they have a world view, heavily influenced by religion and class structure, and they are driven to re-mould the country in that image. I fear that their perception is this. "If we can just get that majority, we can fix everything. If we can get around these pesky citizens, who don't know what's good for them, we'll make everything right. Then, we can 'eliminate' the naysayers because they will be overwhelmingly quieted by the vast majority of people who will be won over by our amazing approach to reforming the country."
The problem with that - besides the inherent assumption that they know better than the people - is that the mould they would advocate would involve creating a state infused with christianity-based philosophy, where the border between the US and Canada is largely erased, and Alberta becomes some oil-rich oligarchy within a weak, probably militaristic, Canada.
So we all need to find a means to ensure that the majority (ie at least 65% of the population by recent polls) is not led by this party. Assuming some of the 35% support does not fully grasp the ideology of the conservatives, we are looking at some crazy situation where we can all be led by a minority with a vastly different view of the country.
Then after election day we need to get the voting system changed. Not to some crazy MMP thing like Ontario explored briefly, but changed instead to an 'instant run-off' approach that recognizes that people often have an 'anyone but that guy' perspective. Our current system allows the 'anyone but him' situation to disasterously end up electing exactly that person due to spreading of the majority vote among a diffuse base of alternatives.
Whew. There - I've outlined the solution to all the woes of our country in one brief blog post, and it's not even lunch time yet.
Seeing the poll graph that flashes past the screen each night on CBC, I see that the Conservative line is dipping, and the NDP & Liberal ones are cranking up. The Greens gained a bit, but there's a sharp snap back on them too. Since nothing specific has happened, I'd expect that's a statistical error - something within their margin of uncertainty. Those graphs should really be drawn with error bars to give us an idea of their uncertainty. Since the Conservative number is 32% and the liberals 25%, if the margin of error is 3 or 4 points, it could be that the conservatives are at 29 and the liberals at 28. I'm sure that is not the case, but we can't really tell what is within the realm of possibility.
So two comments to make that really outline what I'm feeling most strongly about during this campaign. First, how everyone in the country should vote - Yes, I'm talkiing to you, and second my read on how ideology driven people think.
HOW TO VOTE TO SAVE YOUR COUNTRY
First you need to find a source of polling data for your riding. Now remember, these things are never bang on - but that's okay you just need a rough idea. Since I assume everyone else in your riding is reading this as well, all will be fine.
If you can't find one check here. It's not very scientific but it might fit the bill. The discussions in each riding often include some recent numbers that someone mentions. Otherwise, just google "riding polls" and click the "pages from Canada" search button.
How every you do it, just look at your riding's numbers. This part is the easy step:
simply vote for the leading non-conservative party. That's it. Done.
So, if the conservatives are ahead (my condolences) but look at the next number down, and cast your vote for that party, regarless of which way you are otherwise leaning.
If the conservatives are not leading, simply vote for the leading party in the polls. This avoids the vote splitting. Plus it's pretty democratic really. Since we don't have a proper "first choice, second choice" instant run-off voting system like we SHOULD have if we were in the 21st century, this deals with the challenge of 'anyone but the conservatives' without splitting the vote and letting them come up the middle.
Problem solved.
THE IDEOLOGS PHILOSOPHY
My fundamental fear of a conservative majority is their ideology driven agenda. It's been very carefully hidden for a few years now. They've effectively cut the media off from being able to participate in the democracy. There are no more scrums in the house. The local MP's in the their ridings don't talk to any media. Thus no media will hear when one of their many loose cannons spews vitriol at minorities, aboriginals, gay/lesbian communities, or immigrants, or when they spout some crazy right wing conspiracy theory about the jews, or advocate adopting the US currency (wouldn't that be great right now as their banking system falls apart.)
What motivates the leaders of this party? I beleive it is an ideology that they have a world view, heavily influenced by religion and class structure, and they are driven to re-mould the country in that image. I fear that their perception is this. "If we can just get that majority, we can fix everything. If we can get around these pesky citizens, who don't know what's good for them, we'll make everything right. Then, we can 'eliminate' the naysayers because they will be overwhelmingly quieted by the vast majority of people who will be won over by our amazing approach to reforming the country."
The problem with that - besides the inherent assumption that they know better than the people - is that the mould they would advocate would involve creating a state infused with christianity-based philosophy, where the border between the US and Canada is largely erased, and Alberta becomes some oil-rich oligarchy within a weak, probably militaristic, Canada.
Vote on Election Day
So we all need to find a means to ensure that the majority (ie at least 65% of the population by recent polls) is not led by this party. Assuming some of the 35% support does not fully grasp the ideology of the conservatives, we are looking at some crazy situation where we can all be led by a minority with a vastly different view of the country.
Then after election day we need to get the voting system changed. Not to some crazy MMP thing like Ontario explored briefly, but changed instead to an 'instant run-off' approach that recognizes that people often have an 'anyone but that guy' perspective. Our current system allows the 'anyone but him' situation to disasterously end up electing exactly that person due to spreading of the majority vote among a diffuse base of alternatives.
Whew. There - I've outlined the solution to all the woes of our country in one brief blog post, and it's not even lunch time yet.
Wednesday
Integrity, Debates and Polls
Wow - it's tough to blog about a subject that is just so depressing. Walking along the street today I saw a headline about John Baird being ahead in some poll. This is one of the reasons I dislike media carrying poll information, as it's just put out there in a few words in 200pt font on a masthead, and nobody gets any detail about the question asked or the margin of error.
I'm amazed and saddened that people can actually see that guy in normal operating mode and think "hey, there's a guy I want to support." I lose faith in humanity, in that people seem incapable of detecting (or perhaps caring about) sleaziness.
Meanwhile, I note at night on the CBC national news that a nightly flash of a chart showing the trend over several days is given. Luckily that goes by so fast that nobody can be very influenced by it.
With the freezeframe button on my remote, I can look at it long enough to figure out what it says. It's pretty much showing variations within the margin of error, but seems to indicate some growth for the NDP - perhaps at the expense of the liberals. There's some drop in the Conservatives, but again within the margin of polling error.
Given the incessantly negative advertising of the conservatives, and their lack of a platform and their ongoing avoidance of allowing their people to talk for fear their propensity to insert their feet, I would think integrity would be a bigger issue in this election.
The recent plaigiarism scandel has been trivialized by some, but I think this speaks directly to integrity. However, I think the story is bigger than what the media is half-assedly reporting. Contrary to their reports, I think the issue is likely not that they copied an Aussie PM's speech, but rather that they were given text by someone in the US Republican party, and they parroted it 'cause that's what Uncle George told them to do. It seems unlikely that Harper's androids were sitting around watching John Howard speeches. Getting the daily communiqué from their republican handlers seems much more likely.
Does anyone care that our PM gets his speech text from a Republican handler? Seems not.
Meanwhile the debates are queued up, and set to clash directly with the US veep debates. You'd think they could have planned a bit better for this. I mean the pure theatre value of the swan dive being set-up for Gov Palin at the hands of crazy-man Biden should be pretty entertaining.
But debates have gone beyond their original purpose. God-forbid that we should have people tune in to the Cdn debate for the purpose of seeing who has the greater strength to lead the country. No, instead people watch it to see if someone can 'score points' against someone else. It's become purely theatre - more a sport than an intellectual discussion. We want to see losers hammered, not eloquent leaders. We don't want to see someone inspire us, we want to see someone trip-up the other guy.
I like to think that my interest in the US Veep Debate is to pull the cloak of lies off this Palin character, and expose her for the lightweight that she is.
I like to think that my interest in the Cdn debate is to hear who can put to gether the most cogent arguments for their platform. Given that certain parties have chosen to introduce no platform at all, and campaign purely on personal attacks doesn't leave me very inspired.
I'm amazed and saddened that people can actually see that guy in normal operating mode and think "hey, there's a guy I want to support." I lose faith in humanity, in that people seem incapable of detecting (or perhaps caring about) sleaziness.
Meanwhile, I note at night on the CBC national news that a nightly flash of a chart showing the trend over several days is given. Luckily that goes by so fast that nobody can be very influenced by it.
With the freezeframe button on my remote, I can look at it long enough to figure out what it says. It's pretty much showing variations within the margin of error, but seems to indicate some growth for the NDP - perhaps at the expense of the liberals. There's some drop in the Conservatives, but again within the margin of polling error.
Integrity
Given the incessantly negative advertising of the conservatives, and their lack of a platform and their ongoing avoidance of allowing their people to talk for fear their propensity to insert their feet, I would think integrity would be a bigger issue in this election.
The recent plaigiarism scandel has been trivialized by some, but I think this speaks directly to integrity. However, I think the story is bigger than what the media is half-assedly reporting. Contrary to their reports, I think the issue is likely not that they copied an Aussie PM's speech, but rather that they were given text by someone in the US Republican party, and they parroted it 'cause that's what Uncle George told them to do. It seems unlikely that Harper's androids were sitting around watching John Howard speeches. Getting the daily communiqué from their republican handlers seems much more likely.
Does anyone care that our PM gets his speech text from a Republican handler? Seems not.
Meanwhile the debates are queued up, and set to clash directly with the US veep debates. You'd think they could have planned a bit better for this. I mean the pure theatre value of the swan dive being set-up for Gov Palin at the hands of crazy-man Biden should be pretty entertaining.
But debates have gone beyond their original purpose. God-forbid that we should have people tune in to the Cdn debate for the purpose of seeing who has the greater strength to lead the country. No, instead people watch it to see if someone can 'score points' against someone else. It's become purely theatre - more a sport than an intellectual discussion. We want to see losers hammered, not eloquent leaders. We don't want to see someone inspire us, we want to see someone trip-up the other guy.
I like to think that my interest in the US Veep Debate is to pull the cloak of lies off this Palin character, and expose her for the lightweight that she is.
I like to think that my interest in the Cdn debate is to hear who can put to gether the most cogent arguments for their platform. Given that certain parties have chosen to introduce no platform at all, and campaign purely on personal attacks doesn't leave me very inspired.
Monday
Train Tours and Deregulation Fueled Epidemics
The cross-country train thing that Elizabeth May is doing is nice to see. I think it says some fundamental things about the origin of this country and what binds it together, and how things change. But it also has a good message about green transportation.
I wonder how much sway they have over the schedule of the Transcontinental - apparently it's a regularly scheduled one. My experiences on that beast have been that they are invariably delayed by many hours - sometimes tens of hours as they go across the country, but perhaps things have changed in the latter decade or so.
Meanwhile, elsewhere, I continue to hear reporters talk about the Liberal inability to fill the schedule with event, press or public. They seem to have some severe organization issues. I'd speculate that those who would normally organize such things are waiting to precipitate Dion's failure so they can bring their guy in (read: Ignatief or Rae)
I'm amazed at the things the Conservatives do and the inability of voters to see thru' the charade. I mean a minister joking and making light of one of the western world's worst bacteria contaminations of the food supply, and I see little sign of it impacting their support.
Frighteningly, I heard a reporter speculating that with stronger parties on the left, the threshold of popular vote required for a majority may be as low as 35%. That's pretty scary. The more I think about it, the more I think that our only hope is some coalition forming that can depose a Conservative minority. If a majority happens, we're all really, really screwed.
The same push towards deregulation (or at least hollowing out of food safety inspection infrastructure) that allows the Listeria epidemic also allows the sub-prime mortgage fiasco. If our conservatives start pushing that even further, who knows what sort of mess we'll find ourselves in.
Maybe I'll look into this vote-swapping thing. I don't think it's going to have much impact, but the tiniest oportunity to ensure that we aren't beholden to ideologs is attractive.
I wonder how much sway they have over the schedule of the Transcontinental - apparently it's a regularly scheduled one. My experiences on that beast have been that they are invariably delayed by many hours - sometimes tens of hours as they go across the country, but perhaps things have changed in the latter decade or so.
Meanwhile, elsewhere, I continue to hear reporters talk about the Liberal inability to fill the schedule with event, press or public. They seem to have some severe organization issues. I'd speculate that those who would normally organize such things are waiting to precipitate Dion's failure so they can bring their guy in (read: Ignatief or Rae)
I'm amazed at the things the Conservatives do and the inability of voters to see thru' the charade. I mean a minister joking and making light of one of the western world's worst bacteria contaminations of the food supply, and I see little sign of it impacting their support.
Frighteningly, I heard a reporter speculating that with stronger parties on the left, the threshold of popular vote required for a majority may be as low as 35%. That's pretty scary. The more I think about it, the more I think that our only hope is some coalition forming that can depose a Conservative minority. If a majority happens, we're all really, really screwed.
The same push towards deregulation (or at least hollowing out of food safety inspection infrastructure) that allows the Listeria epidemic also allows the sub-prime mortgage fiasco. If our conservatives start pushing that even further, who knows what sort of mess we'll find ourselves in.
Maybe I'll look into this vote-swapping thing. I don't think it's going to have much impact, but the tiniest oportunity to ensure that we aren't beholden to ideologs is attractive.
Governance by the Numbers?
Second week kicks off with out much really gripping the electorate. There was that whole country-wide uprising of voters of all stripes against the party leadership that would exclude a leader from the debate who has a sitting member, and candidates running coast-to-coast in all ridings. That is a real great thing for Canada, that we value our democracy to that extent and can be non-partisan in such movements.
But I fear I am hearing a real erosion of the Liberal party. My prediction seems to hold still that this election will help us in terms of clearing out some people that shouldn't be there. I think Dion will be gone after this. I just fear that the result will be a Conservative Majority. I am hearing some clearer positioning of the Green Shift concept lately, but still think it is a mistake for the election campaign. It would have been better as a policy to bring forward as a governing party.
My biggest hope is that new found strength in the NDP and Greens will result in enough seats to form a coalition of some kind. I mean, if the conservatives get a minority, but the NDP + Liberals represent more seats, it is conceivable that they immediately vote down the Conservatives and go to the GG to request that they form a coalition government. Of course the numbers will be a challenge, as the remaining parties Greens + Bloc perhaps could depose them with the conservatives. But some bedfellows are not probable. And after the animosity being displayed in Quebec between Bloc and CRAP, it could well be that they will not vote together in such a situation.
Still waiting for some substance to emerge, and still grumbling about the idea that some moron would place the Canadian leadership debate on at the same time as the US leaders debate. Duh.
But I fear I am hearing a real erosion of the Liberal party. My prediction seems to hold still that this election will help us in terms of clearing out some people that shouldn't be there. I think Dion will be gone after this. I just fear that the result will be a Conservative Majority. I am hearing some clearer positioning of the Green Shift concept lately, but still think it is a mistake for the election campaign. It would have been better as a policy to bring forward as a governing party.
My biggest hope is that new found strength in the NDP and Greens will result in enough seats to form a coalition of some kind. I mean, if the conservatives get a minority, but the NDP + Liberals represent more seats, it is conceivable that they immediately vote down the Conservatives and go to the GG to request that they form a coalition government. Of course the numbers will be a challenge, as the remaining parties Greens + Bloc perhaps could depose them with the conservatives. But some bedfellows are not probable. And after the animosity being displayed in Quebec between Bloc and CRAP, it could well be that they will not vote together in such a situation.
Still waiting for some substance to emerge, and still grumbling about the idea that some moron would place the Canadian leadership debate on at the same time as the US leaders debate. Duh.
Tuesday
Poor Respect for our Political System
There is some broad consensus that the exclusion of Greens, and their theologian leader, from the upcoming debate. I'm reminded of the CBC 'At Issue' panel - a set of political pundits, who were asked a week ago, as a wrap up question: "Should the Greens be part of the Debate." All three unequivocally said yes without hesitation.
Contrast that against the denigrating Prime Minister slagging the Greens with some inane argument that the greens as liberals anyway. This is some half-assed reference to a riding where they've coordinated to not split the vote, to ensure a conservative defeat. Of course, the conservatives are similarly not fielding a candidate in another riding where a conservative leaning independent is strong (with the hopes that he's shift to them, of course).
I am disappointed that our politicians don't fundamentally understand how important it is to preserve the fair and open principles of electoral debate.
I'm saddened by our current government and hope we can find some path to change. Crap, I'm too depressed to type anymore for now. I'm going to bed.
Contrast that against the denigrating Prime Minister slagging the Greens with some inane argument that the greens as liberals anyway. This is some half-assed reference to a riding where they've coordinated to not split the vote, to ensure a conservative defeat. Of course, the conservatives are similarly not fielding a candidate in another riding where a conservative leaning independent is strong (with the hopes that he's shift to them, of course).
I am disappointed that our politicians don't fundamentally understand how important it is to preserve the fair and open principles of electoral debate.
I'm saddened by our current government and hope we can find some path to change. Crap, I'm too depressed to type anymore for now. I'm going to bed.
Monday
Anti Democratic Principles
I heard that the Greens will be excluded from the debate because PM Harper has refused to take part if they participate. They are fielding candidates in all ridings across the country, are getting a non-trivial portion of the vote, and - unlike say the libertarians, or the communist party or the marijuana party - most people know someone who has voted Green, or perhaps will vote green themselves.
Given that threat, the other parties have said if Harper doesn't participate, they won't thus, the media is saying lets exclude the Greens.
Will this stick to the Conservatives? No, not likely. The media won't give it legs. Such fundamental rejection of free speech, and the importance of the debate process is so sad. But it's in line with a party who locks the media out of the workings of government, instructs the caucus to not talk to media, and is even coaching certain foot-in-mouth prone candidates to not talk to anyone.
Crazy process.
Given that threat, the other parties have said if Harper doesn't participate, they won't thus, the media is saying lets exclude the Greens.
Will this stick to the Conservatives? No, not likely. The media won't give it legs. Such fundamental rejection of free speech, and the importance of the debate process is so sad. But it's in line with a party who locks the media out of the workings of government, instructs the caucus to not talk to media, and is even coaching certain foot-in-mouth prone candidates to not talk to anyone.
Crazy process.
Sunday
Barack Layton?
My reading of the election timing is starting to show up in the media. I saw CTV commentary that mentioned (mostly jokingly) Obama and Layton comparisons. That was my prediction a week or two back. The thesis? A media feeding frenzy on the Obama/McLean project south of the border is bound to inspire Canadian voters - some of whom will say "I wish we had someone new talking about big questions, and inspiring us. A strong orator like Obama."
I don't think we have anyone like that in the slate - though some folks have told me that seeing Dion in person is much more inspiring and impressive that his on-TV persona.
When I spin through our existing leaders though (and this has been supported by a recent poll which came out after my comments earlier), I think Layton is the guy who would benefit most from those thoughts. On that poll, I heard surveys of opinions about leadership show people to rate Layton highly.
Smooth, though, Layton isn't. Noticing some media footage recently, he's got a strange posture that might turn some people off, looks like some combination of a guy in a girdle and a flamboyant thespian - too much arm swinging or something. Can't put my finger on it, but these things do a lot to influence people's opinions (unfortunately). Hmmm, I wonder if it's a good time for him to consider loosing the mustache? Nah, probably too much screwing with the brand at this point would hurt him.
Still watching...
I don't think we have anyone like that in the slate - though some folks have told me that seeing Dion in person is much more inspiring and impressive that his on-TV persona.
When I spin through our existing leaders though (and this has been supported by a recent poll which came out after my comments earlier), I think Layton is the guy who would benefit most from those thoughts. On that poll, I heard surveys of opinions about leadership show people to rate Layton highly.
Smooth, though, Layton isn't. Noticing some media footage recently, he's got a strange posture that might turn some people off, looks like some combination of a guy in a girdle and a flamboyant thespian - too much arm swinging or something. Can't put my finger on it, but these things do a lot to influence people's opinions (unfortunately). Hmmm, I wonder if it's a good time for him to consider loosing the mustache? Nah, probably too much screwing with the brand at this point would hurt him.
Still watching...
The Long Road Ends At Another Road
Well that took a while, but finally we're there. Writ dropped, election officially in place this morning, and driving around this afternoon I see men with poor motor-skills trying to tap stakes into the ground to support their election signs.
Tip: Obese senior citizen with a big sledge hammer - wielding that thing takes a bunch of arm strength you haven't been working on since your late 60's. Let the young guy do that part before you bust the guys arm.
Listening to a cross country call in show, I'm hearing positive things and scary things. Some pragmatic perspective from BC where an existing carbon tax gives them some perspective. Some blinders-wearing Albertans who are content living in a one-party system, at federal and provincial level staying on script.
I heard some brilliant comments from an immigrant man, and a middle aged lady. From the former, echoing my thoughts, the fear of a Harper majority, given a blatant disregard for democratic society (e.g. free media who are included in the workings of government) and the hidden ideologue's agenda.
The lady on the green shift idea made an excellent point that took me a bit of time to parse - but she said (to paraphrase) "being against the green shift isn't going to make gas and fuel costs come down, and if you think we need to make some changes because of the evolution in our fuel driven economy, perhaps this is the way to go."
I think the green shift plan, as it's proposed was a terribly poor strategic move going into an election, but is probably an astute direction. I think we'll hear many commentators quoting Kim Campbell in the coming weeks: "An election is no time to discuss important issues" (to again attempt a quote from memory).
So out on the trail go our politicians, and the outcome is uncertain. I must say though that I truly am worried about where we might end up. Particularly that an Environics poll suggesting a possible Conservative majority might be accurate and sustained. I think we'd see the loss of treasured Canadian institutions such as our healthcare system and the CBC, and quite possibly loss of identity pulling us closer to Americans through the scuttling of our currency, our resources and our independance in foriegn policy.
I remember waking up after a Mulroney victory and how dismal things looked - and much of that was well founded. This current Conservative group scares the crap out of me, and I can only hope that some other party - any party can keep them at least to a minority, or if not, someone else can get into a minority position through some dynamic changes during the course of the campaign.
Watch this space for more avg guy on the Capital streets perspective.
Tip: Obese senior citizen with a big sledge hammer - wielding that thing takes a bunch of arm strength you haven't been working on since your late 60's. Let the young guy do that part before you bust the guys arm.
Listening to a cross country call in show, I'm hearing positive things and scary things. Some pragmatic perspective from BC where an existing carbon tax gives them some perspective. Some blinders-wearing Albertans who are content living in a one-party system, at federal and provincial level staying on script.
I heard some brilliant comments from an immigrant man, and a middle aged lady. From the former, echoing my thoughts, the fear of a Harper majority, given a blatant disregard for democratic society (e.g. free media who are included in the workings of government) and the hidden ideologue's agenda.
The lady on the green shift idea made an excellent point that took me a bit of time to parse - but she said (to paraphrase) "being against the green shift isn't going to make gas and fuel costs come down, and if you think we need to make some changes because of the evolution in our fuel driven economy, perhaps this is the way to go."
I think the green shift plan, as it's proposed was a terribly poor strategic move going into an election, but is probably an astute direction. I think we'll hear many commentators quoting Kim Campbell in the coming weeks: "An election is no time to discuss important issues" (to again attempt a quote from memory).
So out on the trail go our politicians, and the outcome is uncertain. I must say though that I truly am worried about where we might end up. Particularly that an Environics poll suggesting a possible Conservative majority might be accurate and sustained. I think we'd see the loss of treasured Canadian institutions such as our healthcare system and the CBC, and quite possibly loss of identity pulling us closer to Americans through the scuttling of our currency, our resources and our independance in foriegn policy.
I remember waking up after a Mulroney victory and how dismal things looked - and much of that was well founded. This current Conservative group scares the crap out of me, and I can only hope that some other party - any party can keep them at least to a minority, or if not, someone else can get into a minority position through some dynamic changes during the course of the campaign.
Watch this space for more avg guy on the Capital streets perspective.
Thursday
Writ Pending?
It's oh so close... Or is it? The insiders say that the it's a certainty, but one never knows. I'll wait and see if there is any writ droppage today or tomorrow. But word on the street is it happens before the weekend.
On a call-in show yesterday I was surprised to see how many callers said they didn't want to see this election now, and then proceeded to talk about how crappy the current government is and how they aren't doing anything, and should do something first.
I can't help but see that as a contradiction - if they're so crappy and unable to do anything, then perhaps this is your chance to impose some change on them.
The show had a very astute guest though, well, I say that because he was echoing things I've been saying around the dinner table and coffee shops for a while, but had yet to hear in the media. Unfortunately I didn't get his name, and the CBC website for 'OntarioToday' has no history info.
One - on the concept of a fixed election date. First it's an indictable offense to have proclaimed that a fixed date was required because otherwise parties would select election days opportunistically, then to have done exactly that.
Two - the whole concept of a fixed election date makes little sense in a parliamentary system. (my theory is that it's more of their subconscious white-house wannabe syndrome)
Three - the deck-clearing effect of this election could be dramatic, with new leaders possible in many camps. This is a key value for me, and why I'm anxious to see this one happen.
Anyway, rather than 99% sure, as most media and pundits seem to be, I think I'm hovering around 65%. Just given the opportunism, Harper et al may well be pulling our chains with all the meeting shenanigans and hint mongering. I certainly hope not.
On a call-in show yesterday I was surprised to see how many callers said they didn't want to see this election now, and then proceeded to talk about how crappy the current government is and how they aren't doing anything, and should do something first.
I can't help but see that as a contradiction - if they're so crappy and unable to do anything, then perhaps this is your chance to impose some change on them.
The show had a very astute guest though, well, I say that because he was echoing things I've been saying around the dinner table and coffee shops for a while, but had yet to hear in the media. Unfortunately I didn't get his name, and the CBC website for 'OntarioToday' has no history info.
One - on the concept of a fixed election date. First it's an indictable offense to have proclaimed that a fixed date was required because otherwise parties would select election days opportunistically, then to have done exactly that.
Two - the whole concept of a fixed election date makes little sense in a parliamentary system. (my theory is that it's more of their subconscious white-house wannabe syndrome)
Three - the deck-clearing effect of this election could be dramatic, with new leaders possible in many camps. This is a key value for me, and why I'm anxious to see this one happen.
Anyway, rather than 99% sure, as most media and pundits seem to be, I think I'm hovering around 65%. Just given the opportunism, Harper et al may well be pulling our chains with all the meeting shenanigans and hint mongering. I certainly hope not.
Tuesday
Trailer Park Soaps versus Writ Droppage
The pending election is palpable, I suspect the dropping of the writ will occur today, unless our current GG is off traipsing around some distant country on our dime. Just in time, and I hear on morning radio the discussion of our election versus their election.
Of course the debate was prepared ahead of time, before all the trailer trash stories in the saga of veep candidate Palin started showing up, and there's almost another one every news cast. So the discussion is charisma versus no charisma.
I think the downside is that the charisma channel tends to bring with it a package of bad decisions and trashy stories. In comparison, I'm glad to say that our elections are a little tamer. Certainly less vetting of candidate family members, but also fewer knee jerk 'card' playing to counter the opposing party's positions.
The most we get (thankfully) is a carefully orchestrated shot of Liberal Dion arriving for a meeting in a Prius, and stories of his dog being named Kyoto. That's enough of that sort of stuff for me.... though as I said earlier, finding a leader with the ability to articulate a vision and address issues head-on would be nice.
Of course the debate was prepared ahead of time, before all the trailer trash stories in the saga of veep candidate Palin started showing up, and there's almost another one every news cast. So the discussion is charisma versus no charisma.
I think the downside is that the charisma channel tends to bring with it a package of bad decisions and trashy stories. In comparison, I'm glad to say that our elections are a little tamer. Certainly less vetting of candidate family members, but also fewer knee jerk 'card' playing to counter the opposing party's positions.
The most we get (thankfully) is a carefully orchestrated shot of Liberal Dion arriving for a meeting in a Prius, and stories of his dog being named Kyoto. That's enough of that sort of stuff for me.... though as I said earlier, finding a leader with the ability to articulate a vision and address issues head-on would be nice.
Monday
Meetings, Meetings
PM Harper schedules meetings with all the opposition leaders and speculation is reaching a peak that the call will happen imminently. Why the meetings - I assume it's so he can say 'I tried to work with them, but they just refuse to stop ruining parliament.'
Of course, voters won't soon forget the publishing of the conservative handbook on how to effectively disrupt meetings, committees and debate.
The Obama tidal wave on the American news channels is scaring the crap out of the charisma-vacuum that is the Conservative party. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of charisma driven politics. However the I find their realization humourous that their combined lack of charisma and lack of ability to communicate a vision leaves them exposed during an American media juggernaut. They end up looking boring and directionless, which can only help their opponents.
This promises to change on an almost hourly basis at this point, as we finally get into an election campaign, albeit for manipulative reasons, based on pretense.
Of course, voters won't soon forget the publishing of the conservative handbook on how to effectively disrupt meetings, committees and debate.
The Obama tidal wave on the American news channels is scaring the crap out of the charisma-vacuum that is the Conservative party. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of charisma driven politics. However the I find their realization humourous that their combined lack of charisma and lack of ability to communicate a vision leaves them exposed during an American media juggernaut. They end up looking boring and directionless, which can only help their opponents.
This promises to change on an almost hourly basis at this point, as we finally get into an election campaign, albeit for manipulative reasons, based on pretense.
Thursday
Health Minister is WHERE?
In this run up to a new election coinciding with the Listeria debacle, I've heard a few news reports mention that Health Minister Tony Clement is not available because he's in Denver at the Democratic convention.
Huh? Does this not catch ANYONE else's attention? Why is the reporter involved not tripping over themselves to find out why he's there and tell us about it? He's a right wing, conservative insider - and the media has pointed out that the Bushies have been providing that party with backroom guildance. And he's at a conference for the new leader of the DEMs? What gives?
Where's the media when you really want answers to a question!
Huh? Does this not catch ANYONE else's attention? Why is the reporter involved not tripping over themselves to find out why he's there and tell us about it? He's a right wing, conservative insider - and the media has pointed out that the Bushies have been providing that party with backroom guildance. And he's at a conference for the new leader of the DEMs? What gives?
Where's the media when you really want answers to a question!
Tuesday
Timing is Everything
Interesting point I hadn't thought about before from an interview I saw last night on CBC news. One of the big motivators for the PM calling an election early is the big US election with its mass appeal.
If that election is fought late this year with all its associated press feeding frenzy and the perceived building love-in with Barack Obama, what is the impact for a crazy right wing government in Canada?
I think it makes a ton of sense. Surely it will be inspiring for voters above the border to jump on the bandwagon of a youthful idealistic visionary, versus a dour, negative, control freak. Not sure who benefits here. Greens? NDP? Liberals? Dion doesn't have any charisma, so perhaps the other two both get a bump. That would be interesting, but still leave us with a minority gov't though.
The Greens are led by a bible-thumping former minister apparently (they keep that part very quiet), so it almost seems like Jack Layton might actually get the better part of that. Liberals under Ignatief or Ray could do pretty well in that environment, but they can't get there until they get rid of that albatross around their neck.
The crazy 'election day' thing Harper put in place is looking lamer and lamer. Do they know anything about the parliamentary system? It makes no sense at all in a system where minorities are possible. Just another attempt to be as American as possible. Too much bad TV watching by that conservative group as kids I guess. Their mothers should have made them watch more "Beachcombers" and "King of Kensington."
If that election is fought late this year with all its associated press feeding frenzy and the perceived building love-in with Barack Obama, what is the impact for a crazy right wing government in Canada?
I think it makes a ton of sense. Surely it will be inspiring for voters above the border to jump on the bandwagon of a youthful idealistic visionary, versus a dour, negative, control freak. Not sure who benefits here. Greens? NDP? Liberals? Dion doesn't have any charisma, so perhaps the other two both get a bump. That would be interesting, but still leave us with a minority gov't though.
The Greens are led by a bible-thumping former minister apparently (they keep that part very quiet), so it almost seems like Jack Layton might actually get the better part of that. Liberals under Ignatief or Ray could do pretty well in that environment, but they can't get there until they get rid of that albatross around their neck.
The crazy 'election day' thing Harper put in place is looking lamer and lamer. Do they know anything about the parliamentary system? It makes no sense at all in a system where minorities are possible. Just another attempt to be as American as possible. Too much bad TV watching by that conservative group as kids I guess. Their mothers should have made them watch more "Beachcombers" and "King of Kensington."
Monday
New Rumblings
PM Harper is on a tour it seems, trying to lay the groundwork for a fall election. Granted, I expected one last fall, but this bizarre stalemate seems set in concrete, and there is a lack of leadership with an addiction to some perceived glory of the current roles. Harper is basking in one of the most stable minority governments in Canadian history, and Dion is sitting under the sunlamp of weak leadership, convincing himself that it's the tropical sun he's basking in on the ramparts of his palace.
In reality, the Harper government stability is built on a foundation of secrecy, bumbling politicians whose only success comes from being muzzled to ensure that they can't commit immediate and irrevocable political suicide by opening their mouths. They have actually, really written a manual, distributed to their people on how to stonewall committees to ensure that they don't progress towards logical, meaningful conclusions - because those are typically against the Conservative direction of the right-wing, US wannabe vision.
Meanwhile, the NDP and the Greens are further splitting the centre and left ensuring that a party with approval of a quarter of the population can continue to sit there doing nothing.
Dion is the biggest failure of this situation, in that rather than going to the polls on a platform built around something he stood for, he's happily capitulated on anything and everything that was posed to him, all to maintain his weak, cardboard leadership.
With Harper's tour spouting that he may have to call an election because of the House's dysfunction, Dion could lose the only freebie he could have mustered, the strength of conviction on some random topic. Now he'll have to go into an election with both weak leadership, a history of capitulation, and no central focussing principle. What's most laughable is that Harpers mantra about dysfunction in the house is in no small part attributable to his party. They literally wrote the book on obfuscation and dysfunction, well the manual anyway.
So my bottomline is still that an election is desperately needed to clean up stalemate that we see now. Problem is, I'm not convinced any of those there now have the guts to go forward with it.
I like to think of the best outcome imaginable. At this point, all I can think of is that the stalemate could result in a gentle flip of leading parties in a minority with the same weak support numbers that have persisted for years now. The result being a Dion government coalition with Jack Layton. That's also in some ways a worst case, 'cause it entrenches Dion making it hard to bring in a stronger leader, while giving the Conservatives the opportunity to find someone more charismatic. The good thing is that I'm skeptical they could find a 'Reform aka CRAP aka Conservative' figure who has charisma and a closet that is not bulging with inopportune, bigoted comments, reactionary policy and skeletons to boot.
So, yeah, I'm hopeful something will happen in the coming months - more than the few by-elections currently scheduled. But I'm still skeptical we'll get a better political landscape out of it. Hopefully some vision and charisma from south of the border will inspire voters here to seek out someone with depth and leadership vision. I think we usually end up with better (well, less dirty anyway) politicians than the Americans get with their system of only old-money, rich white guys. But some vision would be a nice change.
In reality, the Harper government stability is built on a foundation of secrecy, bumbling politicians whose only success comes from being muzzled to ensure that they can't commit immediate and irrevocable political suicide by opening their mouths. They have actually, really written a manual, distributed to their people on how to stonewall committees to ensure that they don't progress towards logical, meaningful conclusions - because those are typically against the Conservative direction of the right-wing, US wannabe vision.
Meanwhile, the NDP and the Greens are further splitting the centre and left ensuring that a party with approval of a quarter of the population can continue to sit there doing nothing.
Dion is the biggest failure of this situation, in that rather than going to the polls on a platform built around something he stood for, he's happily capitulated on anything and everything that was posed to him, all to maintain his weak, cardboard leadership.
With Harper's tour spouting that he may have to call an election because of the House's dysfunction, Dion could lose the only freebie he could have mustered, the strength of conviction on some random topic. Now he'll have to go into an election with both weak leadership, a history of capitulation, and no central focussing principle. What's most laughable is that Harpers mantra about dysfunction in the house is in no small part attributable to his party. They literally wrote the book on obfuscation and dysfunction, well the manual anyway.
So my bottomline is still that an election is desperately needed to clean up stalemate that we see now. Problem is, I'm not convinced any of those there now have the guts to go forward with it.
I like to think of the best outcome imaginable. At this point, all I can think of is that the stalemate could result in a gentle flip of leading parties in a minority with the same weak support numbers that have persisted for years now. The result being a Dion government coalition with Jack Layton. That's also in some ways a worst case, 'cause it entrenches Dion making it hard to bring in a stronger leader, while giving the Conservatives the opportunity to find someone more charismatic. The good thing is that I'm skeptical they could find a 'Reform aka CRAP aka Conservative' figure who has charisma and a closet that is not bulging with inopportune, bigoted comments, reactionary policy and skeletons to boot.
So, yeah, I'm hopeful something will happen in the coming months - more than the few by-elections currently scheduled. But I'm still skeptical we'll get a better political landscape out of it. Hopefully some vision and charisma from south of the border will inspire voters here to seek out someone with depth and leadership vision. I think we usually end up with better (well, less dirty anyway) politicians than the Americans get with their system of only old-money, rich white guys. But some vision would be a nice change.
Tuesday
Summer Recess
Well, the session is over, and I've long since given up hope that the Liberals would bring down the government. M. Dion appears to be so back-boneless that he would support a bill to sell off a few provinces rather than take down the government in a non-confidence vote.
So the summer comes along, and we won't see an election until the fall I guess. Crazy stuff.
So the summer comes along, and we won't see an election until the fall I guess. Crazy stuff.
Friday
Bubbling Dissent
The Liberal party is starting to vibrate a bit with a combination of dissatisfaction with the leader Dion's performance, lack of perceived election readiness in Quebec, and inability to attack the government on big, seemingly glaring exposures.
On the latter point, the finance minister's obsession with sniping at those who deposed him from his previous job in Ontario. Or, perhaps, his attempts to sequester money for a commuter train from his own riding in back-woods Ontario into Toronto. Luckily the train thing has been downgraded to a feasability study (wanna bet that one of his cronies gets the contract?).
But meanwhile, the optics of a federal finance minister slagging a provincial government, particularly when he used to hold a job there and was deposed. That's pretty cheezy small town stuff.
Dion's inability to project a sense of leadership is an issue that can only be cleared by an election I think. I wonder though if some of these rumblings of lack of election readiness are a ploy to force the Conservative's hand, and precipitate the election themselves. A bit far-fetched I suppose, but political chess is often about manipulation.
This is not resolved yet, and I suspect the news cycle will hype it a bit more before it drops.
On the latter point, the finance minister's obsession with sniping at those who deposed him from his previous job in Ontario. Or, perhaps, his attempts to sequester money for a commuter train from his own riding in back-woods Ontario into Toronto. Luckily the train thing has been downgraded to a feasability study (wanna bet that one of his cronies gets the contract?).
But meanwhile, the optics of a federal finance minister slagging a provincial government, particularly when he used to hold a job there and was deposed. That's pretty cheezy small town stuff.
Dion's inability to project a sense of leadership is an issue that can only be cleared by an election I think. I wonder though if some of these rumblings of lack of election readiness are a ploy to force the Conservative's hand, and precipitate the election themselves. A bit far-fetched I suppose, but political chess is often about manipulation.
This is not resolved yet, and I suspect the news cycle will hype it a bit more before it drops.
Monday
Two Passes But ByElections are Key
So both the 'confidence-like' votes passed. A key bit in this whole thing, driving the Liberals propensity for approving everything, regardless how they feel about it, are the by-elections that ran today.
Getting Bob into the parliament is a key part of their push forward. They want all the press that buys them, and also to get him some camera time to build his stock so that when they dump Stephane Dion, they will have some viable options.
So, I'm not sure if they will drop the government on the very next opportunity, or string them along a bit longer to give Bob some soak time. What do you think?
I suspect they also want to give the local riding associations time to rebuild their cash a bit after the by-Election. Sure, they can save some cash by re-using their lawn signs.
Getting Bob into the parliament is a key part of their push forward. They want all the press that buys them, and also to get him some camera time to build his stock so that when they dump Stephane Dion, they will have some viable options.
So, I'm not sure if they will drop the government on the very next opportunity, or string them along a bit longer to give Bob some soak time. What do you think?
I suspect they also want to give the local riding associations time to rebuild their cash a bit after the by-Election. Sure, they can save some cash by re-using their lawn signs.
Thursday
Vote Today on Afghanistan
It would have been a drop the government like a hot brick day, but everyone is supporting the government's position on Afghanistan. Not that I don't - it seems reasonable enough to me. But it's another turning point passed.
Wednesday
RESP Regressive Tax Relief
This is an interesting step towards another chance at an election. A Liberal MP put forward legislation that made it through the house of Commons and is off to the Senate for approval. This bill makes RESP contributions tax sheltered, much like an RRSP. ( Read "like an IRA" for any American's who might be reading here - not that I can imagine such a scenario).
It's apparently got a $900M pricetag against government revenue, and the Conservatives don't like it. Parents of course eat it up. The MP who championed the bill is shown papering his office with emails of support. Go figure, people like getting tax breaks. Offer a free case of beer with your tax return and see how many emails of support you get.
My problem with it (yikes, I'm siding with the Conservatives) is that such a program benefits education for rich people. The people that would have trouble affording post-secondary education don't have the cash (and sometimes not the knowhow) to wrangle up an RESP. If we want to blow $900M a year on education related benefits, how about lowering tuitions, or funding low-income students through their schooling.
Anyway, the Conservatives are putting together a bill to rescind the legislation if it goes through. If passed, the RESP bill dies, if defeated the government falls. Well, interesting of course, as the Liberals immediately say,that they will not defeat the latter bill.
And so it goes again.
We need an election to clear the clogged pipes. The liberals can't change leadership without an election to precipitate it. The Conservatives can't be deposed without it. The NDP and Greens can resolve their relative roles in the landscape without it either. The outcome would be either the same thing, or perhaps a reduced Conservative minority, or a Liberal Minority. Either way, it would have some value to clear the air.
When will the opposition get a backbone and vote down stuff that they don't support?
It's apparently got a $900M pricetag against government revenue, and the Conservatives don't like it. Parents of course eat it up. The MP who championed the bill is shown papering his office with emails of support. Go figure, people like getting tax breaks. Offer a free case of beer with your tax return and see how many emails of support you get.
My problem with it (yikes, I'm siding with the Conservatives) is that such a program benefits education for rich people. The people that would have trouble affording post-secondary education don't have the cash (and sometimes not the knowhow) to wrangle up an RESP. If we want to blow $900M a year on education related benefits, how about lowering tuitions, or funding low-income students through their schooling.
Anyway, the Conservatives are putting together a bill to rescind the legislation if it goes through. If passed, the RESP bill dies, if defeated the government falls. Well, interesting of course, as the Liberals immediately say,that they will not defeat the latter bill.
And so it goes again.
We need an election to clear the clogged pipes. The liberals can't change leadership without an election to precipitate it. The Conservatives can't be deposed without it. The NDP and Greens can resolve their relative roles in the landscape without it either. The outcome would be either the same thing, or perhaps a reduced Conservative minority, or a Liberal Minority. Either way, it would have some value to clear the air.
When will the opposition get a backbone and vote down stuff that they don't support?
Thursday
Sleaze Oozes out of Government Cracks
While the current government gets closer to one of the longest running minority governments, a few things begin to pile up behind the gate to an election.
The Obama campaign was the last thing I thought would come up in our political situation, but a bonehead move by someone in the PMO meant that a discussion was leaked to the press.
Initially, it was shared (allegedly by Harper's Chief of Staff) that Obama called up the Canadian Embassy to say - "hey, forget all that stuff I'm saying about NAFTA - it's just for getting votes" - okay I'm paraphrasing, but that was the gist of it.
Later it comes up that, well, that's not really what the exchange was. But it's immaterial now, as the impact has already been felt in Ohio primaries.
In previous government leaks, they found the culprit and removed the temp employee I think it was, in the handcuffs of the RCMP. In this case it sounds like there's a Privy Council investigation, and they'll likely come back with "oh well, we reprimanded the unnamed pesky fellow". Sounds like a double standard.
Though, I am somehow not surprised, as there was word of Republicans or at least links to republican-connected right wing religio-fascists in the US providing advisors to Harpers campaign during the previous election. It seems possible in a slightly crazy conspiracy-sort-of-way that they would also be looking for some help in besmirching Mr. Charisma given the way the upcoming US election is looking.
Anyway, all this to say, it gives the Opposition some scandal-like ammunition to consider toppling the government. Add onto that the current push towards the censorship bill C-10 that seeks to not only scuttle funding for some Canadian movies that don't meet some cabal's ideas of suitable content, but they also want to be able to do it after the fact. This ensures that not only do they kill the movie project, but they also financially deep-six the production company who suddenly finds that it's product has bankrupted them as the pending funds are suddenly withdrawn after the cash is spent. Some nut job evangelist named McVety out west was claiming ownership of the bill until someone told him to shut up, and now he's pulled back into the festering underbelly of religion-motivated censorship advocates.
Hopefully the arts community continues pushing on this, and the Liberals in the Senate can kill the thing. Meanwhile, add it to the list of reasons for an election.
The Obama campaign was the last thing I thought would come up in our political situation, but a bonehead move by someone in the PMO meant that a discussion was leaked to the press.
Initially, it was shared (allegedly by Harper's Chief of Staff) that Obama called up the Canadian Embassy to say - "hey, forget all that stuff I'm saying about NAFTA - it's just for getting votes" - okay I'm paraphrasing, but that was the gist of it.
Later it comes up that, well, that's not really what the exchange was. But it's immaterial now, as the impact has already been felt in Ohio primaries.
In previous government leaks, they found the culprit and removed the temp employee I think it was, in the handcuffs of the RCMP. In this case it sounds like there's a Privy Council investigation, and they'll likely come back with "oh well, we reprimanded the unnamed pesky fellow". Sounds like a double standard.
Though, I am somehow not surprised, as there was word of Republicans or at least links to republican-connected right wing religio-fascists in the US providing advisors to Harpers campaign during the previous election. It seems possible in a slightly crazy conspiracy-sort-of-way that they would also be looking for some help in besmirching Mr. Charisma given the way the upcoming US election is looking.
Anyway, all this to say, it gives the Opposition some scandal-like ammunition to consider toppling the government. Add onto that the current push towards the censorship bill C-10 that seeks to not only scuttle funding for some Canadian movies that don't meet some cabal's ideas of suitable content, but they also want to be able to do it after the fact. This ensures that not only do they kill the movie project, but they also financially deep-six the production company who suddenly finds that it's product has bankrupted them as the pending funds are suddenly withdrawn after the cash is spent. Some nut job evangelist named McVety out west was claiming ownership of the bill until someone told him to shut up, and now he's pulled back into the festering underbelly of religion-motivated censorship advocates.
Hopefully the arts community continues pushing on this, and the Liberals in the Senate can kill the thing. Meanwhile, add it to the list of reasons for an election.
Tuesday
Afghanistan Entrée to Spring Election Fading
This one came and left pretty quickly. Over the past few days it looked like an election was imminent over a Conservative bill to extend the Afghan mission. The motivation seemed to me to be coalescing around a desire to exploit perceived differences among Liberal leadership about how the mission should go.
But as of this morning it sounds like the liberals have agreed to a position regarding post 2011 definitions of the engagement. I'm guessing the liberals and conservatives will be able to find some agreement to avoid defeat of the bill, and they will end up waiting for the budget as the motivation for defeating the government.
An election seems needed to clean house. The liberals can drop Dion after an election attempt. The Bloc can drop Mr quit-no-not-quit. The NDP & Greens will get a new snapshot of where they stand. The conservatives can experience their humbling inability to grow past their current minority -thwarting their ability to deploy their hidden agenda.
The next few days will be interesting to watch.
But as of this morning it sounds like the liberals have agreed to a position regarding post 2011 definitions of the engagement. I'm guessing the liberals and conservatives will be able to find some agreement to avoid defeat of the bill, and they will end up waiting for the budget as the motivation for defeating the government.
An election seems needed to clean house. The liberals can drop Dion after an election attempt. The Bloc can drop Mr quit-no-not-quit. The NDP & Greens will get a new snapshot of where they stand. The conservatives can experience their humbling inability to grow past their current minority -thwarting their ability to deploy their hidden agenda.
The next few days will be interesting to watch.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)