The reaction of the Harper government to the nuclear deal with Iran is astounding.
A government that was under suspicion of developing nuclear weapons has agreed not to do so and it has also agreed to greater oversight than what is already required as a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Further the deal was made with the US, Britain, France, Germany, China and Russia, which is a great deal of diplomatic firepower.
The Canadian government should be happy about this agreement. Instead they pretty much came about against it. Why? Because they apparently do not trust Iran to live up to it. That for them is a reason not to support with the agreement.
You know the same concerns were voiced by many about the different SALT agreements in the 1970s and '80s. The Soviets could not be trusted they said but wiser heads prevailed and agreements to reduce the number of nuclear weapons in the world were agreed to, enacted and implemented. The confidence building measures between the two superpowers worked and they probably contributed to the rise of Mr. Gorbachev to the leadership of the Soviet Union instead of someone more reactionary. In short, those two agreements contributed to the world stepping away from the nuclear brink.
Of course the agreement with Iran is only a first step and it will probably not lead to a greater thaw in and of itself but it could be a step towards that. As well, Iran will need to be watched to make certain it lives up to its side of the agreement but you only need to look at their negotiating partners to see that they will have a great deal of difficulty hiding any move to cheat. Most of those powers are not new at negotiated and enforcing nuclear deals.
This agreement should be greeted with cautious optimism from any country that strives for peace, which should include Canada, as a middle power watching its influence in the world steadily drain away. Instead we get the stupidity that was demonstrated by Mr. Baird and by extension Mr. Harper on the weekend.
Monday, November 25, 2013
By-elections
I know it is great fun to talk about them but tonight's by-elections will not decide any great political questions in this country.
When it is all over Stephen Harper will still be leading a majority Conservative government. Mr. Mulclair will still be the Leader of the Opposition and the Liberals will still be the Third Party.
All will have more or less the same seat count as right now.
That of course will not stop commentators, professional or otherwise, from spinning them like a tornado but that is all it will be.
2015 will be the real deal and we will see what happens then.
When it is all over Stephen Harper will still be leading a majority Conservative government. Mr. Mulclair will still be the Leader of the Opposition and the Liberals will still be the Third Party.
All will have more or less the same seat count as right now.
That of course will not stop commentators, professional or otherwise, from spinning them like a tornado but that is all it will be.
2015 will be the real deal and we will see what happens then.
Friday, November 15, 2013
Admired no, be impressed with, absolutely
So the Conservatives and their supporters in the media are making a little political hay from a statement Mr. Trudeau made a few days ago about China. His remarks seemed innocuous enough but you would think by the reaction from the Conservatives that Mr. Trudeau suggested Canada follow the Chinese model.
Of course that is BS and all the reaction does is demonstrate that the Conservatives' internal polling is telling them what the public polls have been saying for months. Mr. Trudeau is a real threat to win the next election.
Buried by all of the Conservative hyper-ventilating is a real assessment of the country of China.
Let's remember that 20 years ago China was a poor country. The size of its economy was not even in the top ten. Now it is the second largest economy in the world and it is on a trajectory to overtake the largest economy by the end of this decade.
To put that in perspective, the Communist dictatorship in China is beating the entire capitalist democratic world at their own game.
That is a remarkable achievement.
No one can admire a government that slaughtered 100s or even 1000s of its citizens for the temerity of demanding democratic reforms but objectively speaking one can be impressed with how they have guided one of the fastest economic expansions in history and how that expansion shows little sign of abating any time soon.
As well, with economic power comes political power so Canada and other democratic countries better begin to come to grips with some of the implications of that. In all likelihood the Chinese government will frown upon any western government that makes any comments they do not like and with political power will come the ability to demonstrate that dislike in tangible ways against the offending government. Very soon, gone will be the days that Canada or any other western government will be able to lecture the Chinese government on its human rights record without suffering a heavy price for it, one that would probably have a significant economic impact in the offending country.
Mr. Trudeau's statement was questionable but it could have elicited a reaction from his opponents that could have advanced the understanding of the new dynamic that is shaping up in the international community. Imagine, if the Conservatives would have made nuanced statements that caused debate on how to handle that and informed Canadians of the pending new reality. It would have been in the public interest.
Instead they went for the cheap "gotcha" moment and that moment was lost. Not that I was expecting anything different.
Of course that is BS and all the reaction does is demonstrate that the Conservatives' internal polling is telling them what the public polls have been saying for months. Mr. Trudeau is a real threat to win the next election.
Buried by all of the Conservative hyper-ventilating is a real assessment of the country of China.
Let's remember that 20 years ago China was a poor country. The size of its economy was not even in the top ten. Now it is the second largest economy in the world and it is on a trajectory to overtake the largest economy by the end of this decade.
To put that in perspective, the Communist dictatorship in China is beating the entire capitalist democratic world at their own game.
That is a remarkable achievement.
No one can admire a government that slaughtered 100s or even 1000s of its citizens for the temerity of demanding democratic reforms but objectively speaking one can be impressed with how they have guided one of the fastest economic expansions in history and how that expansion shows little sign of abating any time soon.
As well, with economic power comes political power so Canada and other democratic countries better begin to come to grips with some of the implications of that. In all likelihood the Chinese government will frown upon any western government that makes any comments they do not like and with political power will come the ability to demonstrate that dislike in tangible ways against the offending government. Very soon, gone will be the days that Canada or any other western government will be able to lecture the Chinese government on its human rights record without suffering a heavy price for it, one that would probably have a significant economic impact in the offending country.
Mr. Trudeau's statement was questionable but it could have elicited a reaction from his opponents that could have advanced the understanding of the new dynamic that is shaping up in the international community. Imagine, if the Conservatives would have made nuanced statements that caused debate on how to handle that and informed Canadians of the pending new reality. It would have been in the public interest.
Instead they went for the cheap "gotcha" moment and that moment was lost. Not that I was expecting anything different.
Wednesday, October 30, 2013
Stephen Harper is becoming unglued
I have argued in this space before that the best way for the Liberals to defeat Mr. Harper was to cause him to go off script.
Mr. Harper does not ad lib worth a damn. He always gets himself into deeper and deeper trouble when he does. That has been proven in the past and it is being proven with Harper Senate Scandal.
Of course, since 2006 the Liberals, the Bloc and the NDP have utterly failed to make Mr. Harper ad lib. They barely ruffled his feathers.
So it is ironic that he who has caused Mr. Harper to go so far off script recently is a Conservative and one of Mr. Harper's chosen men.
Mr. Harper does not ad lib worth a damn. He always gets himself into deeper and deeper trouble when he does. That has been proven in the past and it is being proven with Harper Senate Scandal.
Of course, since 2006 the Liberals, the Bloc and the NDP have utterly failed to make Mr. Harper ad lib. They barely ruffled his feathers.
So it is ironic that he who has caused Mr. Harper to go so far off script recently is a Conservative and one of Mr. Harper's chosen men.
Friday, August 16, 2013
Egypt's Non-Revolution
By staging a coup the military in Egypt crushed any hope of a democratic Egypt, a democratic Middle East.
There are many commentators in the West, both professional and amateur, who have put forth the opinion that the coup was necessary. Their argument goes something like this. Mr. Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood, although they won a reasonably free and fair election, were not pursuing a democratic agenda. Indeed, their actions were leading to a dictatorship and that Mr. Morsi would make certain that the election that made him president would be the last election Egypt would ever have. Some even trotted out the old chestnut that Hitler was elected in free elections and we all know how that turned out.
This would have been a legitimate concern if Mr. Morsi had come to power after an actual revolution in Egypt. However, no revolution took place. A revolution always results in the old political order being destroyed to be replaced by a new political order. That is, the old ruling class loses all or most of its political power and the power vacuum that creates is filled by a new ruling class. That did not happen in Egypt. The mass peaceful uprising of 2012 did not result in the replacement of the old and current Egyptian ruling class. It did convince them that a change had to be made so they threw Hosni Mubarak and his son under a bus and held free elections to actually prevent a real revolution and to preserve themselves as the ruling elite in Egypt, not to have themselves replaced.
They were successful. We only need to see how the coup unfolded to see that. In most revolutions the old ruling class tends to make one final attempt, a last gasp, to hang onto power but it always fails miserably and often spectacularly. That did not happen in Egypt. When the military moved they were so successful that the removal of Mr. Morsi and the installation of a new government was seamless. It was only the aftermath that become messy. The old ruling class still held all of the important levers of power and when they decided to use them Mr. Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood were helpless to stop them.
So the argument that Mr. Morsi was setting himself up as a new dictator is flat wrong. He never had that power and he would never have achieved the power necessary to do it. He could have nibbled around the edges but the fundamental power structure of Egypt would not have changed. Any attempt by him to prevent further elections would have been thwarted if he would have tried.
Oh yes, Hitler did win free elections in 1933. However, the Germany of the 1930s was what was left over after a revolution that swept the old guard of the Kaiser and his ministers from political power and replaced it with not much. There was a virtual power vacuum in that country when Hitler won his election so there was no state apparatus to prevent him from seizing absolute power a few years later. There is no parallel between Germany in the 1930s and Egypt in 2013 so any comparison of them is specious.
It is true that Mr. Morsi was pursuing an agenda that was not very liberal or democratic but as the duly elected president of the country that was his right. Just because many disagreed with it does not justify his forcible removal. If that was a valid criteria for forcibly removing a duly elected government there would be no democracy on the planet let alone Egypt.
Unfortunately for Mr. Morsi he was very inept at pursuing his agenda because he managed to alienate every ally that the Muslim Brotherhood had gained over the years in its struggle against the current ruling elite. It is a tragic irony that if the Egyptian ruling class would have let things progress as they were progressing Mr. Morsi would have probably lost his job to an internal Muslim Brotherhood revolt as many in that party would have realized just what kind of damage he was doing to their political movement. Democracy might have been preserved. But then again, the current ruling elite in Egypt has much less interest in preserving democracy in that country than that which Mr. Morsi is accused of so they moved to crush it when the opportunity presented itself.
That is all a moot point now. The Muslim Brotherhood feels that it has been betrayed. Not just by the ruling class of Egypt but by the democrats and Coptic Christians that allied with them to bring down Hosni Mubarak. They probably feel that those groups were more than happy to piggy back on the organizational strength of their movement but then quickly abandoned them when the military moved to replace them in government.
And there in lies the real tragedy of all of this. Those that would bring democracy to Egypt are not of sufficient number and organization to do it themselves. They need a partner. The only other two sectors of Egyptian society with sufficient muscle they can partner with are the current ruling class or the Muslim Brotherhood. Now neither will have any incentive to work with them. The ruling class because they have no interest in changing a system that grants them great privilege and the Muslim Brotherhood because they will believe the liberal democrats cannot be trusted.
Indeed, in all likelihood the Muslim Brotherhood will probably resort of increased violence, not just against the rulers of Egypt but against those they believe betrayed them, which is going to force the liberal democrats into the sphere of the ruling class just to find protection from the Muslim Brotherhood.
We are already seeing this. If anybody really believes that the attacks on the Coptic Churches are just about religion they are mistaken. That is one reason but the main reason is probably vengeance at the perceived betrayal by them of the Muslim Brotherhood.
The dream of a democratic Egypt is dead and it takes the dream of democracy spreading through the Arab world with it. The fate of the Morsi government will not be lost on other Islamists in the broader Middle East so they will continue to try to gain power by other means.
There are many commentators in the West, both professional and amateur, who have put forth the opinion that the coup was necessary. Their argument goes something like this. Mr. Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood, although they won a reasonably free and fair election, were not pursuing a democratic agenda. Indeed, their actions were leading to a dictatorship and that Mr. Morsi would make certain that the election that made him president would be the last election Egypt would ever have. Some even trotted out the old chestnut that Hitler was elected in free elections and we all know how that turned out.
This would have been a legitimate concern if Mr. Morsi had come to power after an actual revolution in Egypt. However, no revolution took place. A revolution always results in the old political order being destroyed to be replaced by a new political order. That is, the old ruling class loses all or most of its political power and the power vacuum that creates is filled by a new ruling class. That did not happen in Egypt. The mass peaceful uprising of 2012 did not result in the replacement of the old and current Egyptian ruling class. It did convince them that a change had to be made so they threw Hosni Mubarak and his son under a bus and held free elections to actually prevent a real revolution and to preserve themselves as the ruling elite in Egypt, not to have themselves replaced.
They were successful. We only need to see how the coup unfolded to see that. In most revolutions the old ruling class tends to make one final attempt, a last gasp, to hang onto power but it always fails miserably and often spectacularly. That did not happen in Egypt. When the military moved they were so successful that the removal of Mr. Morsi and the installation of a new government was seamless. It was only the aftermath that become messy. The old ruling class still held all of the important levers of power and when they decided to use them Mr. Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood were helpless to stop them.
So the argument that Mr. Morsi was setting himself up as a new dictator is flat wrong. He never had that power and he would never have achieved the power necessary to do it. He could have nibbled around the edges but the fundamental power structure of Egypt would not have changed. Any attempt by him to prevent further elections would have been thwarted if he would have tried.
Oh yes, Hitler did win free elections in 1933. However, the Germany of the 1930s was what was left over after a revolution that swept the old guard of the Kaiser and his ministers from political power and replaced it with not much. There was a virtual power vacuum in that country when Hitler won his election so there was no state apparatus to prevent him from seizing absolute power a few years later. There is no parallel between Germany in the 1930s and Egypt in 2013 so any comparison of them is specious.
It is true that Mr. Morsi was pursuing an agenda that was not very liberal or democratic but as the duly elected president of the country that was his right. Just because many disagreed with it does not justify his forcible removal. If that was a valid criteria for forcibly removing a duly elected government there would be no democracy on the planet let alone Egypt.
Unfortunately for Mr. Morsi he was very inept at pursuing his agenda because he managed to alienate every ally that the Muslim Brotherhood had gained over the years in its struggle against the current ruling elite. It is a tragic irony that if the Egyptian ruling class would have let things progress as they were progressing Mr. Morsi would have probably lost his job to an internal Muslim Brotherhood revolt as many in that party would have realized just what kind of damage he was doing to their political movement. Democracy might have been preserved. But then again, the current ruling elite in Egypt has much less interest in preserving democracy in that country than that which Mr. Morsi is accused of so they moved to crush it when the opportunity presented itself.
That is all a moot point now. The Muslim Brotherhood feels that it has been betrayed. Not just by the ruling class of Egypt but by the democrats and Coptic Christians that allied with them to bring down Hosni Mubarak. They probably feel that those groups were more than happy to piggy back on the organizational strength of their movement but then quickly abandoned them when the military moved to replace them in government.
And there in lies the real tragedy of all of this. Those that would bring democracy to Egypt are not of sufficient number and organization to do it themselves. They need a partner. The only other two sectors of Egyptian society with sufficient muscle they can partner with are the current ruling class or the Muslim Brotherhood. Now neither will have any incentive to work with them. The ruling class because they have no interest in changing a system that grants them great privilege and the Muslim Brotherhood because they will believe the liberal democrats cannot be trusted.
Indeed, in all likelihood the Muslim Brotherhood will probably resort of increased violence, not just against the rulers of Egypt but against those they believe betrayed them, which is going to force the liberal democrats into the sphere of the ruling class just to find protection from the Muslim Brotherhood.
We are already seeing this. If anybody really believes that the attacks on the Coptic Churches are just about religion they are mistaken. That is one reason but the main reason is probably vengeance at the perceived betrayal by them of the Muslim Brotherhood.
The dream of a democratic Egypt is dead and it takes the dream of democracy spreading through the Arab world with it. The fate of the Morsi government will not be lost on other Islamists in the broader Middle East so they will continue to try to gain power by other means.
Wednesday, August 14, 2013
It would only be fair
When it was alleged that an aide to Dalton McGuinty had deleted e-mails regarding the gas plant decision Conservative commentators howled and continue to howl in outrage over the allegations. You would think that Mr. McGuinty had been revealed to be a reptilian kitten eater or something.
So can we now expect the same outrage from these Conservative commentators now that it has been alleged that Senator Wallin changed hundreds of entries regarding her travel schedule in her Outlook account during the audit of her travel expenses?
Both could be construed as attempts to cover up wrong doing.
My question is rhetorical of course. I already know the answer.
Full disclosure. I do not believe that either Mr. McGuinty's aide or the Senator intentionally attempted to hide anything. Their actions were not taken for some nefarious reason. In all likelihood they probably did not really think that much about their actions at all. I have read the explanations from the two of them and in both cases they are logical. In the case of the McGuinty aide, he was out of a job so it made sense to clean out your e-mail before leaving your office. I have had to do that on a number of occasions myself. As for the Senator, cleaning up your schedule to facilitate an audit, seemingly at the request of the auditor and after being told that the original full schedule had been backed up and delivered to the auditor, seems reasonable.
So can we now expect the same outrage from these Conservative commentators now that it has been alleged that Senator Wallin changed hundreds of entries regarding her travel schedule in her Outlook account during the audit of her travel expenses?
Both could be construed as attempts to cover up wrong doing.
My question is rhetorical of course. I already know the answer.
Full disclosure. I do not believe that either Mr. McGuinty's aide or the Senator intentionally attempted to hide anything. Their actions were not taken for some nefarious reason. In all likelihood they probably did not really think that much about their actions at all. I have read the explanations from the two of them and in both cases they are logical. In the case of the McGuinty aide, he was out of a job so it made sense to clean out your e-mail before leaving your office. I have had to do that on a number of occasions myself. As for the Senator, cleaning up your schedule to facilitate an audit, seemingly at the request of the auditor and after being told that the original full schedule had been backed up and delivered to the auditor, seems reasonable.
Friday, August 02, 2013
Some mid-summer thoughts
It has been a busy summer and blogging has been down on my list of priorities but I have been paying attention and I thought I would comment on some of the things that have been going on the past few months.
Ontario by-elections: The reading of the entrails from last night has begun and the instant conclusions of the chattering class is falling along ideological/partisan lines a usual. I am always amused at the attempt to read something bigger into by-elections than what is really there. Cutting through all of the spin the political situation in Ontario has not changed. The Liberals are the governing party, with a minority government, the PCs are the Official Opposition and the NDP are still the third party. Beyond that, the rest is just spin.
The next Ontario General Election: Will be lost by the Liberals. Voter fatigue with them has just reach a level where it will take a miracle for them to win again. This was true before the by-elections and it is still true. The next premier of Ontario will be Mr. Hudak. Ms. Horvath is popular but her party is not. The Orange Wave that swept Quebec did not carry over into Ontario. There are still enough centre and centre-right Ontarians who remember the Bob Rae government and who will pick whichever of the Liberals or the PCs they believe will prevent an NDP government if that threat materializes. People say that Mr. Hudak is too unpopular to win an election but they said the same thing about Mr. Harper. So the only question is whether Mr. Hudak wins a majority or a minority. If progressives want to guarantee it is a minority they should begin hammering at his promise to pass "Right-to-Work" legislation. The idea of adopting failed Republican policies in this province would probably not go down very well in many parts of the province and it may just hold Mr. Hudak to a minority.
Mr. Trudeau and Pot: Agree or disagree with his position but the fact he took one on a controversial issue instead of obfuscating and generally trying to avoid saying anything is quite refreshing. It has been a long time since I saw any politician take a clear stand on such a charged issue.
Eastern Pipeline: All I can say is it is about freaking time! There are countless pipelines heading south out of Alberta. So much so that there is a glut of Alberta oil in the US driving down the price being paid for Alberta oil way below market value. Meanwhile, us folks in the East are pumping gasoline that originated overseas into our gas tanks. Or, perversely, importing gasoline that has been refined in the United States that started out as Alberta oil. It is the height of stupidity that we export raw crude to the US only to import the refined fuels that are produced from those exports. If this Eastern pipeline will allow us to process more of Canada's energy resources in Canada then let's do it, after a thorough and fair environmental impact assessment of course.
Egypt: The ruling class of Egypt must be very grateful that Mr. Morsi was such an incompetent boob while in government. He gave them the excuse they were looking for to reestablish control without too great of a political backlash. I believed nothing would change in that country and sadly I was right.
The US snooping scandal: The naiveté of Americans to be surprised that their government was snooping on them is astounding. Really did they believe after the Patriot Act and the creation of the Department of Homeland Security that there would not be greater surveillance of American society? The other consideration is the American people probably do not have any concept of just how much data is being produced out there now. It is not called Big Data for nothing. There is no way that all of that data can be examined by human eyes. It is being examined and reexamined by computers and an extremely small percentage of it is making it to a computer monitor of a human being. So no American has to worry about "Big Brother" finding out about their elicit affair with their administrative assistant or their plan to defraud their company investors. The computers are not programmed to spit that kind of activity out to a human analyst.
Federal Cabinet Shuffle: Yawn. The most interesting part of that was the widely held view amongst the paid political punditry that the Cabinet Shuffle would be an opportunity for Stephen Harper to change the tone of his government. Not hardly! Mr. Harper has realized great success by being a prick and he is not going to change a winning formula just because a scandal and the political honeymoon of one of his political opponents have driven his polling numbers down, especially when it happens smack in the middle of a four year majority mandate. He will continue to be a prick. He will begin 2015 by donning a sweater vest and showing off his so far unknown dancing skills and he will relentlessly attack his opponents. Meanwhile Mr. Flaherty will pull the same stunt he pulled in Ontario and misplace the Federal government deficit in 2015. Mr. Harper will do all of this and hope that it can overcome the voter fatigue that is setting in towards his government and which should be well entrenched by the next election.
Ontario by-elections: The reading of the entrails from last night has begun and the instant conclusions of the chattering class is falling along ideological/partisan lines a usual. I am always amused at the attempt to read something bigger into by-elections than what is really there. Cutting through all of the spin the political situation in Ontario has not changed. The Liberals are the governing party, with a minority government, the PCs are the Official Opposition and the NDP are still the third party. Beyond that, the rest is just spin.
The next Ontario General Election: Will be lost by the Liberals. Voter fatigue with them has just reach a level where it will take a miracle for them to win again. This was true before the by-elections and it is still true. The next premier of Ontario will be Mr. Hudak. Ms. Horvath is popular but her party is not. The Orange Wave that swept Quebec did not carry over into Ontario. There are still enough centre and centre-right Ontarians who remember the Bob Rae government and who will pick whichever of the Liberals or the PCs they believe will prevent an NDP government if that threat materializes. People say that Mr. Hudak is too unpopular to win an election but they said the same thing about Mr. Harper. So the only question is whether Mr. Hudak wins a majority or a minority. If progressives want to guarantee it is a minority they should begin hammering at his promise to pass "Right-to-Work" legislation. The idea of adopting failed Republican policies in this province would probably not go down very well in many parts of the province and it may just hold Mr. Hudak to a minority.
Mr. Trudeau and Pot: Agree or disagree with his position but the fact he took one on a controversial issue instead of obfuscating and generally trying to avoid saying anything is quite refreshing. It has been a long time since I saw any politician take a clear stand on such a charged issue.
Eastern Pipeline: All I can say is it is about freaking time! There are countless pipelines heading south out of Alberta. So much so that there is a glut of Alberta oil in the US driving down the price being paid for Alberta oil way below market value. Meanwhile, us folks in the East are pumping gasoline that originated overseas into our gas tanks. Or, perversely, importing gasoline that has been refined in the United States that started out as Alberta oil. It is the height of stupidity that we export raw crude to the US only to import the refined fuels that are produced from those exports. If this Eastern pipeline will allow us to process more of Canada's energy resources in Canada then let's do it, after a thorough and fair environmental impact assessment of course.
Egypt: The ruling class of Egypt must be very grateful that Mr. Morsi was such an incompetent boob while in government. He gave them the excuse they were looking for to reestablish control without too great of a political backlash. I believed nothing would change in that country and sadly I was right.
The US snooping scandal: The naiveté of Americans to be surprised that their government was snooping on them is astounding. Really did they believe after the Patriot Act and the creation of the Department of Homeland Security that there would not be greater surveillance of American society? The other consideration is the American people probably do not have any concept of just how much data is being produced out there now. It is not called Big Data for nothing. There is no way that all of that data can be examined by human eyes. It is being examined and reexamined by computers and an extremely small percentage of it is making it to a computer monitor of a human being. So no American has to worry about "Big Brother" finding out about their elicit affair with their administrative assistant or their plan to defraud their company investors. The computers are not programmed to spit that kind of activity out to a human analyst.
Federal Cabinet Shuffle: Yawn. The most interesting part of that was the widely held view amongst the paid political punditry that the Cabinet Shuffle would be an opportunity for Stephen Harper to change the tone of his government. Not hardly! Mr. Harper has realized great success by being a prick and he is not going to change a winning formula just because a scandal and the political honeymoon of one of his political opponents have driven his polling numbers down, especially when it happens smack in the middle of a four year majority mandate. He will continue to be a prick. He will begin 2015 by donning a sweater vest and showing off his so far unknown dancing skills and he will relentlessly attack his opponents. Meanwhile Mr. Flaherty will pull the same stunt he pulled in Ontario and misplace the Federal government deficit in 2015. Mr. Harper will do all of this and hope that it can overcome the voter fatigue that is setting in towards his government and which should be well entrenched by the next election.
Thursday, June 06, 2013
The Myth of Free Trade
There is no such thing as free trade. Real free trade would be the free flow of goods within and across borders with restrictions that only deal with health and safety.
Instead what we get is what is known as managed trade where countries negotiate what goods can cross their borders. In other words, countries negotiate deals that codify protectionism and then trumpet to those who have to live with the consequences that they achieved a great deal.
Although free trade proponents will claim that free trade agreements are good for the economies of the signing countries the empirical evidence to back that up is rather lacking. However, the evidence that such deals can do harm to sectors of an economy or even the whole economy of a signatory is more compelling. We only need to look at the hollowing out of the industrial capacity of North America to see that at work.
This line of thought came up because I read earlier this week that the Harper government has ordered its negotiators for the Canada-EU free trade talks to have a deal this month. These talks have been stumbling along for months without a conclusion being close but now Mr. Harper would like to a deal in three weeks.
The reason for this, according to several commentators that I have read, is Mr. Harper is desperate to find something to change the channel on the Senate Expense Scandal.
If this is true I cannot think of anything more at odds with the interests of Canadians. You have to wonder just what parts of the Canadian economy Canadian negotiators are selling out in order to provide Mr. Harper a way out of the mess created by his Senate appointees.
Free Trade deals are usually not worth the paper they are written on but this next one presented by our government, I am certain with great fanfare, will require a greater than usual level of scrutiny than other deals of this nature.
Instead what we get is what is known as managed trade where countries negotiate what goods can cross their borders. In other words, countries negotiate deals that codify protectionism and then trumpet to those who have to live with the consequences that they achieved a great deal.
Although free trade proponents will claim that free trade agreements are good for the economies of the signing countries the empirical evidence to back that up is rather lacking. However, the evidence that such deals can do harm to sectors of an economy or even the whole economy of a signatory is more compelling. We only need to look at the hollowing out of the industrial capacity of North America to see that at work.
This line of thought came up because I read earlier this week that the Harper government has ordered its negotiators for the Canada-EU free trade talks to have a deal this month. These talks have been stumbling along for months without a conclusion being close but now Mr. Harper would like to a deal in three weeks.
The reason for this, according to several commentators that I have read, is Mr. Harper is desperate to find something to change the channel on the Senate Expense Scandal.
If this is true I cannot think of anything more at odds with the interests of Canadians. You have to wonder just what parts of the Canadian economy Canadian negotiators are selling out in order to provide Mr. Harper a way out of the mess created by his Senate appointees.
Free Trade deals are usually not worth the paper they are written on but this next one presented by our government, I am certain with great fanfare, will require a greater than usual level of scrutiny than other deals of this nature.
Sunday, June 02, 2013
Conservative Scandals
For political junkies like myself it has been fun to watch the scandals unfolding in Toronto and Ottawa in the past few weeks.
The Ford scandal has been surreal. Who would have ever thought that a politician in Canada would get involved in a drug scandal?
The Senate scandal is much more mundane. That just involves ordinary money and really not that much of it either. It is true that when they get around to investigating the expense claims of Senator Wallin the amounts will be more substantial but considering I can fly Air Canada to Orlando for around $400 return but it will cost me almost $900 return to fly to Halifax her expense claims could very well be plausible.
Although I have tried I cannot get really worked up over these scandals. I find them interesting case studies in political crisis management but on a more personal level my reaction has been "Meh".
The Ford scandal does not concern me because it is occurring in Toronto. It does not effect me here in Ottawa. I know some Torontonians like to think their city is the centre of the world but.... This is something the people of Toronto will have to figure out on their own.
The Senate scandal does not concern me that much either because the kind of behavior that caused it is part of the human condition. People have been using their positions for personal gain ever since we, as a species, began to form civilizations. This kind of behavior cuts across partisan lines. It is a function of having power.
Of course, that does not mean that the partisan in me is not enjoying watching Stephen Harper and his government twisting in the wind over this.
So will these scandals have any political impacts?
In Toronto who knows. This is the same city where a sizable number of its citizens have been supporting a hockey team despite nearly half-a-century of futility. There is no telling how the people of Toronto will finally react to the Ford scandal.
As for the Senate scandal it can be stated that it is absolutely having an impact on the Conservatives. Despite their relative insignificance in the grand scheme of things these kinds of scandals are the ones that convince non-partisan voters, who supported the governing party in the last election or two, to rethink that support. These are the types of scandals that begin convincing those voters that it is time to change the government. Combine that with the fact the Conservatives have been in power for seven years, usually a time when voter fatigue with governments begin to solidify, and you have a recipe for electoral disaster for the Conservatives.
Not that it is guaranteed that they are doomed. There is nothing to prevent these non-partisan voters from deciding in two years to stick with the Conservatives. There are too many variables to consider. However, Conservatives do have to be concerned about the scandal. It has the potential to become a tipping point and if that happens the Conservatives will likely lose the next election.
The Ford scandal has been surreal. Who would have ever thought that a politician in Canada would get involved in a drug scandal?
The Senate scandal is much more mundane. That just involves ordinary money and really not that much of it either. It is true that when they get around to investigating the expense claims of Senator Wallin the amounts will be more substantial but considering I can fly Air Canada to Orlando for around $400 return but it will cost me almost $900 return to fly to Halifax her expense claims could very well be plausible.
Although I have tried I cannot get really worked up over these scandals. I find them interesting case studies in political crisis management but on a more personal level my reaction has been "Meh".
The Ford scandal does not concern me because it is occurring in Toronto. It does not effect me here in Ottawa. I know some Torontonians like to think their city is the centre of the world but.... This is something the people of Toronto will have to figure out on their own.
The Senate scandal does not concern me that much either because the kind of behavior that caused it is part of the human condition. People have been using their positions for personal gain ever since we, as a species, began to form civilizations. This kind of behavior cuts across partisan lines. It is a function of having power.
Of course, that does not mean that the partisan in me is not enjoying watching Stephen Harper and his government twisting in the wind over this.
So will these scandals have any political impacts?
In Toronto who knows. This is the same city where a sizable number of its citizens have been supporting a hockey team despite nearly half-a-century of futility. There is no telling how the people of Toronto will finally react to the Ford scandal.
As for the Senate scandal it can be stated that it is absolutely having an impact on the Conservatives. Despite their relative insignificance in the grand scheme of things these kinds of scandals are the ones that convince non-partisan voters, who supported the governing party in the last election or two, to rethink that support. These are the types of scandals that begin convincing those voters that it is time to change the government. Combine that with the fact the Conservatives have been in power for seven years, usually a time when voter fatigue with governments begin to solidify, and you have a recipe for electoral disaster for the Conservatives.
Not that it is guaranteed that they are doomed. There is nothing to prevent these non-partisan voters from deciding in two years to stick with the Conservatives. There are too many variables to consider. However, Conservatives do have to be concerned about the scandal. It has the potential to become a tipping point and if that happens the Conservatives will likely lose the next election.
Tuesday, April 30, 2013
The Air Cadet Gliding Program
I fly gliders as a hobby. I learned how to do so 30 years ago by attending the Gliding Scholarship Course offered by the Air Cadets. That course is part of the Air Cadet Gliding Program, a program that has been awarding glider licences to about 300 kids a year for about 50 years.
Many of these kids then participate in the Spring and Fall programs of the ACGP to build time and nurture their passion for flying. Many like me will devote years to the program during these seasons (30 years for me) taking young Air Cadets up in the air to introduce them to gliding and to encourage them to attend the Glider Scholarship Course when they reach their 16th birthday.
You may recall Rick Mercer did a segment on this in the Fall when he visited a gliding centre in Alberta.
Did I mention that all of this is free of charge for the kids?
I mention this because on the weekend it was revealed that the military is considering cutting this wonderful program as a cost cutting exercise and I seek anybody's assistance to convince them that such action would be a colossal mistake. Many of us who are either still participating in the program or who participated in it in the past have started a Facebook Page to save the program and it has grown to over 11,000 members since Saturday but we still need to find other ways to put pressure on the military and its political masters to realize the program is extremely valuable. It only costs around $25 million dollars a year to run, which is a rounding error in an $18 billion dollar defence budget.
We have made a good start as Peter Mackey has received questions two days running about this issue during QP but that is just the beginning. We need to launch a sustained effort to stop this decision if we are to be successful.
Many Canadians have benefited from it and Canada has as well. Countless airline and military pilots discovered and nurtured their passion for flying in Air Cadet Gliders. Many Snowbird pilots, the pilot who landed the 767 in Gimli Manitoba when it ran out of fuel a few years ago, Chris Hadfield and even Peter Mackay's wife have benefited from this program. In short its cost is a pittance in the grand scheme of the Defence budget but its value is incalculable.
I would urge anyone who cares about saving a youth program that has been a resounding success for half-a-century to take whatever steps you think would be appropriate to help us save it.
Many of these kids then participate in the Spring and Fall programs of the ACGP to build time and nurture their passion for flying. Many like me will devote years to the program during these seasons (30 years for me) taking young Air Cadets up in the air to introduce them to gliding and to encourage them to attend the Glider Scholarship Course when they reach their 16th birthday.
You may recall Rick Mercer did a segment on this in the Fall when he visited a gliding centre in Alberta.
Did I mention that all of this is free of charge for the kids?
I mention this because on the weekend it was revealed that the military is considering cutting this wonderful program as a cost cutting exercise and I seek anybody's assistance to convince them that such action would be a colossal mistake. Many of us who are either still participating in the program or who participated in it in the past have started a Facebook Page to save the program and it has grown to over 11,000 members since Saturday but we still need to find other ways to put pressure on the military and its political masters to realize the program is extremely valuable. It only costs around $25 million dollars a year to run, which is a rounding error in an $18 billion dollar defence budget.
We have made a good start as Peter Mackey has received questions two days running about this issue during QP but that is just the beginning. We need to launch a sustained effort to stop this decision if we are to be successful.
Many Canadians have benefited from it and Canada has as well. Countless airline and military pilots discovered and nurtured their passion for flying in Air Cadet Gliders. Many Snowbird pilots, the pilot who landed the 767 in Gimli Manitoba when it ran out of fuel a few years ago, Chris Hadfield and even Peter Mackay's wife have benefited from this program. In short its cost is a pittance in the grand scheme of the Defence budget but its value is incalculable.
I would urge anyone who cares about saving a youth program that has been a resounding success for half-a-century to take whatever steps you think would be appropriate to help us save it.
Thursday, April 25, 2013
The Liberal Ads
No one likes a prick.
And from a political standpoint the Conservatives have been just that. For years they have made politics personal. In any other environment if Stephen Harper would have orchestrated the negative, personal campaigns against colleagues that he did against Mr. Dion and Mr. Ignatieff he would have been in trouble. He would have faced consequences at his job, he would have faced legal consequences and he might even have had to use his body to cash all of the cheques his mouth wrote.
However, politics is not the real world. While it seemed counter-intuitive that these negative, personal attacks would be effective they were and the reason for that was the targets of these campaigns never effectively responded to them. Both Mr. Dion and Mr. Ignatieff waited weeks and months before responding to Conservative attacks on them and with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight that was perceived as weakness, which is a killer in politics.
I do not know of anyone who voted for the Conservatives because they liked them or Mr. Harper. But they voted for them anyway. The reason is evident. In politics being seen as a prick is better than being seen as weak.
Unfortunately, that has a built in trap. If very few people actually like you it does come back to bite you on the ass eventually.
That is the reason why I find the Liberal English ad rather clever. The first few seconds of the ad reminds the viewer of why they do not like the Conservatives. They are pricks. Then the ad tries to demonstrate that Mr. Trudeau is much more likeable or to put it another way, he is not a prick.
It is an interesting strategy and I would think a good one at this stage of the game. If, in the next few months, they can keep reminding Canadians of why they do not like the Conservatives in general and Mr. Harper in particular while showing Mr. Trudeau as being a likeable and affable kind of guy they could go a long way towards making the next election very interesting and competitive.
Only the fullness of time will tell us how effective the Liberal ads are but they are a rather clever opening salvo.
And from a political standpoint the Conservatives have been just that. For years they have made politics personal. In any other environment if Stephen Harper would have orchestrated the negative, personal campaigns against colleagues that he did against Mr. Dion and Mr. Ignatieff he would have been in trouble. He would have faced consequences at his job, he would have faced legal consequences and he might even have had to use his body to cash all of the cheques his mouth wrote.
However, politics is not the real world. While it seemed counter-intuitive that these negative, personal attacks would be effective they were and the reason for that was the targets of these campaigns never effectively responded to them. Both Mr. Dion and Mr. Ignatieff waited weeks and months before responding to Conservative attacks on them and with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight that was perceived as weakness, which is a killer in politics.
I do not know of anyone who voted for the Conservatives because they liked them or Mr. Harper. But they voted for them anyway. The reason is evident. In politics being seen as a prick is better than being seen as weak.
Unfortunately, that has a built in trap. If very few people actually like you it does come back to bite you on the ass eventually.
That is the reason why I find the Liberal English ad rather clever. The first few seconds of the ad reminds the viewer of why they do not like the Conservatives. They are pricks. Then the ad tries to demonstrate that Mr. Trudeau is much more likeable or to put it another way, he is not a prick.
It is an interesting strategy and I would think a good one at this stage of the game. If, in the next few months, they can keep reminding Canadians of why they do not like the Conservatives in general and Mr. Harper in particular while showing Mr. Trudeau as being a likeable and affable kind of guy they could go a long way towards making the next election very interesting and competitive.
Only the fullness of time will tell us how effective the Liberal ads are but they are a rather clever opening salvo.
Saturday, April 20, 2013
Justin Trudeau and Negative Advertizing
When Pierre Trudeau died Canadians waited in their 10s of thousands, for 3 to 4 hours at a time, for their chance to pay their respects during his time of lying in state. I was one of them. I decided to wait until closer to the end of the week thinking that the crowds would have thinned by then but I was wrong. I still waited over three hours for my opportunity to stand for a few seconds before his flag draped coffin and pay my respects.
I mention this as it demonstrates that the Trudeau name is respected and to a certain extent revered, particularly amongst the 45+ set, who happen to be the one demographic that still votes regularly.
With this in mind and the fact Justin Trudeau seems to be quite popular amongst the under 30 crowd I do not believe that the Conservatives negative ad campaign will have much of an impact in the short to medium term. Most of those over 45 will probably give him the benefit of the doubt because of his name and those under 30 who already support him will not change their minds because of two or three Conservative ads.
What Liberals have to worry about with regard to these ads is they could set up an "I told you so" moment in the future if Mr. Trudeau stumbles badly and/or often going forward.
As well, Liberals are dreaming if they expect that these ads will cause a backlash against the Conservatives. This is the Conservative MO. Canadians are probably not going to react with a wave of revulsion or anger because they have seen it all before. Instead we will probably see a collective shrug from Canadians.
Not that Conservatives can take too much solace from that. It is inevitable that Canadians will turn on the Conservatives at some point. It happens to every government and they will be no different. When that happens the usual reaction is to "go negative". Unfortunately, Canadians will be less likely to hear that message because they would have been hearing it since the Conservatives came to power and would dismiss it as more of the same. Indeed, at some point such advertising could just fuel a "throw the bums out" sentiment as it reminds Canadians of one of the reasons they finally turned on the Conservatives.
If Justin Trudeau can keep his feet under him in the coming months these ads will be forgotten. If not then the true impact of them will be felt long after they have gone off the air.
I mention this as it demonstrates that the Trudeau name is respected and to a certain extent revered, particularly amongst the 45+ set, who happen to be the one demographic that still votes regularly.
With this in mind and the fact Justin Trudeau seems to be quite popular amongst the under 30 crowd I do not believe that the Conservatives negative ad campaign will have much of an impact in the short to medium term. Most of those over 45 will probably give him the benefit of the doubt because of his name and those under 30 who already support him will not change their minds because of two or three Conservative ads.
What Liberals have to worry about with regard to these ads is they could set up an "I told you so" moment in the future if Mr. Trudeau stumbles badly and/or often going forward.
As well, Liberals are dreaming if they expect that these ads will cause a backlash against the Conservatives. This is the Conservative MO. Canadians are probably not going to react with a wave of revulsion or anger because they have seen it all before. Instead we will probably see a collective shrug from Canadians.
Not that Conservatives can take too much solace from that. It is inevitable that Canadians will turn on the Conservatives at some point. It happens to every government and they will be no different. When that happens the usual reaction is to "go negative". Unfortunately, Canadians will be less likely to hear that message because they would have been hearing it since the Conservatives came to power and would dismiss it as more of the same. Indeed, at some point such advertising could just fuel a "throw the bums out" sentiment as it reminds Canadians of one of the reasons they finally turned on the Conservatives.
If Justin Trudeau can keep his feet under him in the coming months these ads will be forgotten. If not then the true impact of them will be felt long after they have gone off the air.
Saturday, February 23, 2013
Falling to Second World Status
My last post was lamenting the decline of the Middle Class in the industrialized west, particularly within the old G7 states, which includes Canada. I mentioned that such a situation existed because governments and corportations within those states made a conscious decision to reverse the policies and practices that lead to one of the greatest economic expansions in history and one the greatest expansions of the Middle Class in history. I further stated that the reason for that economic expansion was the rise of the Middle Class and the decision to reverse it has great impliciations for the industrialized west.
This is particularly true since while the G7 countries have been allowing their middle classes to decline all of the emerging economies are taking steps to build theirs up. It should come as no surprise that such countries as China, India, Brazil, and Mexico are seeing their economies grow and prosper. They are essentially following in the footsteps that the G7 set down in the 30 years after the end of the Second World War. They are pursuing policies that are allowing their citizens to take full advantage of the economic booms these countries are enjoying and that in turn is continuing to fuel those booms.
The result is the emerging economies and the economies of the G7 are heading in different directions and the gap between them is closing very fast.
This should be a concern to the ruling classes of the G7. With economic power comes political power and it is only a matter of time before the newly dominent economies will begin using that power, probably to the detriment of the political interests of the old guard. Once that power shift is complete alot of things will change in many place, such as, the Middle East, Korea, Africa, South and Latin America. And no telling how things will change in such areas as trade, nuclear proliferation and climate change politics.
The business classes of the G7 should be very worried as well. The world industrial capacity is shifting to the emerging economies and history has demonstrated that he who holds the advantage in industrial capacity holds the power to control the financial and economic levers of the world. It remains to be seen if these new powers will be as liberal and as enlightened as the old guard was when it found itself in control of the global economy.
As I stated in my previous post corporations in the G7 are now dependant on the emerging economies for their business health. The middle classes of the G7 countries have declined so much that they can no longer sustain those corporations on their own.
That is a very precarious situation to be in because the emerging economies are building industries that are in direct competition to Western corporations. For example both China and India are in the process of developing their own auto industries and Brazil has a civilian aerospace industry to rival that of any G7 country. It is only a matter of time before these industries begin squeezing out the foreign industries in these countries, particularly since the new political power these countries are beginning to enjoy will insulate them from any backlash to policies that protect these domestic industries in their countries. Once that happens the foreign markets that have been sustaining Western corporations will disappear and without domestic markets to take up the slack, that will be that.
During the Cold War we all heard about Second World countries. These were wealthy countries that just were not on the same level as the G7. The thing holding them back was a lack of a middle class. They were countries that had very wealthy ruling elites, while their broader populations were poor, often desperately so. As well, the key thing about all of these countries is they were powerless within the international economy. They were wholly dependent on the good will of the First World for maintaining their status as wealthy countries. If it were not for the liberal trade and economic policies pursued by the First World these Second World countries would have fallen to Third World status.
That is the direction the G7 countries are headed. It is only a matter of time before they become the Second World countries if current trends continue. We are already seeing the characteristics of that status manifest itself in these countries. Wealth being more and more concentrated in a very small percentage of the population while more and more "ordinary people" slip into genteel destitution. What industrial capacity that remains in these countries are now dependent on the economic decisions of countries where they do not have an effective voice so they are dependent on the goodwill of those countries to sustain that capacity. The politics in these countries has become less about working for the greater good and more about keeping your "base" happy and motivated.
It is the shortsightedness of the current ruling classes in the G7 that have brought us to this point. It has put us on a path that will lead to all but the very few and the very priviledged being much poorer and much more desperate. The trend will not be reversed before it actually happens because too many people believe that it cannot happen to them until it actually does or worse they suffer under the delusion that they will be one of the lucky few so they keep agreeing with those that are destroying the middle class.
Eventually, people will wake up and realize what is happening but by then it will be too late. At that point even if the ruling elites were willing to risk their wealth and priviledges they would be powerless to change the situation until the new economic powers begin their inevitable decline, which would probably not happen before the end of this century.
This is particularly true since while the G7 countries have been allowing their middle classes to decline all of the emerging economies are taking steps to build theirs up. It should come as no surprise that such countries as China, India, Brazil, and Mexico are seeing their economies grow and prosper. They are essentially following in the footsteps that the G7 set down in the 30 years after the end of the Second World War. They are pursuing policies that are allowing their citizens to take full advantage of the economic booms these countries are enjoying and that in turn is continuing to fuel those booms.
The result is the emerging economies and the economies of the G7 are heading in different directions and the gap between them is closing very fast.
This should be a concern to the ruling classes of the G7. With economic power comes political power and it is only a matter of time before the newly dominent economies will begin using that power, probably to the detriment of the political interests of the old guard. Once that power shift is complete alot of things will change in many place, such as, the Middle East, Korea, Africa, South and Latin America. And no telling how things will change in such areas as trade, nuclear proliferation and climate change politics.
The business classes of the G7 should be very worried as well. The world industrial capacity is shifting to the emerging economies and history has demonstrated that he who holds the advantage in industrial capacity holds the power to control the financial and economic levers of the world. It remains to be seen if these new powers will be as liberal and as enlightened as the old guard was when it found itself in control of the global economy.
As I stated in my previous post corporations in the G7 are now dependant on the emerging economies for their business health. The middle classes of the G7 countries have declined so much that they can no longer sustain those corporations on their own.
That is a very precarious situation to be in because the emerging economies are building industries that are in direct competition to Western corporations. For example both China and India are in the process of developing their own auto industries and Brazil has a civilian aerospace industry to rival that of any G7 country. It is only a matter of time before these industries begin squeezing out the foreign industries in these countries, particularly since the new political power these countries are beginning to enjoy will insulate them from any backlash to policies that protect these domestic industries in their countries. Once that happens the foreign markets that have been sustaining Western corporations will disappear and without domestic markets to take up the slack, that will be that.
During the Cold War we all heard about Second World countries. These were wealthy countries that just were not on the same level as the G7. The thing holding them back was a lack of a middle class. They were countries that had very wealthy ruling elites, while their broader populations were poor, often desperately so. As well, the key thing about all of these countries is they were powerless within the international economy. They were wholly dependent on the good will of the First World for maintaining their status as wealthy countries. If it were not for the liberal trade and economic policies pursued by the First World these Second World countries would have fallen to Third World status.
That is the direction the G7 countries are headed. It is only a matter of time before they become the Second World countries if current trends continue. We are already seeing the characteristics of that status manifest itself in these countries. Wealth being more and more concentrated in a very small percentage of the population while more and more "ordinary people" slip into genteel destitution. What industrial capacity that remains in these countries are now dependent on the economic decisions of countries where they do not have an effective voice so they are dependent on the goodwill of those countries to sustain that capacity. The politics in these countries has become less about working for the greater good and more about keeping your "base" happy and motivated.
It is the shortsightedness of the current ruling classes in the G7 that have brought us to this point. It has put us on a path that will lead to all but the very few and the very priviledged being much poorer and much more desperate. The trend will not be reversed before it actually happens because too many people believe that it cannot happen to them until it actually does or worse they suffer under the delusion that they will be one of the lucky few so they keep agreeing with those that are destroying the middle class.
Eventually, people will wake up and realize what is happening but by then it will be too late. At that point even if the ruling elites were willing to risk their wealth and priviledges they would be powerless to change the situation until the new economic powers begin their inevitable decline, which would probably not happen before the end of this century.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)