Modern politics seems to conspire to distract political parties from what is important. It is a function of a media that gave up reporting the news in favour of infotainment a long time ago and the fact most modern politicians are so bereft of ideas that they have to resort to hyper-partisanship to appear relevant.
Mr. Ignatieff you need to rise above all of this.
It is a reality that most people vote against something as opposed to voting for something. That is why negative advertizing works and that is the root cause of partisanship. If it were the other way around our Parliament would be a hotbed of debate about different ideas on how to make the lives of Canadians better instead of the juvenile crap we see there now.
However, despite this reality a political party still needs to be able to present ideas and, dare I say it, vision to really enjoy success. That is one reason why the Conservatives have never won a majority government. They have figured out the "vote against" reflex of the average voter but they have not been able to take it to the next level because they are a complete failure on the "vision" front.
The Conservatives have been presenting you with all sorts of ammunition for you to begin convincing Canadians that they need to vote against these clowns. I do not believe they have gone one week since Parliament resumed where they have not been defending some kind of bonehead decision, the Fake Lake being the latest in a long line. You and I both know that these are the kinds of things that plant the seed in the electorate that will germinate into a desire for change over time or during an election campaign.
However, you need to do more. You need to present a vision or at least an election theme. The campaigns of seemingly random election promises are not working. They have not worked for the Liberals in the last three elections and they have only been marginally more successful for the Conservatives.
You do not need to present individual policy proposal yet. The ground is not ready for that anyway. When the time comes you will need to present these proposals in the context of an overarching theme if you are to take increasing anger at the Conservatives and turn it to Liberal advantage.
Last Fall, when you gave your non-confidence speech in the House of Commons, you articulated just such a theme. I blogged back then that the theme you talked about was a proven winner in this country and I urged you to follow through on it. I am quite disappointed that you did not, however it is not too late.
You have a summer BBQ season coming up so you should spend that entire period talking about your vision. At every event talk to Canadians about how you believe government can be an agent of good in the lives of Canadians, using topical examples such as the oil spill in the Gulf to demonstrate your point. Talk about your vision for Canada and where you would like it to be in the next 5 to 10 years and beyond. In short, establish the broad objectives of a Liberal government under you so that when you begin to present individual policy proposals during the next election Canadians can put them into some context and see how they would achieve the objectives you have outlined.
The Conservative have been planting the seeds of their own defeat since Stephen Harper prorogued Parliament the first time. They will be ripe for the taking during the next election so you need to prepare Canadians to accept the idea of a Liberal government. Letting the Conservatives self-destruct will go along way in doing that but if you really want to seal the deal you will need to provide them with an alternative that they can like.
You only have the summer to do that so I would suggest you focus on that and not worry about the rest of the political noise out there right now.
Wednesday, June 09, 2010
Look past the next election
One thing about all of this merger talk is it is motivated solely by short-term considerations.
However, if you look past the next election there is no political logic to the NDP joining the Liberals and the idea of a merged Liberal/NDP Party should scare the shit out of the Conseratives. Such a situation would eliminate the NDP from the federal political scene and ensure the Liberals are the dominent party in this country for the foreseeable future.
As I stated in my previous blog the Liberals have dominated the Canadian federal political scene for more than half a century despite the centre-left being divided between two parties. The simple fact of Canadian politics is the progressive habit runs deep and there has not been any signs that it is changing.
So, imagine what would happen in the Canadian political scene if there were only two political parties, one a conservative party the other a liberal party. Liberal dominance would be virtually guaranteed.
I know many would dispute that assertion but just look at the last 60 years. In all but two cases the Conservatives only won government because the NDP siphoned off enough votes from the Liberals to hand them victory. The two exceptions are the first election of the Chief and the 1984 election. However, you only need to look at the 1988 Free Trade election to see what I am talking about. The Conservatives won that election with 43% of the vote. That leaves the remainder voting against them. Fortunately, the NDP took enough of that 57% away from the Liberals to deny them government. Just imagine if that election would have been fought between just the Liberals and the Progressive Conservatives. Joe Clark's experience really sheds a light on that dynamic. Then there is Stephen Harper who has only won his minorities because Jack Layton has managed to increase his seat count in Parliament to the detriment of the Liberals. Again, imagine if the NDP did not exist.
Of course, you cannot just add up the Liberal popular vote and the NDP popular vote and think that they would mesh perfectly. Some Liberals would go to the Conservatives, but not that many, and some Dippers would refuse to join the new party but enough of them would put power over principle to make the new party the dominent party on the federal scene.
I am certain that some NDP supporters would disagree with my assertion that the NDP would be eliminated but you only need to look at the two "partners" in the proposed merger. Despite its current problems the Liberals are bigger, better financed and they have the better party apparatus than the NDP. We only need to look at the "merger" between the Progressive Conservatives and the Canadian Alliance to see what happens to the smaller party in such a situation. A merger between the Liberals and the NDP would be a takeover and nothing else. The NDP and its ideals would cease to exist on the federal scene, much like old time Toryism has disappeared from federal politics.
Looking past the short-term a political merger between the Liberals and the NDP makes no sense from an NDP point-of-view. It would be political suicide for them. That is why you can probably believe Jack Layton when he states that he does not want to merge the two parties.
As for Conservatives you had better pray that it does not come to pass if you are entertaining any ideas of becoming a more competative political party in the 21st century.
For the Liberals, such a merger would be advantageous to you in the longer-term but not so much in the short-term. I would wager a sizable chunk of money that you will be enjoying majority government status by the middle of this decade without a merger so you have no real need to make it happen at present. Who knows, once the dynamic I described in my previous post re-asserts itself, and the NDP is struggling to maintain official party status, maybe then discussions can be opened up to take over the NDP.
However, if you look past the next election there is no political logic to the NDP joining the Liberals and the idea of a merged Liberal/NDP Party should scare the shit out of the Conseratives. Such a situation would eliminate the NDP from the federal political scene and ensure the Liberals are the dominent party in this country for the foreseeable future.
As I stated in my previous blog the Liberals have dominated the Canadian federal political scene for more than half a century despite the centre-left being divided between two parties. The simple fact of Canadian politics is the progressive habit runs deep and there has not been any signs that it is changing.
So, imagine what would happen in the Canadian political scene if there were only two political parties, one a conservative party the other a liberal party. Liberal dominance would be virtually guaranteed.
I know many would dispute that assertion but just look at the last 60 years. In all but two cases the Conservatives only won government because the NDP siphoned off enough votes from the Liberals to hand them victory. The two exceptions are the first election of the Chief and the 1984 election. However, you only need to look at the 1988 Free Trade election to see what I am talking about. The Conservatives won that election with 43% of the vote. That leaves the remainder voting against them. Fortunately, the NDP took enough of that 57% away from the Liberals to deny them government. Just imagine if that election would have been fought between just the Liberals and the Progressive Conservatives. Joe Clark's experience really sheds a light on that dynamic. Then there is Stephen Harper who has only won his minorities because Jack Layton has managed to increase his seat count in Parliament to the detriment of the Liberals. Again, imagine if the NDP did not exist.
Of course, you cannot just add up the Liberal popular vote and the NDP popular vote and think that they would mesh perfectly. Some Liberals would go to the Conservatives, but not that many, and some Dippers would refuse to join the new party but enough of them would put power over principle to make the new party the dominent party on the federal scene.
I am certain that some NDP supporters would disagree with my assertion that the NDP would be eliminated but you only need to look at the two "partners" in the proposed merger. Despite its current problems the Liberals are bigger, better financed and they have the better party apparatus than the NDP. We only need to look at the "merger" between the Progressive Conservatives and the Canadian Alliance to see what happens to the smaller party in such a situation. A merger between the Liberals and the NDP would be a takeover and nothing else. The NDP and its ideals would cease to exist on the federal scene, much like old time Toryism has disappeared from federal politics.
Looking past the short-term a political merger between the Liberals and the NDP makes no sense from an NDP point-of-view. It would be political suicide for them. That is why you can probably believe Jack Layton when he states that he does not want to merge the two parties.
As for Conservatives you had better pray that it does not come to pass if you are entertaining any ideas of becoming a more competative political party in the 21st century.
For the Liberals, such a merger would be advantageous to you in the longer-term but not so much in the short-term. I would wager a sizable chunk of money that you will be enjoying majority government status by the middle of this decade without a merger so you have no real need to make it happen at present. Who knows, once the dynamic I described in my previous post re-asserts itself, and the NDP is struggling to maintain official party status, maybe then discussions can be opened up to take over the NDP.
Thursday, June 03, 2010
Why would any Liberal suggest a deal with the NDP right now?
The short answer is fear. They believe it is the only way to defeat Stephen Harper. The logic of those making this suggestion is the centre-left is divided so it needs to be united in order to take on the big bad Conservatives.
The biggest hole in that logic is the centre-left in this country has been divided for over 60 years. With the exception of the 1990s, the centre-right in this country has had only one party to represent it for the last 6 decades yet in those 60 years the Liberals have dominated the Canadian federal political scene.
You see, the pattern in this country for the past 60 years is the Liberals govern, often for long stretches at a time. As usually happens, with long standing governments, they get tired, they run out of ideas and the electorate decides it is time for a change. At that point Liberal support tends to bleed to the NDP in sufficient numbers that the a conservative party forms a government. Then when Canadians grow tired of that government those that lent their votes to the NDP go back to the Liberals, often in very big numbers. In short, Canadians believe there are only two parties that can be trusted to govern. The Liberals and their conservative alternative.
We have seen no evidence that this pattern has changed. Yes some would point to the polls indicating that Jack Layton is the most popular federal leader right now but one thing about respondents to polls is they know that they can answer the question any way the like without consequences. No government has fallen and no party ever formed a government based on a poll from Nanos, Ekos, Strategic Council, et al.
It is only the ballot box, where the decision of a voter has profound consequences, where we should be looking and it you look there it is as plain as Stephen Harper's hair style that the decades old voting pattern is still alive. Despite Adscam, the Liberals came in second in the 2006 election and despite the worst showing of the Liberal Party since 1984 the Liberals still have double the seats of the NDP after the 2008 election.
The spanner in the works is the Bloc. It is a big enough force in Quebec to be a problem. However, twice in this decade it looked like their grip on Quebec was loosening only to have the two big parties give them another lease on life. The Liberals did it with Adscam in 2006 and the Conservatives did it with their policy proposal of locking up 14 year olds and attacking the arts in 2008. Long standing stalwarts of the seperatist movement have called into question the whole concept so if the Liberals can exploit that and provide Quebecers a reason to vote Liberal again they should be able to whither the Bloc.
The other argument is Canadians are becoming more conservative. Again the ballot box proves that argument wrong.
A third argument is Conservative voters are more motivated while progressive voters have washed their hands of politics. Again, the ballot box prove that argument wrong and when Canadians finally decide to rid themselves of the Conservative government they will come out to vote to do so. It is funny, whenever Canadians become motivated to get rid of a government voter turnout goes up. We saw that with Brian Mulroney's, Jean Chretien's and Stephen Harper's first election victories.
There is no reason for the Liberals to make a deal with the NDP right now. The current Conservative government has passed its best before date. There is a malaise in the electorate right now that will change into a desire for change. Once that happens many voter who deserted the Liberals will come back to them. Liberals should be patient and not let fear cloud their judgement or make them do something that would be counter-productive in the extreme.
If after the next election the Liberals are in a position to form a government and they need help from another party to do so then seeking that help from the NDP should be an option. Until then just focus on being an effective opposition and winning the next election.
The biggest hole in that logic is the centre-left in this country has been divided for over 60 years. With the exception of the 1990s, the centre-right in this country has had only one party to represent it for the last 6 decades yet in those 60 years the Liberals have dominated the Canadian federal political scene.
You see, the pattern in this country for the past 60 years is the Liberals govern, often for long stretches at a time. As usually happens, with long standing governments, they get tired, they run out of ideas and the electorate decides it is time for a change. At that point Liberal support tends to bleed to the NDP in sufficient numbers that the a conservative party forms a government. Then when Canadians grow tired of that government those that lent their votes to the NDP go back to the Liberals, often in very big numbers. In short, Canadians believe there are only two parties that can be trusted to govern. The Liberals and their conservative alternative.
We have seen no evidence that this pattern has changed. Yes some would point to the polls indicating that Jack Layton is the most popular federal leader right now but one thing about respondents to polls is they know that they can answer the question any way the like without consequences. No government has fallen and no party ever formed a government based on a poll from Nanos, Ekos, Strategic Council, et al.
It is only the ballot box, where the decision of a voter has profound consequences, where we should be looking and it you look there it is as plain as Stephen Harper's hair style that the decades old voting pattern is still alive. Despite Adscam, the Liberals came in second in the 2006 election and despite the worst showing of the Liberal Party since 1984 the Liberals still have double the seats of the NDP after the 2008 election.
The spanner in the works is the Bloc. It is a big enough force in Quebec to be a problem. However, twice in this decade it looked like their grip on Quebec was loosening only to have the two big parties give them another lease on life. The Liberals did it with Adscam in 2006 and the Conservatives did it with their policy proposal of locking up 14 year olds and attacking the arts in 2008. Long standing stalwarts of the seperatist movement have called into question the whole concept so if the Liberals can exploit that and provide Quebecers a reason to vote Liberal again they should be able to whither the Bloc.
The other argument is Canadians are becoming more conservative. Again the ballot box proves that argument wrong.
A third argument is Conservative voters are more motivated while progressive voters have washed their hands of politics. Again, the ballot box prove that argument wrong and when Canadians finally decide to rid themselves of the Conservative government they will come out to vote to do so. It is funny, whenever Canadians become motivated to get rid of a government voter turnout goes up. We saw that with Brian Mulroney's, Jean Chretien's and Stephen Harper's first election victories.
There is no reason for the Liberals to make a deal with the NDP right now. The current Conservative government has passed its best before date. There is a malaise in the electorate right now that will change into a desire for change. Once that happens many voter who deserted the Liberals will come back to them. Liberals should be patient and not let fear cloud their judgement or make them do something that would be counter-productive in the extreme.
If after the next election the Liberals are in a position to form a government and they need help from another party to do so then seeking that help from the NDP should be an option. Until then just focus on being an effective opposition and winning the next election.
Saturday, May 29, 2010
Do the Liberals have a hidden agenda?
There has been a fair amount of complaining about the Liberals and the fact they have not bothered to release even a part of their election platform and that they do not stand for anything. Many are saying this is the reason why the Liberals are not doing so well in the polls.
We, of course, have seen this before. Leading up to the 2006 election Stephen Harper talked about nothing but Adscam and absolutely refused to talk about anything else. At the time it was assumed that the reason for this was he had a hidden agenda. So that must be the reason for the Liberals reluctance to release any policy.
So, what is that hidden agenda? Do they have one?
Or are we just seeing again that it sucks to be the Official Opposition in this country?
We, of course, have seen this before. Leading up to the 2006 election Stephen Harper talked about nothing but Adscam and absolutely refused to talk about anything else. At the time it was assumed that the reason for this was he had a hidden agenda. So that must be the reason for the Liberals reluctance to release any policy.
So, what is that hidden agenda? Do they have one?
Or are we just seeing again that it sucks to be the Official Opposition in this country?
Saturday, May 22, 2010
Some Thoughts
I have been way too busy to blog in depth about what has been going on these days so I thought I would just summarize some of them.
The polls: As many have noticed the polls have not been giving any of the three national parties any love. There does seem to be a general malaise amongst the electorate.
Although this is not good news for any party right now it is the Conservatives that should be the most worried about it. It does not take long for this kind of malaise to morph into a desire for change. Once that happens there is not much the government can do to stop it and Mr. Harper's own experience should tell him that once that does take root even an Opposition Leader who has been largely written off can win an election.
The Conservatives know this as demonstrated by my second point.
The Conservative capitulation on the Afghan detainee documents: No media have characterized the deal as such but considering the lengths the government went to prevent their release, the statements, a month ago, by senior Conservative officials about calling an election before they would release them and the fact that the government agreed to each and every major demand by the Opposition would indicate they completely surrendered on this issue.
They are afraid of an election and I only hope the Opposition are aware of that fact and begin to use it to their advantage.
Abortion: This particular Djinni has been let out of the bottle and the Conservatives have been trying to stuff it back in ever since.
It still boggles my mind that the great chess master actually let it out. The Conservatives have been playing with fire for over a year by throwing red meat at their base while risking alienating the broader electorate in the process. They have more or less escaped each one of these instances without damaging themselves too much but their luck cannot hold indefinitely and they might have just run out of it this time.
I still question why the Conservatives feel the need to keep shoring up their base. I have stated in this space before that I believe they see something happening within their base that frightens them and this latest episode just reinforces that belief.
Auditor General wanting to audit Member's expences: To what end?
Sorry folks but I am going to have to disagree with the consensus.
It is very common for senior public servants to build empires and our AG has shown herself as being very adept at doing so. This is just more of her empire building and it should be nipped in the bud. There are much greater issues with how this government spends our tax dollars that should be investigated before looking at how individual Members spend their 200K a year office budgets.
The Stanley Cup playoffs: Go Habs Go!
The elections in Britain: Interesting result but it has no bearing on our politics in Canada. It is a different political culture with different values and different personalities. Our form of government may be based on theirs but that is as far as the similarities go.
As well, any similarities that are pointed out about their situation and the ones here miss the mark. For this election the Brits were actually in the same spot we were in 2006. A government that had been in power for a long time, a great desire for change amongst the electorate, but a distrust of the change presented by the only viable alternative to the government. So, the electorate opted for change but they also opted to keep the new government on a tight leash.
That is the limit of any similarities however because the winner of their election decided to enter into a formal agreement with one of its opponents as opposed to trying to govern alone. Once the British Conservatives made that agreement they and the governance of Britain started down a much different path than the ones we have been on for the last four years.
The polls: As many have noticed the polls have not been giving any of the three national parties any love. There does seem to be a general malaise amongst the electorate.
Although this is not good news for any party right now it is the Conservatives that should be the most worried about it. It does not take long for this kind of malaise to morph into a desire for change. Once that happens there is not much the government can do to stop it and Mr. Harper's own experience should tell him that once that does take root even an Opposition Leader who has been largely written off can win an election.
The Conservatives know this as demonstrated by my second point.
The Conservative capitulation on the Afghan detainee documents: No media have characterized the deal as such but considering the lengths the government went to prevent their release, the statements, a month ago, by senior Conservative officials about calling an election before they would release them and the fact that the government agreed to each and every major demand by the Opposition would indicate they completely surrendered on this issue.
They are afraid of an election and I only hope the Opposition are aware of that fact and begin to use it to their advantage.
Abortion: This particular Djinni has been let out of the bottle and the Conservatives have been trying to stuff it back in ever since.
It still boggles my mind that the great chess master actually let it out. The Conservatives have been playing with fire for over a year by throwing red meat at their base while risking alienating the broader electorate in the process. They have more or less escaped each one of these instances without damaging themselves too much but their luck cannot hold indefinitely and they might have just run out of it this time.
I still question why the Conservatives feel the need to keep shoring up their base. I have stated in this space before that I believe they see something happening within their base that frightens them and this latest episode just reinforces that belief.
Auditor General wanting to audit Member's expences: To what end?
Sorry folks but I am going to have to disagree with the consensus.
It is very common for senior public servants to build empires and our AG has shown herself as being very adept at doing so. This is just more of her empire building and it should be nipped in the bud. There are much greater issues with how this government spends our tax dollars that should be investigated before looking at how individual Members spend their 200K a year office budgets.
The Stanley Cup playoffs: Go Habs Go!
The elections in Britain: Interesting result but it has no bearing on our politics in Canada. It is a different political culture with different values and different personalities. Our form of government may be based on theirs but that is as far as the similarities go.
As well, any similarities that are pointed out about their situation and the ones here miss the mark. For this election the Brits were actually in the same spot we were in 2006. A government that had been in power for a long time, a great desire for change amongst the electorate, but a distrust of the change presented by the only viable alternative to the government. So, the electorate opted for change but they also opted to keep the new government on a tight leash.
That is the limit of any similarities however because the winner of their election decided to enter into a formal agreement with one of its opponents as opposed to trying to govern alone. Once the British Conservatives made that agreement they and the governance of Britain started down a much different path than the ones we have been on for the last four years.
Sunday, May 02, 2010
You know you are desperate when...
You spend a whole week talking about the statements of a pollster.
To my Conservative friends if the only thing you can think of to attempt to put some daylight between yourself and your chief political opponent is to attack a pollster you guys are in serious trouble.
To my Conservative friends if the only thing you can think of to attempt to put some daylight between yourself and your chief political opponent is to attack a pollster you guys are in serious trouble.
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Wanted: One Prime Minister, a person with ideas need not apply
I took in some of the recent Thinker's Conference on the weekend and followed it some more by reading the various blogs of folks who attended. All in all I would say it was a success.
However, to judge by the reaction in some of the media you would expect that it was an unmitigated disaster. It is an interesting reaction as the event ran smoothly and there was a good exchange of ideas on many different issues.
And therein lies the problem with this event. The media does not do ideas. They prefer to act as "political strategists" even though they are not very good at it and even though there are much greater issues they should be concerned with.
Part of the reason for this is the generation of ideas in this country as become industrialized like many other sectors of our economy and it is an industry that is dominated by corporate interests.
You only need to take a look at all of the "experts" that now weigh in on many of the issues of the day. They are from banks, various interest groups, and industry groups such as The Conference Board. Then there are the lobbyists. They are now the ones that generate most of the ideas for government but only for the highest bidder.
The idea industry reflects the general lack of innovation of the corporations it supports. Canadian corporations do not care about innovation or ideas. Their job is largely to manage their corporations in a way that contributes to the profits of their parent company, whether they be in the US, Europe or China. For them coming up with good ideas is to rock the boat, which is something they do not want to do and they want to be certain that the Canadian government supports their endeavours so it cannot rock the boat either.
The Thinker's Conference goes directly against that. Not only did the conference have a diversity of opinion it also had a diversity of the sources of that opinion. The corporate interests were not the only voices and ideas presented.
This would not be so bad except that the Liberals have had two big thinkers as successive leaders. They have had leaders that can take ideas and synthesize them into policies that could upset the status quo. It is even worse that the current Liberal leader takes every opportunity to acquire the opinions of ordinary folks. That, combined with some of the ideas expressed on the weekend, combined with a big thinker holding down the position of Leader of the Opposition is not something to make the heart of some Canadian corporate leader flutter with delight.
That is the kind of thing they would want to discourage and since all of the media is this country is owned by those same corporate leaders we see a generally negative reaction to what should be a positive idea, a politician listening to people to determine what are their priority isses and how they might resolve them.
It could be argued that after almost 20 years of having managers running our country that we could use an ideas person for the next Prime Minister to help bring us fully into the new century.
However, to judge by the reaction in some of the media you would expect that it was an unmitigated disaster. It is an interesting reaction as the event ran smoothly and there was a good exchange of ideas on many different issues.
And therein lies the problem with this event. The media does not do ideas. They prefer to act as "political strategists" even though they are not very good at it and even though there are much greater issues they should be concerned with.
Part of the reason for this is the generation of ideas in this country as become industrialized like many other sectors of our economy and it is an industry that is dominated by corporate interests.
You only need to take a look at all of the "experts" that now weigh in on many of the issues of the day. They are from banks, various interest groups, and industry groups such as The Conference Board. Then there are the lobbyists. They are now the ones that generate most of the ideas for government but only for the highest bidder.
The idea industry reflects the general lack of innovation of the corporations it supports. Canadian corporations do not care about innovation or ideas. Their job is largely to manage their corporations in a way that contributes to the profits of their parent company, whether they be in the US, Europe or China. For them coming up with good ideas is to rock the boat, which is something they do not want to do and they want to be certain that the Canadian government supports their endeavours so it cannot rock the boat either.
The Thinker's Conference goes directly against that. Not only did the conference have a diversity of opinion it also had a diversity of the sources of that opinion. The corporate interests were not the only voices and ideas presented.
This would not be so bad except that the Liberals have had two big thinkers as successive leaders. They have had leaders that can take ideas and synthesize them into policies that could upset the status quo. It is even worse that the current Liberal leader takes every opportunity to acquire the opinions of ordinary folks. That, combined with some of the ideas expressed on the weekend, combined with a big thinker holding down the position of Leader of the Opposition is not something to make the heart of some Canadian corporate leader flutter with delight.
That is the kind of thing they would want to discourage and since all of the media is this country is owned by those same corporate leaders we see a generally negative reaction to what should be a positive idea, a politician listening to people to determine what are their priority isses and how they might resolve them.
It could be argued that after almost 20 years of having managers running our country that we could use an ideas person for the next Prime Minister to help bring us fully into the new century.
Sunday, March 21, 2010
How do we overcome voter ignorance?
It seems many Liberals want to have an election on Parliamentary Supremacy. Such enthusiasm is based on the assumption that Canadians will embrace the argument Mr. Harper is defying Parliament so he needs to be kicked out of government for it.
While I agree with the sentiment it is not an argument I would consider to be a strong one.
One reason is the ignorance of Canadians with regards to the workings of their political system. The coalition argument last year should be a demonstration of that. What I would like to see is a poll asking respondents "What is the Prime Minister and the government responsible to in our system of government?"
I would bet a sizable chunk of money that a large majority of them would respond with "to the voters", instead of the right answer which is to Parliament.
Stephen Harper exploited that ignorance last year to good effect and I believe him and his people are coming up with another campaign to do it again. It will be based on lies, but it will be easy to understand and it will sound plausible. All he needs to do is neutralize this issue in the campaign but if he can turn it against the Opposition to carry him to victory that would be gravy.
The Opposition will have the much greater burden. They want to not only keep this issue front and centre in the campaign but they want to make certain that it fatally wounds the Conservatives in the process. They have the truth on their side but as I have stated in this space before progressives always have the facts on their side but they always seem to lose arguments to the right anyway because they just cannot seem to present the facts in a way that grabs the audience. We have seen that with gun control, health care and taxes to name just three issues. I have serious doubts they will be any more successful on such an esoteric concept as Parliamentary Supremacy.
A second reason, which helps explain the first one, is successive Prime Ministers have been marginalizing Parliament for the last 40 years or so. They have concentrated power more and more in the PMO and the Executive and they have reduced the average Parliamentarian to a barking seal.
Now the Opposition wants to fight an election asserting Parliamentary Supremacy?
That is what we are faced with. I have yet to see an argument put forward by Liberals, either at the official or grassroots level, that would be able to overcome voter ignorance and what will be a very concerted effort by Mr. Harper and the Conservatives to exploit that to their benefit.
Until that happens I just will not be as enthusiastic about fighting an election on this issue as many other Liberals seem to be.
While I agree with the sentiment it is not an argument I would consider to be a strong one.
One reason is the ignorance of Canadians with regards to the workings of their political system. The coalition argument last year should be a demonstration of that. What I would like to see is a poll asking respondents "What is the Prime Minister and the government responsible to in our system of government?"
I would bet a sizable chunk of money that a large majority of them would respond with "to the voters", instead of the right answer which is to Parliament.
Stephen Harper exploited that ignorance last year to good effect and I believe him and his people are coming up with another campaign to do it again. It will be based on lies, but it will be easy to understand and it will sound plausible. All he needs to do is neutralize this issue in the campaign but if he can turn it against the Opposition to carry him to victory that would be gravy.
The Opposition will have the much greater burden. They want to not only keep this issue front and centre in the campaign but they want to make certain that it fatally wounds the Conservatives in the process. They have the truth on their side but as I have stated in this space before progressives always have the facts on their side but they always seem to lose arguments to the right anyway because they just cannot seem to present the facts in a way that grabs the audience. We have seen that with gun control, health care and taxes to name just three issues. I have serious doubts they will be any more successful on such an esoteric concept as Parliamentary Supremacy.
A second reason, which helps explain the first one, is successive Prime Ministers have been marginalizing Parliament for the last 40 years or so. They have concentrated power more and more in the PMO and the Executive and they have reduced the average Parliamentarian to a barking seal.
Now the Opposition wants to fight an election asserting Parliamentary Supremacy?
That is what we are faced with. I have yet to see an argument put forward by Liberals, either at the official or grassroots level, that would be able to overcome voter ignorance and what will be a very concerted effort by Mr. Harper and the Conservatives to exploit that to their benefit.
Until that happens I just will not be as enthusiastic about fighting an election on this issue as many other Liberals seem to be.
Saturday, March 20, 2010
Parliamentary Supremacy is not a political gambit
I know that I am in the minority but I still have many reservations with the idea of having an election where the central theme of the Liberals or any of the Opposition parties is the supremacy of Parliament.
Having an election based on that concept is not the slam dunk that many Liberals believe it would be. The result could be a serious setback for the central concept of Responsible Government.
Elections decide questions. If the next election asks Canadians to choose between Parliamentary Supremacy and something else that the Conservatives present as a rebuttal and the Conservatives win then a basic concept of Responsible Government would be seriously weakened, perhaps permanently.
We need to be careful not to let short-term political opportunity cause great harm to the future health of our institutions. Yes, the fact Mr. Harper is defying Parliament is outrageous but he is just one man and his defiance will not cause permanent harm to the institution.
That will only happen if the Opposition decides to use that defiance as a political gambit and fails.
Unless the Liberals have something else with which to combat the Conservatives so that they can use Mr. Harper's defiance as just another example of Mr. Harper's style of government ande his unsuitability to occupy the office he is currently occupying they should be very careful on this issue.
Mr. Harper does not care about our institutions. He has proven that over and over again. It is up to those of us who do to safeguard them. If that means letting a political opportunity go by then sobeit.
Having an election based on that concept is not the slam dunk that many Liberals believe it would be. The result could be a serious setback for the central concept of Responsible Government.
Elections decide questions. If the next election asks Canadians to choose between Parliamentary Supremacy and something else that the Conservatives present as a rebuttal and the Conservatives win then a basic concept of Responsible Government would be seriously weakened, perhaps permanently.
We need to be careful not to let short-term political opportunity cause great harm to the future health of our institutions. Yes, the fact Mr. Harper is defying Parliament is outrageous but he is just one man and his defiance will not cause permanent harm to the institution.
That will only happen if the Opposition decides to use that defiance as a political gambit and fails.
Unless the Liberals have something else with which to combat the Conservatives so that they can use Mr. Harper's defiance as just another example of Mr. Harper's style of government ande his unsuitability to occupy the office he is currently occupying they should be very careful on this issue.
Mr. Harper does not care about our institutions. He has proven that over and over again. It is up to those of us who do to safeguard them. If that means letting a political opportunity go by then sobeit.
Thursday, March 18, 2010
The Opposition did some thinking this week
For a couple of weeks there have been rumblings from sources in the PMO that Stephen Harper would call an election if the Opposition attempted to invoke Parliamentary privilege in their desire to see the Afghan detainee documents.
I had serious reservations about the Liberals doing just that as indicated in my last post.
However, the actions by the three opposition parties shows that they did some thinking before taking action. They did not just react in a knee-jerk fashion they actually did some planning.
Presenting a united front on this issue is crucial. If it were just the Liberals doing this the Conservatives could have invoked National Security for not releasing the documents and accused the Liberals of just playing partisan games. As well, if all three opposition parties are singing from the same hymn book on this, at least for a little while, then it will likely carry much more weight than if just one party is invoking privilege.
As well, the questions from today have not actually set any mechanisms in motions for finding the government in contempt of Parliament. They essentially just formalize what the Opposition has been saying informally for months. They, as Parliamentarians, have the right to see the Afghan detainee documents.
Again, this is important because it takes away the government's ability to conflate a contempt charge with lack of confidence in the government. If the government wants to use an election to stop the release of these documents they will have to call it. There is nothing in today's Opposition questions that can be construed as the Opposition not having confidence in the government.
So what happens now?
In all likelihood we will see the government squirm some more. The amount of squirming is going to depend on how far ahead the Opposition Parties thought beyond today. They are going to need follow through on this and part of that follow through will be to educate Canadians on the meaning of Parliamentary Supremacy. As well, they are going to have to be ready to take the next step and introduce a motion of contempt. They cannot reverse themselves from the course they charted today.
Ultimately, I do believe we will have an election over this. There is no way Stephen Harper will allow himself to just meekly take a contempt charge from the Opposition. However, if the Opposition has the forethought to use the time between then and and now to give Canadians a crash course in the meaning of Responsible Government this issue could very well fatally damage the Conservatives' chances of re-election.
I had serious reservations about the Liberals doing just that as indicated in my last post.
However, the actions by the three opposition parties shows that they did some thinking before taking action. They did not just react in a knee-jerk fashion they actually did some planning.
Presenting a united front on this issue is crucial. If it were just the Liberals doing this the Conservatives could have invoked National Security for not releasing the documents and accused the Liberals of just playing partisan games. As well, if all three opposition parties are singing from the same hymn book on this, at least for a little while, then it will likely carry much more weight than if just one party is invoking privilege.
As well, the questions from today have not actually set any mechanisms in motions for finding the government in contempt of Parliament. They essentially just formalize what the Opposition has been saying informally for months. They, as Parliamentarians, have the right to see the Afghan detainee documents.
Again, this is important because it takes away the government's ability to conflate a contempt charge with lack of confidence in the government. If the government wants to use an election to stop the release of these documents they will have to call it. There is nothing in today's Opposition questions that can be construed as the Opposition not having confidence in the government.
So what happens now?
In all likelihood we will see the government squirm some more. The amount of squirming is going to depend on how far ahead the Opposition Parties thought beyond today. They are going to need follow through on this and part of that follow through will be to educate Canadians on the meaning of Parliamentary Supremacy. As well, they are going to have to be ready to take the next step and introduce a motion of contempt. They cannot reverse themselves from the course they charted today.
Ultimately, I do believe we will have an election over this. There is no way Stephen Harper will allow himself to just meekly take a contempt charge from the Opposition. However, if the Opposition has the forethought to use the time between then and and now to give Canadians a crash course in the meaning of Responsible Government this issue could very well fatally damage the Conservatives' chances of re-election.
Monday, March 15, 2010
The ground is not ready
The terms of reference for the detainee document review has been released and predictably they just prove that the whole exercise is a stall tactic.
Equally predictably many in the Liberal blogsphere are demanding that the Liberals table the Contempt of Parliament motion and dare Mr. Harper to call an election over it. Of course, they assume that such an action would be political suicide so he would not do it.
Such assumptions are wrong because they are based on a false premise. It is believed that if the Conservatives call an election to prevent being held in Contempt of Parliament and to prevent the release of what could be very damaging documents that the electorate will punish the Conservatives badly.
What many are forgetting is leading up to the dissolution of Parliament the Conservatives would be screaming that they are doing so in the interests of National Security. Meanwhile, the Opposition will be screaming about Parliamentary Supremacy. Considering how the Conservatives managed to exploit Canadians' ignorance of their own political system to make the idea of a coalition government very unpopular 14 months ago Liberals should not be too confident that they will come out on the winning end of an argument between National Security and Parliamentary Supremacy.
At the very least there are enough Conservative apologists in the media who would help the Conservatives muddy the waters enough to neutralize the detainee documents issue as an election issue. That would mean the election would be fought on other issues and as many in the same Liberal blogsphere have pointed out the Liberals do not seem to have many policies to campaign on at the moment.
So, putting forward the Contempt motion right now might be problematic because the Canadian people are not prepared for it. Remember, the opposition to proroguing the House in the country, earlier this winter, centred around MPs taking a "holiday". The detainee documents were barely on the radar for most ordinary Canadians.
The groundwork needs to be done before this issue can really be used to hurt the Conservatives. Unfortunately, that has not happened and it is pretty late in the game to begin doing so. The Liberals had almost three months to do just that and to develop a coherent plan of attack when Parliament resumed and they failed to do both.
As an aside I am having serious doubts about Mr. Ignatieff. He is faced with a principle opponent who is making all sorts of serious political errors. If Mr. Harper were facing someone with even half of the political instincts that Misters Chretien, Trudeau or Mulroney had he would be toast. Fortunately for him he is not facing that. Mr. Ignatieff is making it easier for him.
The Conservatives will still probably lose the next election because they are just getting old and tired and it is showing. However, it will be a rather indecisive defeat which will have us dealing with yet another weak minority government.
Finally, do not fear for Parliament. The Canadian Parliament has been in existance since before Confederation. There is very little that the current dickhead and his minions can do to really harm that institution. It will be in existance long after Stephen Harper's government is tossed into the dustbin of history.
You should only fear for Parliament if the next Liberal government, saddled with a minority government and facing a hostile House decides that Mr. Harper was on to something in his actions of the past 15 months. That is when I will begin worrying about Canada's Parliamentary Democracy.
Equally predictably many in the Liberal blogsphere are demanding that the Liberals table the Contempt of Parliament motion and dare Mr. Harper to call an election over it. Of course, they assume that such an action would be political suicide so he would not do it.
Such assumptions are wrong because they are based on a false premise. It is believed that if the Conservatives call an election to prevent being held in Contempt of Parliament and to prevent the release of what could be very damaging documents that the electorate will punish the Conservatives badly.
What many are forgetting is leading up to the dissolution of Parliament the Conservatives would be screaming that they are doing so in the interests of National Security. Meanwhile, the Opposition will be screaming about Parliamentary Supremacy. Considering how the Conservatives managed to exploit Canadians' ignorance of their own political system to make the idea of a coalition government very unpopular 14 months ago Liberals should not be too confident that they will come out on the winning end of an argument between National Security and Parliamentary Supremacy.
At the very least there are enough Conservative apologists in the media who would help the Conservatives muddy the waters enough to neutralize the detainee documents issue as an election issue. That would mean the election would be fought on other issues and as many in the same Liberal blogsphere have pointed out the Liberals do not seem to have many policies to campaign on at the moment.
So, putting forward the Contempt motion right now might be problematic because the Canadian people are not prepared for it. Remember, the opposition to proroguing the House in the country, earlier this winter, centred around MPs taking a "holiday". The detainee documents were barely on the radar for most ordinary Canadians.
The groundwork needs to be done before this issue can really be used to hurt the Conservatives. Unfortunately, that has not happened and it is pretty late in the game to begin doing so. The Liberals had almost three months to do just that and to develop a coherent plan of attack when Parliament resumed and they failed to do both.
As an aside I am having serious doubts about Mr. Ignatieff. He is faced with a principle opponent who is making all sorts of serious political errors. If Mr. Harper were facing someone with even half of the political instincts that Misters Chretien, Trudeau or Mulroney had he would be toast. Fortunately for him he is not facing that. Mr. Ignatieff is making it easier for him.
The Conservatives will still probably lose the next election because they are just getting old and tired and it is showing. However, it will be a rather indecisive defeat which will have us dealing with yet another weak minority government.
Finally, do not fear for Parliament. The Canadian Parliament has been in existance since before Confederation. There is very little that the current dickhead and his minions can do to really harm that institution. It will be in existance long after Stephen Harper's government is tossed into the dustbin of history.
You should only fear for Parliament if the next Liberal government, saddled with a minority government and facing a hostile House decides that Mr. Harper was on to something in his actions of the past 15 months. That is when I will begin worrying about Canada's Parliamentary Democracy.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Canada's old government
The Jaffer judgement and the reactions to it shows some interesting dynamics in Canada's current political climate.
The same can be said of a recent junior minister's temper tantrum in Charlottetown and Mr. Flaherty's jaunt to a London photo-op in an airplane he may not have had a right to take.
Not too many months in the past all three incidents would have been largely ignored by the media and by Canadians. The reason is simple. They really do not amount to much.
Mr. Jaffer's sentence certainly is light but the Canadian legal is system is what it is for better or for worse. Sometimes someone will receive woefully inadequate consequences for their actions and others will receive much greater for less serious crimes. It is unfortunate but it is the nature of all systems devised by humans.
Mr. Flaherty's trip on the Citation was no big deal. Really, Canada is the only Western country where we expect senior ministers to take commercial transportation to go to events. It is silly. It was silly when the Conservatives tied themselves into knots complaining when Liberal ministers used to do this and it is silly now when the Conservatives are doing it. Although I do find it ironic that Conservative ministers are doing what they used to forcefully condemn when they were in opposition. Conservative hypocracy, I am shocked.
Ms. Guerguis' (sp) temper tantrum was a little more serious but in the grander scheme of things it was still pretty minor.
So, what do the reactions to all of these incidences say about the political dynamic in this country?
The Conservatives have hit that point in being the government where every perceived misstep by it or its supporters becomes more magnified and frankly blown out of proportion.
This usually happens to governments that have grown old in the eyes of voters and the media. It seems they just cannot do anything right and every transgression, regardless of its insignificance becomes a major issue. We saw this in the past with Mr. Dingwall's pack of gum.
As well, when a government reaches this point it is pretty much doomed. It does not take long for Canadians to believe a government is old and beyond its best-before-date to believing it is time for a change. And there is virtually nothing a government can do at that stage to reverse that belief.
The reactions to these three events demonstrates that the Conservatives days are numbered on the government side of the House. They are on a well worn path to electoral defeat, one that has been tread by governments, Liberal and Conservatives, before it and there is probably not much they can do to get off of it.
The next election will likely see the end of the current Conservative government.
The same can be said of a recent junior minister's temper tantrum in Charlottetown and Mr. Flaherty's jaunt to a London photo-op in an airplane he may not have had a right to take.
Not too many months in the past all three incidents would have been largely ignored by the media and by Canadians. The reason is simple. They really do not amount to much.
Mr. Jaffer's sentence certainly is light but the Canadian legal is system is what it is for better or for worse. Sometimes someone will receive woefully inadequate consequences for their actions and others will receive much greater for less serious crimes. It is unfortunate but it is the nature of all systems devised by humans.
Mr. Flaherty's trip on the Citation was no big deal. Really, Canada is the only Western country where we expect senior ministers to take commercial transportation to go to events. It is silly. It was silly when the Conservatives tied themselves into knots complaining when Liberal ministers used to do this and it is silly now when the Conservatives are doing it. Although I do find it ironic that Conservative ministers are doing what they used to forcefully condemn when they were in opposition. Conservative hypocracy, I am shocked.
Ms. Guerguis' (sp) temper tantrum was a little more serious but in the grander scheme of things it was still pretty minor.
So, what do the reactions to all of these incidences say about the political dynamic in this country?
The Conservatives have hit that point in being the government where every perceived misstep by it or its supporters becomes more magnified and frankly blown out of proportion.
This usually happens to governments that have grown old in the eyes of voters and the media. It seems they just cannot do anything right and every transgression, regardless of its insignificance becomes a major issue. We saw this in the past with Mr. Dingwall's pack of gum.
As well, when a government reaches this point it is pretty much doomed. It does not take long for Canadians to believe a government is old and beyond its best-before-date to believing it is time for a change. And there is virtually nothing a government can do at that stage to reverse that belief.
The reactions to these three events demonstrates that the Conservatives days are numbered on the government side of the House. They are on a well worn path to electoral defeat, one that has been tread by governments, Liberal and Conservatives, before it and there is probably not much they can do to get off of it.
The next election will likely see the end of the current Conservative government.
Sunday, March 07, 2010
Going out on a limb
If the allegations of Professor Attaran become the topic of conversation for the remainder of the Spring Parliamentary session the Liberals will win a majority government in the next election, regardless of when it occurs.
Very few Canadians will support a government that appears to have been complicit in committing war crimes. Certainly, some of the more ardent Conservatives, who see the Afghan and Iraq wars as some kind of holy crusade will continue to support the Conservatives but anybody who does not believe that will find somewhere else to go on election day. If not to one of the opposition parties then the couch.
I have my doubts about the allegations and I need to see more evidence before I can conclude that the government was complicit in torture, to conclude that the government actually did commit a war crime. So far there are no facts to support these allegations.
However, I have been around politics long enough to know that facts do not count for a hill of beans in politics. You just need to look at past scandals, such as Adscam, to see that in action. If the government is perceived to have committed a war crime they are done.
If these allegations prove to be true then the Conservative Party of Canada will be destroyed. Oh it will resurrect itself as another conservative leaning party, or a couple of different conservative parties but the current incarnation of the Conservative Party will self destruct.
Very few Canadians will support a government that appears to have been complicit in committing war crimes. Certainly, some of the more ardent Conservatives, who see the Afghan and Iraq wars as some kind of holy crusade will continue to support the Conservatives but anybody who does not believe that will find somewhere else to go on election day. If not to one of the opposition parties then the couch.
I have my doubts about the allegations and I need to see more evidence before I can conclude that the government was complicit in torture, to conclude that the government actually did commit a war crime. So far there are no facts to support these allegations.
However, I have been around politics long enough to know that facts do not count for a hill of beans in politics. You just need to look at past scandals, such as Adscam, to see that in action. If the government is perceived to have committed a war crime they are done.
If these allegations prove to be true then the Conservative Party of Canada will be destroyed. Oh it will resurrect itself as another conservative leaning party, or a couple of different conservative parties but the current incarnation of the Conservative Party will self destruct.
Friday, March 05, 2010
Did the Conservatives really think the anthem gambit would work?
Really c'mon!
They propose changes to the anthem to appease women.
Did they really think the traditionalists in this country would just say "Oh, OK".?
Did they really believe that women in this country would really be impressed by this?
Did they really believe that feminists would forgive them for all of the cuts to women's programs?
Perhaps this was just something to distract Canadians from other issues but they could not use something else?
These guys and gals are really losing it folks. The death watch has begun and do not be surprised to see some rats abandoning this sinking ship very soon.
They propose changes to the anthem to appease women.
Did they really think the traditionalists in this country would just say "Oh, OK".?
Did they really believe that women in this country would really be impressed by this?
Did they really believe that feminists would forgive them for all of the cuts to women's programs?
Perhaps this was just something to distract Canadians from other issues but they could not use something else?
These guys and gals are really losing it folks. The death watch has begun and do not be surprised to see some rats abandoning this sinking ship very soon.
What Now Mr. Harper?
You blew it!!
You managed to alienate Canadians enough that the best performance by Canadian athletes in the Olympics, on Canadian soil, did not cause you to even enjoy a temporary bounce in your polling numbers.
The result was a Throne Speech that was forgotten 5 minutes after the GG finished reading it and a budget, whose most positive review was it is bland, innocuous and inoffensive.
You are in a political pickle. Budgets are really the only tool you can use to pick up more support from voters and the one you just produced will be a complete failure in achieving that. You see, restraint is not cool. It does not gain votes. You need to provide something to grab the attention of voters and there is nothing in the budget to do that. Certainly there is the attack on the public service that all Conservative governments do when their fiscal incompetence forces them to deal with deficits that they create. Unfortunately, that kind of thing only appeals to your base it does not cause others outside of it to support the Conservatives. Indeed, I would argue that you will lose more votes than you will gain. The decisions in this budget are going to negatively effect over 150 thousand people in the National Capital Region and Eastern Ontario directly and indirectly effect 100s of thousands more. That is more than 25 seats that you just put in play without any counteracting benefit elsewhere.
Now the one thing that might have stuck out from that past few days, the national anthem proposal, is being withdrawn after just three days, probably because your internal polling demonstrated that Canadians recognized it for the deeply cynical move that it was and they rejected it in droves.
This was the last week where you had the opportunity to drive the agenda for the next few months. Instead, now it will be the Opposition as they hound you some more on issues that caused you to prorogue Parliament in the first place. It is ironic that you took this action to escape those issues only to be faced with them again just 10 weeks later but from a political position much weaker than it was before Christmas. A position you find yourself in because of your own actions and decisions.
I am not certain how you are going to escape this one. The once compliant media is becoming more critical and the Opposition seems content to let you twist in the wind for a few more months waiting for the negative reactions of Canadians to your government over the last few weeks to be cemented in their consciousness.
I am certain you have some things up your sleeve but will any of them be any different than we have seen from your crew before? Can you be truly innovative in your approach?
I guess we will see but if not then I suspect we are beginnning the death watch for your government and your term as the leader of the government of this great country.
You managed to alienate Canadians enough that the best performance by Canadian athletes in the Olympics, on Canadian soil, did not cause you to even enjoy a temporary bounce in your polling numbers.
The result was a Throne Speech that was forgotten 5 minutes after the GG finished reading it and a budget, whose most positive review was it is bland, innocuous and inoffensive.
You are in a political pickle. Budgets are really the only tool you can use to pick up more support from voters and the one you just produced will be a complete failure in achieving that. You see, restraint is not cool. It does not gain votes. You need to provide something to grab the attention of voters and there is nothing in the budget to do that. Certainly there is the attack on the public service that all Conservative governments do when their fiscal incompetence forces them to deal with deficits that they create. Unfortunately, that kind of thing only appeals to your base it does not cause others outside of it to support the Conservatives. Indeed, I would argue that you will lose more votes than you will gain. The decisions in this budget are going to negatively effect over 150 thousand people in the National Capital Region and Eastern Ontario directly and indirectly effect 100s of thousands more. That is more than 25 seats that you just put in play without any counteracting benefit elsewhere.
Now the one thing that might have stuck out from that past few days, the national anthem proposal, is being withdrawn after just three days, probably because your internal polling demonstrated that Canadians recognized it for the deeply cynical move that it was and they rejected it in droves.
This was the last week where you had the opportunity to drive the agenda for the next few months. Instead, now it will be the Opposition as they hound you some more on issues that caused you to prorogue Parliament in the first place. It is ironic that you took this action to escape those issues only to be faced with them again just 10 weeks later but from a political position much weaker than it was before Christmas. A position you find yourself in because of your own actions and decisions.
I am not certain how you are going to escape this one. The once compliant media is becoming more critical and the Opposition seems content to let you twist in the wind for a few more months waiting for the negative reactions of Canadians to your government over the last few weeks to be cemented in their consciousness.
I am certain you have some things up your sleeve but will any of them be any different than we have seen from your crew before? Can you be truly innovative in your approach?
I guess we will see but if not then I suspect we are beginnning the death watch for your government and your term as the leader of the government of this great country.
Wednesday, March 03, 2010
Looks like John and Pierre lost the argument
A Throne speech that goes out of its way to mention reducing Public Service pensions and public service spending (read wage freezes) and this even before a budget is released.
This is not good news for John Baird and his familier to the South.
I am certain they have been trying to fend off these measures, knowing the effect they could have on their re-election prospects, but it would appear they failed.
It is certainly going to look good seeing Ottawa, West Quebec and Eastern Ontario awash in Liberal red again.
This is not good news for John Baird and his familier to the South.
I am certain they have been trying to fend off these measures, knowing the effect they could have on their re-election prospects, but it would appear they failed.
It is certainly going to look good seeing Ottawa, West Quebec and Eastern Ontario awash in Liberal red again.
Saturday, January 02, 2010
Year End Review
Happy New Year everybody!!
So another year has gone by and I decided to review some of the politics we saw in Canada in the last year or so.
Most overrated politician: It's a tie. Stephen Harper and Michael Ignatieff.
Stephen Harper because he has bookended the year with two prorogations of Parliament for the only purpose of escaping two self-inflicted political traps. Anybody who really believes this will not come back to haunt him and the Conservatives sometime in the future is dreaming. Both traps could have been avoided if Mr. Harper would have been more strategic and less ideological. I still cannot believe people in this country think this guy is a political genius.
Michael Ignatieff because he has not been the saviour for the Liberal Party his supporters believed him to be. Under his leadership the Party's standing with the public is no different than it was in 2008. As well, he has been utterly incapable of taking advantage of Mr. Harper's many political mistakes in 2009. By God, Mr. Harper just Prorogued Parliament for the second time in just over a year, for extreme partisan purposes, and where is Mr. Ignatieff and the Liberals? They should be shouting about Mr. Harper's attacks on Canadian democracy from the roof tops but instead the silence is deafening.
Most underrated politician Stephane Dion.
His reaction to the November 2008 economic statement and the actions that grew out of it knocked the Conservatives on their collective butts, a position they did not recover from until September of 2009.
Smartest political move The Sudbury Declaration by Mr. Ignatieff. That declaration caused panic in both the Conservative and NDP camps. It forced the Conservatives to definitively state that they did not want an election just when they were ramping up the government funded advertizing for their Action Plan to increase their polling numbers. Now the advertizing is done and the Conservative polling numbers are slowly but surely sinking again.
Dumbest political move Letting the Afghan detainee issue morph from being about torture to being about the credibility of the Conservatives. The Conservatives forgot an axiom in politics; it is not the crime that will get you it is the coverup. This issue is going to haunt them for awhile.
Most overrated political move Stephen Harper channeling the Beatles at the NAC. The reaction of the chattering classes to it demonstrates just how stupid Canadian politics have become.
Most underrated political move Michael Ignatieff's non-confidence speech in September. That speech set out an election theme, something that has been missing from the Liberals for over a decade. It gave me hope that Mr. Ignatieff would be different but so far I have not seen any follow through on that speech so maybe I am mistaken.
Most unreasonable expectations The idea the Olympics will give the Conservatives a boost. They will be forgotten long before any Canadian marks their X on a ballot and any attempt by the Conservatives to somehow take credit for the efforts of our athletes will be greeted with contempt and scorn.
Least unreasonable expectations A spring election, although I believe it will be closer to the end of May beginning of June than mid-April.
Sleeper issue to watch for in 2010 The deterioration of the economy this year as the stimulus spending of Fiscal Year 2009/10 stops in the new FY and all of the unrepaired structural problems that lead to the last recession, but were masked by the trillions of dollars in stimulus spending around the world, reassert themselves.
There you have. Just one man's opinion of the year just past.
So another year has gone by and I decided to review some of the politics we saw in Canada in the last year or so.
Most overrated politician: It's a tie. Stephen Harper and Michael Ignatieff.
Stephen Harper because he has bookended the year with two prorogations of Parliament for the only purpose of escaping two self-inflicted political traps. Anybody who really believes this will not come back to haunt him and the Conservatives sometime in the future is dreaming. Both traps could have been avoided if Mr. Harper would have been more strategic and less ideological. I still cannot believe people in this country think this guy is a political genius.
Michael Ignatieff because he has not been the saviour for the Liberal Party his supporters believed him to be. Under his leadership the Party's standing with the public is no different than it was in 2008. As well, he has been utterly incapable of taking advantage of Mr. Harper's many political mistakes in 2009. By God, Mr. Harper just Prorogued Parliament for the second time in just over a year, for extreme partisan purposes, and where is Mr. Ignatieff and the Liberals? They should be shouting about Mr. Harper's attacks on Canadian democracy from the roof tops but instead the silence is deafening.
Most underrated politician Stephane Dion.
His reaction to the November 2008 economic statement and the actions that grew out of it knocked the Conservatives on their collective butts, a position they did not recover from until September of 2009.
Smartest political move The Sudbury Declaration by Mr. Ignatieff. That declaration caused panic in both the Conservative and NDP camps. It forced the Conservatives to definitively state that they did not want an election just when they were ramping up the government funded advertizing for their Action Plan to increase their polling numbers. Now the advertizing is done and the Conservative polling numbers are slowly but surely sinking again.
Dumbest political move Letting the Afghan detainee issue morph from being about torture to being about the credibility of the Conservatives. The Conservatives forgot an axiom in politics; it is not the crime that will get you it is the coverup. This issue is going to haunt them for awhile.
Most overrated political move Stephen Harper channeling the Beatles at the NAC. The reaction of the chattering classes to it demonstrates just how stupid Canadian politics have become.
Most underrated political move Michael Ignatieff's non-confidence speech in September. That speech set out an election theme, something that has been missing from the Liberals for over a decade. It gave me hope that Mr. Ignatieff would be different but so far I have not seen any follow through on that speech so maybe I am mistaken.
Most unreasonable expectations The idea the Olympics will give the Conservatives a boost. They will be forgotten long before any Canadian marks their X on a ballot and any attempt by the Conservatives to somehow take credit for the efforts of our athletes will be greeted with contempt and scorn.
Least unreasonable expectations A spring election, although I believe it will be closer to the end of May beginning of June than mid-April.
Sleeper issue to watch for in 2010 The deterioration of the economy this year as the stimulus spending of Fiscal Year 2009/10 stops in the new FY and all of the unrepaired structural problems that lead to the last recession, but were masked by the trillions of dollars in stimulus spending around the world, reassert themselves.
There you have. Just one man's opinion of the year just past.
Thursday, December 31, 2009
The Beginning of the End for John and Pierre
I read in the Globe and Mail yesterday that the government is considering going after the Public Service pension plans as a way to reduce the deficit. This, of course, is only the beginning.
This is a common tactic of Conservative governments when their gross mismanagement of the public purse finally catches up to them.
The Mulroney government found themselves in the same situation in the 1990s and they went after the Public Service pay and benefits.
The result was Ottawa became a Liberal bastion for three straight elections.
Now we are seeing the beginning of the same thing again in 2010. The Public Service is still the biggest employer in the National Capital Region and many of those folks live in Nepean, Barrhaven and Orlean, suburban ridings currently held by Conservatives. However, pissed off Public Servants could tip the balance back to the Liberals again. As well, the 416, 417 highways have caused many of them to live further out of town which could cause problems for Conservatives in the broader Eastern Ontario Region.
It is nice to know that Conservative ideology does not make allowances for past mistakes. I am really looking forward to the National Capital Region and Eastern Ontario being painted red again.
This is a common tactic of Conservative governments when their gross mismanagement of the public purse finally catches up to them.
The Mulroney government found themselves in the same situation in the 1990s and they went after the Public Service pay and benefits.
The result was Ottawa became a Liberal bastion for three straight elections.
Now we are seeing the beginning of the same thing again in 2010. The Public Service is still the biggest employer in the National Capital Region and many of those folks live in Nepean, Barrhaven and Orlean, suburban ridings currently held by Conservatives. However, pissed off Public Servants could tip the balance back to the Liberals again. As well, the 416, 417 highways have caused many of them to live further out of town which could cause problems for Conservatives in the broader Eastern Ontario Region.
It is nice to know that Conservative ideology does not make allowances for past mistakes. I am really looking forward to the National Capital Region and Eastern Ontario being painted red again.
Deep breath everybody
Stephen Harper has prorogued Parliament to escape a Speakers Warrant being issued in the new year for the Afghan detainee documents.
This is not surprising and it is certainly an outrageous affront to our democracy but let's not get too excited.
This is not permanent. He has not put troops into the streets. He has not otherwise done real harm to our institutions. He has merely taken a longstanding Parliamentary practice and abused it. Like I said not very surprising with this guy as we all know ideologues like him always believe that the end justifies the means.
Besides pointing out this abuse to Canadians, Liberals should be quietly ensuring that their own leadership would not do the same thing in the future. Mr. Harper's diminishing of Canadian democracy will only become permanent if his Liberal successor does the same thing, given similar circumstance. That may seem like an odd statement but politicians, when in power, always do what has been proven to be successful in the past regardless of their rhetoric when they were not in power. If Stephen Harper does indeed get away with this then some of his successors may decide to take similar actions as him if they find themselves in a little bit of political trouble. This may be particularly true in another minority government situation.
If Liberals believe otherwise about their leadership our democracy really is in danger from Mr. Harper's actions.
As an aside to Conservatives do not think for a moment that Canadians will not notice Mr. Harper's actions. You may be correct that it will have no immediate impact on Conservative fortunes and it is obvious that Mr. Harper and his advisors are only thinking of the immediate but his actions reek of arrogance and cynicism and these are always the downfall of governments. Canadians recognise them and do not like them in their politicians and eventually punish them for it.
To Liberals, provided that a Liberal government does not pull a similar stunt in the future, there is a silver lining to what Mr. Harper has done. The level or arrogance we are seeing from this government is usually followed by a big fall. Think Mulroney, Harris or Trudeau. Mr. Harper has bought himself three months but it could cost the Conservatives four or more years soon afterwards.
This is not surprising and it is certainly an outrageous affront to our democracy but let's not get too excited.
This is not permanent. He has not put troops into the streets. He has not otherwise done real harm to our institutions. He has merely taken a longstanding Parliamentary practice and abused it. Like I said not very surprising with this guy as we all know ideologues like him always believe that the end justifies the means.
Besides pointing out this abuse to Canadians, Liberals should be quietly ensuring that their own leadership would not do the same thing in the future. Mr. Harper's diminishing of Canadian democracy will only become permanent if his Liberal successor does the same thing, given similar circumstance. That may seem like an odd statement but politicians, when in power, always do what has been proven to be successful in the past regardless of their rhetoric when they were not in power. If Stephen Harper does indeed get away with this then some of his successors may decide to take similar actions as him if they find themselves in a little bit of political trouble. This may be particularly true in another minority government situation.
If Liberals believe otherwise about their leadership our democracy really is in danger from Mr. Harper's actions.
As an aside to Conservatives do not think for a moment that Canadians will not notice Mr. Harper's actions. You may be correct that it will have no immediate impact on Conservative fortunes and it is obvious that Mr. Harper and his advisors are only thinking of the immediate but his actions reek of arrogance and cynicism and these are always the downfall of governments. Canadians recognise them and do not like them in their politicians and eventually punish them for it.
To Liberals, provided that a Liberal government does not pull a similar stunt in the future, there is a silver lining to what Mr. Harper has done. The level or arrogance we are seeing from this government is usually followed by a big fall. Think Mulroney, Harris or Trudeau. Mr. Harper has bought himself three months but it could cost the Conservatives four or more years soon afterwards.
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
What a dumb political move by the Conservatives
I have been watching the Conservatives' reaction to the detainee scandal with a critical eye since Mr. Colvin made his first statements in front of a Parliamentary Committee. Since that time they have had failed strategy after failed strategy and they have forgotten one of the axioms of politics.
It is not the crime that will get you it is the cover up.
I happen to agree with the Conservatives to a certain extent that Canadians will not get too worked up if it is proven that Canadian troops handed over Afghan detainees for potential torture. You see, Canadian are reasonable people who do not believe the troops or the government are evil or condone torture. The Conservatives should have realized that early on and came right out and admitted that the original agreement regarding Afghan detainees was woefully inadequate which probably lead to some Afghans being handed over to Afghan authorities who might have tortured or abused them. With a large dollop of mea culpa they could have admitted they dropped the ball on this file but they did eventually get around to fixing it.
Certainly the usual suspects would have condemned the government but that could have easily been dismissed as partisan politics and all of the revelations that we have been seeing in the last few weeks would have had less of an impact as Canadians would already have known that the government made mistakes.
Instead of course, the Conservatives have lied, obfuscated, smeared and otherwise did the opposite of what I suggested above. The result, weeks of bad press. Being placed in the position of being seen to defy the will of Parliament and being forced to consider Proroguing Parliament once again.
What a mess for the Conservatives.
The Conservatives made the mistake of making this whole scandal about what they are covering up and the lengths they are willing to go to cover whatever it is they are covering. That has the potential to be extremely damaging to the Conservatives and perversely their efforts have reached a point where the honest course is no longer viable. They are going to have to continue trying to cover up their actions and each day, week and month that they do so is like an acid dripping on their credibility.
It is ironic, if the Conservatives would have made this scandal exclusively about torture it would have probably gone away by now or at least been less toxic. Instead it has become about their credibility and it will not be going away any time soon, regardless of whether we have a new Parliament in the New Year or not.
As an aside, if Mr. Harper does Prorogue Parliament in the New Year he will get away with it in the short-term. It will be up to the Opposition to try to make it harm them in the medium to long-term.
It is not the crime that will get you it is the cover up.
I happen to agree with the Conservatives to a certain extent that Canadians will not get too worked up if it is proven that Canadian troops handed over Afghan detainees for potential torture. You see, Canadian are reasonable people who do not believe the troops or the government are evil or condone torture. The Conservatives should have realized that early on and came right out and admitted that the original agreement regarding Afghan detainees was woefully inadequate which probably lead to some Afghans being handed over to Afghan authorities who might have tortured or abused them. With a large dollop of mea culpa they could have admitted they dropped the ball on this file but they did eventually get around to fixing it.
Certainly the usual suspects would have condemned the government but that could have easily been dismissed as partisan politics and all of the revelations that we have been seeing in the last few weeks would have had less of an impact as Canadians would already have known that the government made mistakes.
Instead of course, the Conservatives have lied, obfuscated, smeared and otherwise did the opposite of what I suggested above. The result, weeks of bad press. Being placed in the position of being seen to defy the will of Parliament and being forced to consider Proroguing Parliament once again.
What a mess for the Conservatives.
The Conservatives made the mistake of making this whole scandal about what they are covering up and the lengths they are willing to go to cover whatever it is they are covering. That has the potential to be extremely damaging to the Conservatives and perversely their efforts have reached a point where the honest course is no longer viable. They are going to have to continue trying to cover up their actions and each day, week and month that they do so is like an acid dripping on their credibility.
It is ironic, if the Conservatives would have made this scandal exclusively about torture it would have probably gone away by now or at least been less toxic. Instead it has become about their credibility and it will not be going away any time soon, regardless of whether we have a new Parliament in the New Year or not.
As an aside, if Mr. Harper does Prorogue Parliament in the New Year he will get away with it in the short-term. It will be up to the Opposition to try to make it harm them in the medium to long-term.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)