We haven't seen a majority government situation during this blog's existance (even if this one is with just 38% of the population's support) - so this site faces a long hiatus.
Rather than let it sit for years, I will likely come back with posts related to thoughts on any glimmer of movement towards electoral reform, and perhaps the odd "I told you so" rant as the continued erosions of our system of government's checks and balances advances.
Thursday
Friday
Final Thoughts
Well it's been a couple of weeks, and I can finally make a quick note here. It went pretty sour. The manipulation and deceit sadly worked for them. So now we have to live with a Conservative majority government. The Liberal party has been decimated as well - so that change of leadership will at least be coming about. Dr. Ignatief has already resigned. The executive appears to be continuing to mess up the party's path forward, and we may well see Rae decide to take a pass on the mess too.
Jack Layton and the NDP scored a huge burst in seats, with an unexpected gain in popularity. The main gains were at the expense of the now nearly defunct BQ. Their leader, M Duceppe is out of his seat, and leadership role as well.
Happily the Greens got a seat in the house, sadly though, it was their leader, so we won't be seeing a change in that position for more than 4 years. Ms. May has worked a long time to get there, but I think they should be much further along than they are, mostly due to some poor riding choices in previous elections. They should have won a seat a couple of elections back, and be working on 3 or 4 by now.
Where does that bring us? Well over the next four years we can expect some catastrophic impacts on our freedoms, our position on the world stage and our progressiveness. We can expect:
Elimination of Gun Control - Our police will lose the ability to track who has a gun in their house, and the extra checking associated with gun ownership will be eroded. Apparently while we can license a car or register a dinnerware pattern, registering your gun makes hunting impossible, and oh so terribly unpleasant.
Anti-abortion legislation - say good-bye to a woman's right to choose. A predominantly male government will be able to push through legislation that pushes us back to the 70's.
A Big Prison agenda - now, this is not big prisons versus little prisons. This is a corporatization of prisons that has been on the agenda for a while. Remove rehab programs, and ignore the fact that 3/4 of all inmates are illiterate, and well over half suffer from mental illness. I would be all for a simple enhancement to the conditions in which we incarcerate prisoners to make it easier for the guards and management of the inmates, but this will be capacity increases at the expense of rehab, and in support of an incarcerate without judicial flexibility, which will directly result in an increase in crime rates, as we take minor offenders and train them to be hard-core offenders. Great.
Religion meet Government. The core evangelical sky-god worshippers who run the Conservative party will begin to re-route funding away from secular NGO's and into the hands of their evangelical pals. We will see increased corruption, reduced tolerance for diverse thought, and a further polarization of our society.
Our position in the UN, and on Green treaties. We missed out on broader participation on the security council, and are near pariahs at international meetings on the environment. We can expect that to continue.
I could go on, but isn't that bad enough? Oh, and open government? access to information? Those things were bad enough in the minority parliament, just wait to see what we've called upon ourselves now.
If there is one thing we need to do over the next four years, it's focus on revisions to our electoral system. We have an authoritarian regime lining up their ducks based on approval of 24% of the voting eligible population at best. We need an instant run-off style voting system that preserves our existing parliamentary system, but ensures that broad consensus about which government we DON'T want is as well captured as the one we DO want.
So you won't see election news here until 2015... but in the meantime, I'll try to share occasional thoughts and events relevant to the predictions above, and hopes for progress on the latter point regarding the electoral system.
Keep strong Canada, these will be trying times for democracy and freedom.
Jack Layton and the NDP scored a huge burst in seats, with an unexpected gain in popularity. The main gains were at the expense of the now nearly defunct BQ. Their leader, M Duceppe is out of his seat, and leadership role as well.
Happily the Greens got a seat in the house, sadly though, it was their leader, so we won't be seeing a change in that position for more than 4 years. Ms. May has worked a long time to get there, but I think they should be much further along than they are, mostly due to some poor riding choices in previous elections. They should have won a seat a couple of elections back, and be working on 3 or 4 by now.
Where does that bring us? Well over the next four years we can expect some catastrophic impacts on our freedoms, our position on the world stage and our progressiveness. We can expect:
Elimination of Gun Control - Our police will lose the ability to track who has a gun in their house, and the extra checking associated with gun ownership will be eroded. Apparently while we can license a car or register a dinnerware pattern, registering your gun makes hunting impossible, and oh so terribly unpleasant.
Anti-abortion legislation - say good-bye to a woman's right to choose. A predominantly male government will be able to push through legislation that pushes us back to the 70's.
A Big Prison agenda - now, this is not big prisons versus little prisons. This is a corporatization of prisons that has been on the agenda for a while. Remove rehab programs, and ignore the fact that 3/4 of all inmates are illiterate, and well over half suffer from mental illness. I would be all for a simple enhancement to the conditions in which we incarcerate prisoners to make it easier for the guards and management of the inmates, but this will be capacity increases at the expense of rehab, and in support of an incarcerate without judicial flexibility, which will directly result in an increase in crime rates, as we take minor offenders and train them to be hard-core offenders. Great.
Religion meet Government. The core evangelical sky-god worshippers who run the Conservative party will begin to re-route funding away from secular NGO's and into the hands of their evangelical pals. We will see increased corruption, reduced tolerance for diverse thought, and a further polarization of our society.
Our position in the UN, and on Green treaties. We missed out on broader participation on the security council, and are near pariahs at international meetings on the environment. We can expect that to continue.
I could go on, but isn't that bad enough? Oh, and open government? access to information? Those things were bad enough in the minority parliament, just wait to see what we've called upon ourselves now.
If there is one thing we need to do over the next four years, it's focus on revisions to our electoral system. We have an authoritarian regime lining up their ducks based on approval of 24% of the voting eligible population at best. We need an instant run-off style voting system that preserves our existing parliamentary system, but ensures that broad consensus about which government we DON'T want is as well captured as the one we DO want.
So you won't see election news here until 2015... but in the meantime, I'll try to share occasional thoughts and events relevant to the predictions above, and hopes for progress on the latter point regarding the electoral system.
Keep strong Canada, these will be trying times for democracy and freedom.
Monday
Framing the State of the Parties - Ripe for Change
As the campaigns get into full gear, I can't help but think about the one positive outcome we face here - Regardless of who wins this, we are surely about to see four of the five party leaders change this year.
The guy who gets in - and it will be a guy - will stick around, but surely the rest will be sent packing. We're seeing the Liberal's Ignatief make his first attempt at a real campaign. But he hasn't wowed us so far, running up to this event, and with a failure to take the party to a government, he would certainly be out. I will return to him in a moment.
The PM Harper is said to be losing support in his party too. I'm not sure how long you can muzzle adults before they get a little hot under the collar, so I'm sure losing this election (which I hope does happen) will bring his number up as well. I suspect the CPC would string him along for 6months before announcing an convention, but he would be gone.
Jack Layton has had a bad string of health issues, and has been in place with the NDP for a long time now. He's done a reasonable job for that party, pulling little bits of value out of CPC budgets - one might say propping them up with an informal coalition - for quite a while. But I suspect he might be motivated to let go at a post election review.
Elizabeth May generally gets good things said about her from her audience, but I think she hasn't done the Green party any favours. For some reason she thought it appropriate to go up against a government strong-hold seat, rather than pick of a nobody seat. That seems to me like a HUGE mistake. What better way to advance your party than to get into the friggin' house of commons. It's been too long without progress for them, and surely there will finally be an effort to replace her as well.
Returning for a moment to Ignatief, it seems possible that even with a minority win for his party that a leadership review might oust him. The Liberals are doing a very poor job of holding their party together as a cohesive unit this past decade, since all the animosity of the Cretienites versus Martinites, and those camps are said to still be in place.
The guy who gets in - and it will be a guy - will stick around, but surely the rest will be sent packing. We're seeing the Liberal's Ignatief make his first attempt at a real campaign. But he hasn't wowed us so far, running up to this event, and with a failure to take the party to a government, he would certainly be out. I will return to him in a moment.
The PM Harper is said to be losing support in his party too. I'm not sure how long you can muzzle adults before they get a little hot under the collar, so I'm sure losing this election (which I hope does happen) will bring his number up as well. I suspect the CPC would string him along for 6months before announcing an convention, but he would be gone.
Jack Layton has had a bad string of health issues, and has been in place with the NDP for a long time now. He's done a reasonable job for that party, pulling little bits of value out of CPC budgets - one might say propping them up with an informal coalition - for quite a while. But I suspect he might be motivated to let go at a post election review.
Elizabeth May generally gets good things said about her from her audience, but I think she hasn't done the Green party any favours. For some reason she thought it appropriate to go up against a government strong-hold seat, rather than pick of a nobody seat. That seems to me like a HUGE mistake. What better way to advance your party than to get into the friggin' house of commons. It's been too long without progress for them, and surely there will finally be an effort to replace her as well.
Returning for a moment to Ignatief, it seems possible that even with a minority win for his party that a leadership review might oust him. The Liberals are doing a very poor job of holding their party together as a cohesive unit this past decade, since all the animosity of the Cretienites versus Martinites, and those camps are said to still be in place.
Sunday
When it fell nobody was surprised anymore
The contempt of parliament motion passed the house fell, and the Prime Minister was off to see the Governor General on the weekend. It took until Friday, rather than the Monday for the opposition to have control of the agenda. But so it was. With that we are on our way to Election 41.
The issue does indeed seem an undeniable case of contempt for parliament, as per the motion. When a government in power refuses to deliver to parliament fundamental documents that clarify its spending, to back up its budgeted numbers for major billion dollar purchase plans, it does in fact seem contemptuous of the very foundation of our government system.
Its sad that so many contemptuous actions of that government had been allowed to pile up. Rules broken right and left without repercussions have left me flabbergasted.
Immediately the PM also began a diatribe that fits right in with his approach to communications - flood the conversation with some irrelevant story to take over the discussion. With the word coalition appearing several times per sentence, the media (and apparently here I go too) immediately chatted up the word as well.
All his language is accusatory, threatening, and scare-mongering. That's no way to lead a country.
The gist of the suggestion was that when Stephen Harper gets a minority, it's a sad affront to Canadians but he'll slog it out and pursue his mandate. If the Liberals should get a minority government, then it is immediately classifiable as a horrific coalition and illegitimate.
The opposition parties all scurried around to deny a coalition in the works, but it took them a while to start focussing on how a) Harper made an concerted effort to put together a coalition with the Bloc and the NDP to bring down the Martin Liberal government, and b) the government is in contempt of parliament and THAT is the illegitimate thing and furthermore c) coalitions are perfectly legal and some might say productive ways to form governments. Ask, oh I don't know, pretty much ANY government in Europe - particular the current Conservative government running the UK just now.
The issue does indeed seem an undeniable case of contempt for parliament, as per the motion. When a government in power refuses to deliver to parliament fundamental documents that clarify its spending, to back up its budgeted numbers for major billion dollar purchase plans, it does in fact seem contemptuous of the very foundation of our government system.
Its sad that so many contemptuous actions of that government had been allowed to pile up. Rules broken right and left without repercussions have left me flabbergasted.
Immediately the PM also began a diatribe that fits right in with his approach to communications - flood the conversation with some irrelevant story to take over the discussion. With the word coalition appearing several times per sentence, the media (and apparently here I go too) immediately chatted up the word as well.
All his language is accusatory, threatening, and scare-mongering. That's no way to lead a country.
The gist of the suggestion was that when Stephen Harper gets a minority, it's a sad affront to Canadians but he'll slog it out and pursue his mandate. If the Liberals should get a minority government, then it is immediately classifiable as a horrific coalition and illegitimate.
The opposition parties all scurried around to deny a coalition in the works, but it took them a while to start focussing on how a) Harper made an concerted effort to put together a coalition with the Bloc and the NDP to bring down the Martin Liberal government, and b) the government is in contempt of parliament and THAT is the illegitimate thing and furthermore c) coalitions are perfectly legal and some might say productive ways to form governments. Ask, oh I don't know, pretty much ANY government in Europe - particular the current Conservative government running the UK just now.
Tuesday
2011 Budget Issued
The pivotal budget has been delivered in Parliament, and it looks like - finally - the opposition will not be supporting it.
There are little things going on that could affect the outcome here. There's some speculation that there might be a last minute negotiation between CPC and NDP - although I think that's unlikely. Meanwhile, there is also speculation that PM Harper might go to the Governor General and cry lack of support, requesting an election. This would be an arguably petty move to preempt a non-confidence vote by opposition parties.
The GG could respond within his power to request that other parties form a government. That would be a nice outcome, as it would avoid a costly election. And really, the only possible outcomes are a CPC minority or a Liberal minority. The former is a same-old-same-old which doesn't address the lack of confidence. Thus, why not resolve the situation with the latter? Let's put that extra few hundred million in electioneering and associated costs into seniors programs, and just get on with it.
That way, the next time the government falls, perhaps we'll have a new slate of leaders in the parties as well.
There are little things going on that could affect the outcome here. There's some speculation that there might be a last minute negotiation between CPC and NDP - although I think that's unlikely. Meanwhile, there is also speculation that PM Harper might go to the Governor General and cry lack of support, requesting an election. This would be an arguably petty move to preempt a non-confidence vote by opposition parties.
The GG could respond within his power to request that other parties form a government. That would be a nice outcome, as it would avoid a costly election. And really, the only possible outcomes are a CPC minority or a Liberal minority. The former is a same-old-same-old which doesn't address the lack of confidence. Thus, why not resolve the situation with the latter? Let's put that extra few hundred million in electioneering and associated costs into seniors programs, and just get on with it.
That way, the next time the government falls, perhaps we'll have a new slate of leaders in the parties as well.
Wednesday
Next Monday?
Sounds like next Monday is the most likely day for a non-confidence vote during which the CPC government can be brought down. Tuesday the budget gets tabled, and the opposition doesn't want to go to the polls on a budget-based issue, rather the correct focus for the election should be integrity and the shady activity of the government.
Whether it's the Oda or Kenney affairs, or the 'Harper government' moniker, or the multi-million dollar tour promoting the Conservative Party under the guise of celebrating government (e.g our) spending on infrastructure, there is more than enough reason to turf out the current guys and stick in pretty much anyone else.
Hoping against history for a) thorough drubbing for the CPC b) a broad change of players in party leadership c) inspirational leaders d) a populace that gets off their asses and votes.
Can only wait and see at this point. Stay tuned.
Whether it's the Oda or Kenney affairs, or the 'Harper government' moniker, or the multi-million dollar tour promoting the Conservative Party under the guise of celebrating government (e.g our) spending on infrastructure, there is more than enough reason to turf out the current guys and stick in pretty much anyone else.
Hoping against history for a) thorough drubbing for the CPC b) a broad change of players in party leadership c) inspirational leaders d) a populace that gets off their asses and votes.
Can only wait and see at this point. Stay tuned.
Thursday
Can You Believe: One Year (and a bit) Later?
Yes, it's been a year or so. Who would have thought we would still be in this silly stalemate after all this time. Even ignoring all the sleaze and blatant disregard for law and the rules of parliament, this situation is strange.
It is one borne out of weak, uninspiring leaders, an unmotivated, cynical populace, blind loyalty and an ideological perception of entitlement. Without all those pieces, we wouldn't be in this situation.
The sad thing is that if we could just break ANY of those things, the stalemate would dissolve and we could move forward - potentially with positive change. But sadly we seem to be unable to do so. An election call would precipitate change, but cannot happen because everyone is sitting in a little safe spot, afraid to move for fear they will lose their perceived control.
For the ideologues who prance around flouting the rules of parliament, forging and altering documents, abusing their positions and resorting to petty, insulting personal attacks on anyone questioning their ineptitude, the concern is that the call of an election only bangs them up against the glass ceiling on their popular support. They know that the majority is (thankfully) still out of reach.
For the weak opposition leaders, they are poorly supported within their own ranks, and KNOW that a failed election would be the catalyst to clear them out (and likely) then install the 2nd choice among weak candidates. In the meantime, a year or so passes.
For the populace - my fellow Canadians - we get the worst possible outcome. Some of us blindly support anything right wing, mainly because they've drunk the US media kool-aid which resonates with them, in the simplicity that all the complexities of the world are easily pigeon-holed into 'right' and 'left' and as long as you blindly support the former, the latter can some day be eradicated.
And "blindly" is the operative word there.
The vast majority of my compatriots sadly take another approach. Go through your daily lives, ignoring the world around you. Show no interest in anything, learn nothing about what makes your country the way it is, and for goodness sake, never vote in an election.
Ladies, I harbour particular finger-waving for those of you who shirk your duties as a citizen. There are probably people alive in your family who can remember not being allowed to vote. Certainly there are some who can remember not being able to borrow money without their husband's approval, or hold a job other than teacher, nurse or food-server without a very thick skin and superhuman perseverance. You are currently ruled by a political cadre that includes barely 20% female representation. Why do you stand for that?
I would gladly see the women of the country demand that once, even if for this next (whenever it comes) election only, you will NOT vote for anyone who isn't female. Try it. Just once. Make a change. Then maybe we will see some strong women and can leave behind the likes of Ambrose, Guergis and Oda for some intelligent, thoughtful leaders, rather than ones who will fill chairs and keep their mouths shut.
Where We Are Headed
So how will change happen? A budget is approaching, but the NDP are well placed to sell their support for influence on the budget contents, and the CPC know this and will give them juicy tidbits and let them claim ownership.
The Liberals hesitate to spark a non-confidence vote, likely because they can't count on NDP support while the aforementioned carrot remains of interest.
The CPC probably should, strategically, make it happen themselves for fear the press finds a spin on all the back-to-back sleaze stories, and it begin to stick with their blind-support base. But truly, they want nothing more than to keep the opposition weak, and know an election could cause change in that regard.
Thus we continue to go around.
There is a two week period leading into the next budget process, and a lot can happen in that period. And so we wait. This time, however, I suspect it will not be a year before something happens in this area. One can only hope, because right now change is probably the best thing we can get out of this.
It is one borne out of weak, uninspiring leaders, an unmotivated, cynical populace, blind loyalty and an ideological perception of entitlement. Without all those pieces, we wouldn't be in this situation.
The sad thing is that if we could just break ANY of those things, the stalemate would dissolve and we could move forward - potentially with positive change. But sadly we seem to be unable to do so. An election call would precipitate change, but cannot happen because everyone is sitting in a little safe spot, afraid to move for fear they will lose their perceived control.
For the ideologues who prance around flouting the rules of parliament, forging and altering documents, abusing their positions and resorting to petty, insulting personal attacks on anyone questioning their ineptitude, the concern is that the call of an election only bangs them up against the glass ceiling on their popular support. They know that the majority is (thankfully) still out of reach.
For the weak opposition leaders, they are poorly supported within their own ranks, and KNOW that a failed election would be the catalyst to clear them out (and likely) then install the 2nd choice among weak candidates. In the meantime, a year or so passes.
For the populace - my fellow Canadians - we get the worst possible outcome. Some of us blindly support anything right wing, mainly because they've drunk the US media kool-aid which resonates with them, in the simplicity that all the complexities of the world are easily pigeon-holed into 'right' and 'left' and as long as you blindly support the former, the latter can some day be eradicated.
And "blindly" is the operative word there.
The vast majority of my compatriots sadly take another approach. Go through your daily lives, ignoring the world around you. Show no interest in anything, learn nothing about what makes your country the way it is, and for goodness sake, never vote in an election.
Ladies, I harbour particular finger-waving for those of you who shirk your duties as a citizen. There are probably people alive in your family who can remember not being allowed to vote. Certainly there are some who can remember not being able to borrow money without their husband's approval, or hold a job other than teacher, nurse or food-server without a very thick skin and superhuman perseverance. You are currently ruled by a political cadre that includes barely 20% female representation. Why do you stand for that?
I would gladly see the women of the country demand that once, even if for this next (whenever it comes) election only, you will NOT vote for anyone who isn't female. Try it. Just once. Make a change. Then maybe we will see some strong women and can leave behind the likes of Ambrose, Guergis and Oda for some intelligent, thoughtful leaders, rather than ones who will fill chairs and keep their mouths shut.
Where We Are Headed
So how will change happen? A budget is approaching, but the NDP are well placed to sell their support for influence on the budget contents, and the CPC know this and will give them juicy tidbits and let them claim ownership.
The Liberals hesitate to spark a non-confidence vote, likely because they can't count on NDP support while the aforementioned carrot remains of interest.
The CPC probably should, strategically, make it happen themselves for fear the press finds a spin on all the back-to-back sleaze stories, and it begin to stick with their blind-support base. But truly, they want nothing more than to keep the opposition weak, and know an election could cause change in that regard.
Thus we continue to go around.
There is a two week period leading into the next budget process, and a lot can happen in that period. And so we wait. This time, however, I suspect it will not be a year before something happens in this area. One can only hope, because right now change is probably the best thing we can get out of this.
Still No Shakeup
Haven't seen anything that leads to a shakeup of the top names in the political parties, but the polls are suggesting that the PM's decision to prorogue the parliament to escape criticism hasn't worked out very well for them.
There sure is a lot of ammunition for proving that the Government's pre-power words about transparency, smaller government and accountability have all been tossed aside in favour of reaching for absolute power without oversight or criticism from those pesky voters.
Big protests last weekend were positive to see. I may well have participated myself had I heard about their pending occurrence. As it was, it still sounds like the turnout was good. Perhaps the outrage is beginning to get some foothold.
Sadly I saw an article on how favourable people across the country feel about people of minority groups, such as Jews, non-whites, French-Quebecers and so on. The charts all showed the least tolerant people as being Albertans! Why is that? The fact that this current government has it's power-base and roots in Alberta makes me even more dismayed. Were they to get a majority, I shudder to think about what sorts of things they would do to equality, multiculturalism, immigration and arts policy to please their rural Albertan base.
Well, at least the winds are blowing in an encouraging direction just now. Would still love to see some new blood at the tops of some of these parties, but I think we'll still have a bit of waiting.
There sure is a lot of ammunition for proving that the Government's pre-power words about transparency, smaller government and accountability have all been tossed aside in favour of reaching for absolute power without oversight or criticism from those pesky voters.
Big protests last weekend were positive to see. I may well have participated myself had I heard about their pending occurrence. As it was, it still sounds like the turnout was good. Perhaps the outrage is beginning to get some foothold.
Sadly I saw an article on how favourable people across the country feel about people of minority groups, such as Jews, non-whites, French-Quebecers and so on. The charts all showed the least tolerant people as being Albertans! Why is that? The fact that this current government has it's power-base and roots in Alberta makes me even more dismayed. Were they to get a majority, I shudder to think about what sorts of things they would do to equality, multiculturalism, immigration and arts policy to please their rural Albertan base.
Well, at least the winds are blowing in an encouraging direction just now. Would still love to see some new blood at the tops of some of these parties, but I think we'll still have a bit of waiting.
Tuesday
Don't Look At Me
I've given up trying to predict an election anytime soon. The leader of the opposition is a obfuscating mute, the leader of the government has decided to pretty much cancel parliament rather than face criticism and oversight, and the other parties are too small to matter.
There's no hope of electoral reform in the coming 5 years that I can imagine. The media doesn't seem to be able to put in enough effort to make anything stick to the antidemocratic, non-communicative government that gets people vow to boot them out.
It's a dark period for Canada for sure. We're back where we were two years ago - needing a shakedown in the parties to get new people involved at the top.
I can't see an easy way out of this one. We can only hope a leader of some kind emerges from the back benches.
There's no hope of electoral reform in the coming 5 years that I can imagine. The media doesn't seem to be able to put in enough effort to make anything stick to the antidemocratic, non-communicative government that gets people vow to boot them out.
It's a dark period for Canada for sure. We're back where we were two years ago - needing a shakedown in the parties to get new people involved at the top.
I can't see an easy way out of this one. We can only hope a leader of some kind emerges from the back benches.
Elusive Election
Funny how quickly the shenanigans change things around. So I'm thinking spring before we see an Election. There seems to be some concensus that there wouldn't be an election during the Olympics. Not sure why, but there it is.
Lately, the federal conservatives have been getting exposed for their partisan abuses of public events, funding, etc. They've been spotted with Conservative Party logo's on gov't funding novelty cheques. And when the logo isn't on it, the colour scheme is miraculously their party colours. And the signatures are always the nearest conservative.
Also, the bulk of the funding events seem to be in the ridings of Conservative members.
I'm getting jaded, knowing that even though the ethics commissioner has been referred to these events, and even if he can bring himself/herself (who is it these days?) to criticize, nothing will stick on these guys. They could bring out pictures of the whole bunch of them riding orphaned immigrant children like ponies, and the electorate would shrug and ignore it.
Oh well, let's let this stew a bit longer.
Lately, the federal conservatives have been getting exposed for their partisan abuses of public events, funding, etc. They've been spotted with Conservative Party logo's on gov't funding novelty cheques. And when the logo isn't on it, the colour scheme is miraculously their party colours. And the signatures are always the nearest conservative.
Also, the bulk of the funding events seem to be in the ridings of Conservative members.
I'm getting jaded, knowing that even though the ethics commissioner has been referred to these events, and even if he can bring himself/herself (who is it these days?) to criticize, nothing will stick on these guys. They could bring out pictures of the whole bunch of them riding orphaned immigrant children like ponies, and the electorate would shrug and ignore it.
Oh well, let's let this stew a bit longer.
Politics Gets More Depressing
Well, it's looking like the Liberals are further messing up the state of their party. Meanwhile a poll suggested last week that the Conservatives are nearing potential majority status.
Mr Ignatief has pulled a Dion-like move with his strategy to not tell anyone his platform details for fear of the Conservatives snagging all his planks, meanwhile petty childishness erodes any firmness to their Quebec numbers.
Meanwhile the NDP are sheepishly hiding due to their support of the Conservative agenda on the last vote, and the Greens are snoozing as well.
I am really truly worried about what would happen to the country if the conservatives got a majority. I would actually start investigating possible other destinations to live. Perhaps somewhere in a UN highly ranked country like Norway or something. I truly think we'd see totalitarian moves to oppress the people, move religious-right policy into place, isolate the media, eliminate public broadcaster, keep most of government out of the public visibility, move the country closer to the US, eliminate the Canadian dollar, make guns wide-open for broad availability, move our incarceration rate up as high as the US and so on. Our treatment of Canadians abroad, our positions in international bodies and our environmental positions have all been eroded to embarrassingly malformed states.
There is absolutely a secret agenda waiting. We see it regularly in the strategy of the PMO to silence their people so that their constantly mouth-occupying feet don't get exposed. Their racism and intolerance would be set free, and their ideology would guide all their paths. They know that the fear-factor has held them back from majority territory, so they've tried to have us forget the crazy stuff they espoused early in their formation.
Even worse, with a majority all of the Bush/Cheney advisors who find themselves impotent in the USA would be quickly employed (some already are) by the Conservatives, and we'd get to experience that regime ourselves. Welcome to 2001.
Ignatief has got to lay open his kimono and make take ownership of his platform. Yes, Harper will steal parts of it, but that won't be hard to prove. In fact, plan on it. Introduce the platform, point out the government's position, and as each plank is stolen be ready to point out that they have done so to prop up their minority.
It sounds like an election has been delayed until at least Q1 of 2010. Let's hope we can find some way to make it an election that makes Canada a better place than a worse one.
Mr Ignatief has pulled a Dion-like move with his strategy to not tell anyone his platform details for fear of the Conservatives snagging all his planks, meanwhile petty childishness erodes any firmness to their Quebec numbers.
Meanwhile the NDP are sheepishly hiding due to their support of the Conservative agenda on the last vote, and the Greens are snoozing as well.
I am really truly worried about what would happen to the country if the conservatives got a majority. I would actually start investigating possible other destinations to live. Perhaps somewhere in a UN highly ranked country like Norway or something. I truly think we'd see totalitarian moves to oppress the people, move religious-right policy into place, isolate the media, eliminate public broadcaster, keep most of government out of the public visibility, move the country closer to the US, eliminate the Canadian dollar, make guns wide-open for broad availability, move our incarceration rate up as high as the US and so on. Our treatment of Canadians abroad, our positions in international bodies and our environmental positions have all been eroded to embarrassingly malformed states.
There is absolutely a secret agenda waiting. We see it regularly in the strategy of the PMO to silence their people so that their constantly mouth-occupying feet don't get exposed. Their racism and intolerance would be set free, and their ideology would guide all their paths. They know that the fear-factor has held them back from majority territory, so they've tried to have us forget the crazy stuff they espoused early in their formation.
Even worse, with a majority all of the Bush/Cheney advisors who find themselves impotent in the USA would be quickly employed (some already are) by the Conservatives, and we'd get to experience that regime ourselves. Welcome to 2001.
Ignatief has got to lay open his kimono and make take ownership of his platform. Yes, Harper will steal parts of it, but that won't be hard to prove. In fact, plan on it. Introduce the platform, point out the government's position, and as each plank is stolen be ready to point out that they have done so to prop up their minority.
It sounds like an election has been delayed until at least Q1 of 2010. Let's hope we can find some way to make it an election that makes Canada a better place than a worse one.
Yes, Seems to be That Time Again
The ducks are being lined up for another election. It seems to be in the cards for this autumn. The deciding factor will be if the NDP decide to use their leverage to advance some of their agenda with the government. I know people will complain, but this is really how the NDP add value to our system. They are not going to get elected in the next decade, surely. I'm a bit doubtful that they will ultimately survive the next few years, with pressure from the greens.
However, their value in the past has been to use what leverage they have to advance items from their platform with the government in power to get change for which they can claim ownership. Hey, it got us medicare didn't it?
Meanwhile, the Liberal party leader Mr. Ignatief seems to be in a decent jumping off spot. The media is kind of getting this wrong, saying, 'oh look he's neck and neck with Harper, what tough times for any chance of a Liberal win.' But in reality, this is his starting position. He's basically been neutral, AND had a negative campaign attack for a few weeks - though I haven't seen that lately.
So as he begins to roll out his platform details, he has the opportunity to build on, or subtract from, this current position. Basically any positive response, and he's in the black.
The Liberals have also managed to test-fly a few items. They haven't got much response to a campaign built on EI reform, so now they're tuning it to address jobless numbers. They need to move forward with an autumn election, because the recession is wrapping up, and they don't want the conservatives - who denied there would even be any downturn at all a year ago - to take credit for this incoming tide.
Two things resonate with me for this coming election. One - leadership: I MUCH more trust a guy who has actually had a job. Seems a minor thing, but look at Mr. Harper who has never really held down a job - he went from school to political backroom activity under Manning, and into eventual political leadership. How does a person like that relate to the process of applying for a position, going to interviews, answering to management hierarchy, getting paycheck (or not). It's a fundamental life-skill thing. And delivering things! He's probably never had to create and deliver something! Ignatief as a journalist and a professor has had to deal with deadlines, delivery and completion of tasks. Man, these are such basic things that we SURELY should have in our leaders.
Add to that the leadership ability on the world stage - who would you want someone who has never travelled anywhere on his own time (post PM-ship doesn't count), or someone who spent decades travelling and reporting on issues around the world. I feel much more comfortable with the global awareness of an Ignatief, than someone who has never been there.
Even when he does travel, Harper cannot seem to figure out such basic things as how to get to a meeting on time. Again - a skill we learn in the workplace, but not having held a job, Harper is habitually late for media events when EVERY other leader in the G20 can manage to pull it off.
So that's the leadership piece.
The second issue for me is respect for the rights of Canadians. There seems to be case after case after case of Canadians abroad who are ignored by our government when they get into difficulty abroad. The most infuriating is the case of an autistic man in Africa who was abandoned for 3 years and STILL isn't able to come home. There is the disturbing element that all the people affected appear to be people of colour.
Add to this the case of Guantanamo detainee Omar Khater. Every rule in the book says that we need to bring this young man home. Regardless of his role in the Afghanistan. I think that our civilization proves itself not in the easy situations but in the difficult situations. Not under idle calm but under stress. We demonstrate our humanity and fundamental principles through how we handle the difficult situations. A minor child involved in a war situation - the UN position on it is clear. The position of the courts is clear. Yet the government continues to appeal court decisions and allows the guy to remain in illegal US detention.
I dislike what the man and his family have espoused and advocated. But we should recognize that as a Canadian he has unalienable rights that we will support. We either have or should have a means for dealing with him here. We can imprison him if necessary, apply judicial process, and restrict his personal freedom in an appropriate way. However, he has an unalienable right to have his government support his return.
There seems to be an innate racism in the Federal Conservative party that pokes it's head out occasionally. Even though their approach has become to never allow anyone except the inner cadre to ever speak to Canadians through the media, it doesn't manage to mask that ugliness.
So those elements- leadership and the rights of Canadians abroad - are big issues for me. I don't know that I will vote for Liberals, but I have to advocate an anyone but Conservatives position.
Independent of those two issues, the other element I touched on there, the isolation of the government from the people is surely something that is not appropriate for a democratic government. Media interviews are almost never granted, and the politicians never speak except in very scripted situations. Can't we get some people in there who can think on their feet, aren't so bigotted and inept that they have to be muzzled?
Bring on the election! We need some change. For once it seems like we're a year behind the US political status. They flushed their right wing wackos last year, we're still stuck with ours.
However, their value in the past has been to use what leverage they have to advance items from their platform with the government in power to get change for which they can claim ownership. Hey, it got us medicare didn't it?
Meanwhile, the Liberal party leader Mr. Ignatief seems to be in a decent jumping off spot. The media is kind of getting this wrong, saying, 'oh look he's neck and neck with Harper, what tough times for any chance of a Liberal win.' But in reality, this is his starting position. He's basically been neutral, AND had a negative campaign attack for a few weeks - though I haven't seen that lately.
So as he begins to roll out his platform details, he has the opportunity to build on, or subtract from, this current position. Basically any positive response, and he's in the black.
The Liberals have also managed to test-fly a few items. They haven't got much response to a campaign built on EI reform, so now they're tuning it to address jobless numbers. They need to move forward with an autumn election, because the recession is wrapping up, and they don't want the conservatives - who denied there would even be any downturn at all a year ago - to take credit for this incoming tide.
Two things resonate with me for this coming election. One - leadership: I MUCH more trust a guy who has actually had a job. Seems a minor thing, but look at Mr. Harper who has never really held down a job - he went from school to political backroom activity under Manning, and into eventual political leadership. How does a person like that relate to the process of applying for a position, going to interviews, answering to management hierarchy, getting paycheck (or not). It's a fundamental life-skill thing. And delivering things! He's probably never had to create and deliver something! Ignatief as a journalist and a professor has had to deal with deadlines, delivery and completion of tasks. Man, these are such basic things that we SURELY should have in our leaders.
Add to that the leadership ability on the world stage - who would you want someone who has never travelled anywhere on his own time (post PM-ship doesn't count), or someone who spent decades travelling and reporting on issues around the world. I feel much more comfortable with the global awareness of an Ignatief, than someone who has never been there.
Even when he does travel, Harper cannot seem to figure out such basic things as how to get to a meeting on time. Again - a skill we learn in the workplace, but not having held a job, Harper is habitually late for media events when EVERY other leader in the G20 can manage to pull it off.
So that's the leadership piece.
The second issue for me is respect for the rights of Canadians. There seems to be case after case after case of Canadians abroad who are ignored by our government when they get into difficulty abroad. The most infuriating is the case of an autistic man in Africa who was abandoned for 3 years and STILL isn't able to come home. There is the disturbing element that all the people affected appear to be people of colour.
Add to this the case of Guantanamo detainee Omar Khater. Every rule in the book says that we need to bring this young man home. Regardless of his role in the Afghanistan. I think that our civilization proves itself not in the easy situations but in the difficult situations. Not under idle calm but under stress. We demonstrate our humanity and fundamental principles through how we handle the difficult situations. A minor child involved in a war situation - the UN position on it is clear. The position of the courts is clear. Yet the government continues to appeal court decisions and allows the guy to remain in illegal US detention.
I dislike what the man and his family have espoused and advocated. But we should recognize that as a Canadian he has unalienable rights that we will support. We either have or should have a means for dealing with him here. We can imprison him if necessary, apply judicial process, and restrict his personal freedom in an appropriate way. However, he has an unalienable right to have his government support his return.
There seems to be an innate racism in the Federal Conservative party that pokes it's head out occasionally. Even though their approach has become to never allow anyone except the inner cadre to ever speak to Canadians through the media, it doesn't manage to mask that ugliness.
So those elements- leadership and the rights of Canadians abroad - are big issues for me. I don't know that I will vote for Liberals, but I have to advocate an anyone but Conservatives position.
Independent of those two issues, the other element I touched on there, the isolation of the government from the people is surely something that is not appropriate for a democratic government. Media interviews are almost never granted, and the politicians never speak except in very scripted situations. Can't we get some people in there who can think on their feet, aren't so bigotted and inept that they have to be muzzled?
Bring on the election! We need some change. For once it seems like we're a year behind the US political status. They flushed their right wing wackos last year, we're still stuck with ours.
Thursday
Autumnal Poll Visit?
The scuttlebutt says an election is looking virtually certain for the Autumn. There is no clear idea yet about which issue Mr. Ignatieff will centre his push around, but it does seem logical that his current position as leader of the liberal party for long enough now to be fresh, yet not spoiled goods means he'll do it.
As well, the Conservatives seem to have made enough recent messes that they will be rather damaged goods the next time around. It's clear their attacks upon Iggy will be based on his career's travels around the globe, and time at Harvard in the US.
It's a bit sad that the argument will carry some weight in some quarters. Just think, a political party, in a climate where the global ecomony and foreign policy issues are at the forefront perhaps more than they have been since WWII is going to make the argument that the other candidate has spent a career travelling and engaged in employment in international culture and issues, while their candidate has rarely been out of the country, and has never held an actual, real 'job.'
What a bizarro-land situation that will be.
Meanwhile the Greens and NDP are looking a bit has been. I would have thought the best option for them would be for the NDP to drop the trade-union focus, and join up with the Greens becoming he "New Green Democrats." or something. Of course that would likely split the left of centre vote, and help out the conservatives, but in terms of their fortunes probably make more sense.
Well still a whole summer to work through. But mark you Calendars for Octoberish I suppose.
As well, the Conservatives seem to have made enough recent messes that they will be rather damaged goods the next time around. It's clear their attacks upon Iggy will be based on his career's travels around the globe, and time at Harvard in the US.
It's a bit sad that the argument will carry some weight in some quarters. Just think, a political party, in a climate where the global ecomony and foreign policy issues are at the forefront perhaps more than they have been since WWII is going to make the argument that the other candidate has spent a career travelling and engaged in employment in international culture and issues, while their candidate has rarely been out of the country, and has never held an actual, real 'job.'
What a bizarro-land situation that will be.
Meanwhile the Greens and NDP are looking a bit has been. I would have thought the best option for them would be for the NDP to drop the trade-union focus, and join up with the Greens becoming he "New Green Democrats." or something. Of course that would likely split the left of centre vote, and help out the conservatives, but in terms of their fortunes probably make more sense.
Well still a whole summer to work through. But mark you Calendars for Octoberish I suppose.
Friday
Making Them Wear It
Ignatief at the helm and the Liberals have approved the "Conservative" budget. I have a hard time finding a slate of policies that would endear me to any party. My morals and common sense tells me that bits of each platform adds up to responsible government. I'm rather surprised though, in the whole budget after the prorogation thing that:
a) Iggy didn't at least suggest a few constructive changes to the budget (spend more on this, less on that)
b) The "we already fixed it last year" conservatives could suddenly become the NDP
c) That Jack Layton isn't playing this a bit more astutely. Read more constructively, less attacky
I'll avoid too much policy picking, as this blog is focussed on the path to election(s). But my preferred play through this whole thing is that Iggy lets it lie enough that the spending gets going and money starts flowing, and the paperwork is in place for the programs, then pulls the plug.
My big concern is that the conservatives will be as lame at actually moving the funds as they have been for $billions announced years ago for city infrastructure funding that have barely moved.
So that next election, or movement to a much needed coalition is still a good 4-6 months away.
a) Iggy didn't at least suggest a few constructive changes to the budget (spend more on this, less on that)
b) The "we already fixed it last year" conservatives could suddenly become the NDP
c) That Jack Layton isn't playing this a bit more astutely. Read more constructively, less attacky
I'll avoid too much policy picking, as this blog is focussed on the path to election(s). But my preferred play through this whole thing is that Iggy lets it lie enough that the spending gets going and money starts flowing, and the paperwork is in place for the programs, then pulls the plug.
My big concern is that the conservatives will be as lame at actually moving the funds as they have been for $billions announced years ago for city infrastructure funding that have barely moved.
So that next election, or movement to a much needed coalition is still a good 4-6 months away.
Tuesday
Churn
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.
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.
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!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)