Poly Ticks

Merry Christmas Senate Reform

Some people have suggested that Stephen Harper is not to be trusted, but personally I think you can trust him. You can trust him to speak loudly and passionately about what he believes in. You can trust him to change his mind about what he believes in if it doesn't help him. You can trust him to do the exact opposite of what he said he would do if he thinks it will help him push his agenda forward. You can trust him to ignore the conventions and accepted rules if they get in his way. You can even trust him to break the law if he feels he wants to make a point. In short, you can trust him to be Stephen Harper.

After years of railing against Senate appointments, and even making his point by not appointing any new Senators last term, Stephen Harper has done his usual about face and appointed himself some Senators. Of course he couldn't make those appointments while Parliament was in session like every other Prime Minister, because he suspended Parliament in order to avoid getting tossed out on his ass. So, after setting one precedent for being the first Prime Minister to use the formal procedure of prorogation to avoid a vote of confidence, he adds to that legacy by being the first one to appoint Senators during a prorogation. Does this mean Stephen Harper might actually be beginning to realise that he might not be around much longer and so this is his last chance to tuck some friends in?

I like the Senate, I believe in the Senate and I think it has, generally, served this country very well. On most days it continues to. I also believe in appointed Senators. Typically they are not appointed by some unknown and unelected hermit, they are appointed by the person who, having achieved the majority support of Parliamentarians, achieves the office of Prime Minister. What could be more democratic? This person, usually, has won at least 3 elections to get there. The election to leadership of their party, their home riding election, and then the more nebulous election of having the most seats in the House of Commons. This year, however, only two out of three of those elections were won. There is no doubt in anyone's mind that Stephen Harper has lost the support of the House of Commons.

The Senate's function is to stop populist politicians with from running our country like a dictatorship. And we need them now as much as we ever have.

Thinking About Change

Change was the mantra in the recent U.S. election, and the mantra is sliding north. But change for the sake of change, change without thought, is a risky political idea at best. When someone tells you they want to change something, the first question to be asked is, "Why was this things we want to change put there in the first place? What was being attempted?" Let's look at some real life examples.

Per vote funding of political parties, for example. It's very easy to jump up and down and scream that this is nothing more than snouts in the taxpayers pockets, to mix a metaphor, but before we get to that we need to ask why is it in place to begin with. What was the law designed to do? The per vote funding was brought in for two reasons. The first is that, at the same time, there were changes to how political parties could receive funding. The maximum individual donation was dropped to $1,000. Funding was supposed to come from individuals, not corporations or unions. It basically recognised that money is necessary to running a political campaign, and yet could have a corrupting influence on our elected officials. People who donate large sums of money expect something back for those large donations. The other reason for the per vote subsidy is that it gives parties who do get a considerable size vote, but no seats, some recognition for the fact that they are speaking for some Canadians. Take the Green Party for example. In the last election almost one million Canadians voted for them, and yet not a single seat in Parliament. Those million Canadians can take some comfort in knowing their vote was note wasted and will help the Green Party in getting their message to more Canadians. A democracy needs several voices in order to be healthy. Merely ending this subsidy does nothing to address these issues, and these issues are certainly still relevant in Canadian politics today. Unless there is a plan to address these issues in place, removing this subsidy does far more harm than good.

The Senate is also hitting the news today, with Stephen Harper poised to appoint 18 new members. Apparently these 18 members will have to promise to support the idea of an elected Senate, and an elected Senate is on of Stephen Harper's pet plans. On the surface it sounds like a great idea. Surely the Senate is nothing more than a hold over of British privilege? Not quite.

The purpose of the Senate in Canada is to prevent the Government of Canada from being hijacked. To prevent the Government of Canada from being taken over by anyone who would make themselves a dictator. Let's look at a historical scenario - Nazi Germany. Most people forget Hitler was elected. This phrase has been repeated so often that I'm actually certain most people don't forget, but it is telling for our example. Thru clever machination and a pathological desire to grab the reigns of power, Hitler managed to place all the people he needed throughout the German Government with such speed that by the time the average person noticed what he was doing it was over. He had so consolidated power that it was too late for anyone to do anything about it. A populist approach, pandering to people's fears, and an utter ruthlessness in approach to his opponents was all that it took. At the moment, that can not happen in Canada. Why? Because our Senate is not elected.

By making Senators appointed, the majority of Senators in Canada will be made up of people that agree with whatever Government the people of Canada have seen fit to put into office several times, over a long period of time. As the "house of sober second thought" it represents the will of Canadian voters, through their elected Governments over a period of decades. Just deciding to make it an elected body does nothing to address the safeguards it now represents.

Coronations And Spin

Michael Ignatieff is in as the new leader of the Liberal Part of Canada. Technically it's the interim leader, with the convention in May to pick the leader, however every other candidate in the leadership campaign has dropped out. So it would seem that there won't be many choices in May. As we've seen in the last couple of weeks however, things move quickly in Canadian politics.

In the meantime, we're told that the Liberal executive consulted with roughly 800 members of the Liberal Party. Riding presidents and such. There is being much commentary on the fact that each party member did not get a vote for their new leader, and won't get that chance in May. Here's the spin part. Now I'm not a member of the Liberal Party of Canada and have never read their constitution, but it's my understanding that not a single party leader has been chosen by a vote from all their members - that's not how the Liberal Party does things apparently. When you see this ballon being floated, ignore it.

So how has this changed things in Ottawa? Well Michael Ignatieff seems to have more charisma than Stephane Dion. And half the Conservatives seem to be starting to play nice, suggesting that perhaps the two parties should talk, but the other half seem to continuing their usual attacks. Is there dissent in the ranks of the Conservative Party? A fracturing? Not likely. It's more likely that it's games as usual for the Conservative Party, and they're buying time to figure out how they can slam this leader. They're trying to create the illusion of playing nice in the sandbox so they can, once again, say it's not their fault. The only difference I see in Ottawa today, is that the Liberal Party has a much better chance at maintaining a coalition or winning an election than they did yesterday.

One Dollar And Ninety Five Cents

Much has been made of the axing of the political subsidy. The right is claiming it is the sole reason for the upheaval and that it needs to be done away with. Politicians at the public trough. For the most part the left coalition has ignored this and tried to keep repeating, "It's the economy stupid." It is the economy, but it's also about those subsidies. And just why is our Government giving away tax dollars to political parties?

First of all, there are two main subsidies available to political parties for fund raising. One is tied to donations and one is tied to votes. The first one is available to any registered political party. If you give them $100, you get a $75 tax credit. This is the one that makes up the majority of funding for the Conservative Party, and pays out considerably more than the per vote subsidy, as in we would have saved more money getting rid of this subsidy. Funny that this one wasn't on the chopping block. People in favour of this subsidy say that it demonstrates that people are interested in your party because they are willing to give you money. It's a subsidy you have to "work for" in that someone has to drum up all of those donations.

The other subsidy is tied to votes. There's a threshold, so getting one vote does not get you the subsidy, but if enough Canadians vote for your party you receive a payment, at this point around $1.95, for every vote you receive. This subsidy makes up the majority of funding for the rest of the political parties in Canada. People in favour of this subsidy point out that political parties that champion, for example, the poor will still have a voice in our political system. Myself I have to think that getting a few hundred thousand people to vote for you in a federal election takes at least as much real work as phoning your friends and asking for money does.

The second subsidy was brought in as an attempt to help remove the importance of money, and the corruption that money can bring to politics, from our political system. Of the two subsidies, it is the one that was specifically designed to remove corruption from our political system. It's the one that lets people without large sums of money have a say in Canadian politics. And it's the one that makes sure no vote is ever wasted. Almost a million people voted for the Green Party in the last election, and the Green Party didn't manage to win a single seat in Parliament. Those people can feel like their votes will now be ignored, or those people can know that they have increased the ability of the Green Party to get their message heard by almost two million dollars. If you voted Green last election, which would make you feel like your vote actually meant something.

Personally I think that anything that makes Canadians feel like their votes are not wasted is a good idea. It should also be a relatively easy sell to the vast majority of Canadians.

Stephen Harper Speaks

Wow.

Stephen Harper asked for and got 5 minutes of tv time to convince Canadians that he's right. There was much wondering whether or not Stephen Harper would use this opportunity to apologise for creating this crisis. Whether or not there would be some contrition. There was none. It was nothing but pure politics again and that should anger every Canadian regardless of political affiliation. Worse yet it was filled with, well, lies. I know I shouldn't be so blunt, but there it is. He lied and he knows he's lying. It is a disgrace.

Let's look at his speech. One of the things that the Conservative Party has been doing in the House of Commons lately is to say different things in English and French. It seems that the text was the same in English and French except for one word. In English the Bloc are separatists, in French they are sovereignists. Very telling that. It's guaranteed to rile up his Conservative base in the west. Just what we need in a time of economic crisis.

From Stephen Harper's televised speech:

"Constant in every case, however, is the principle that Canada's Government has always been chosen by the people." Wrong. Canada's Government is chosen by the House of Commons. The House of Commons is chosen by the people. You would think the Prime Minister should have this fundamental fact down by now.

"Unfortunately, even before the Government has brought forward its budget, and only seven weeks after a general election, the opposition wants to overturn the results of that election." - Utter bullshit. And he knows it. No-one is asking for seats in the House of Commons to be changed and that is what the results of the election are.

"Instead of an immediate budget, they propose a new coalition which includes the party in Parliament whose avowed goal is to break up the country." Same smell as the above quote. The coalition is between the Liberal Party and the NDP. The Bloc are only relevant in that they have agreed not to vote against the coalition in 3 votes - a speech from the Throne and 2 budgets over the course of 18 months.

"At a time like this, a coalition with the separatists cannot help Canada. And the Opposition does not have the democratic right to impose a coalition with the separatists they promised voters would never happen." Again, the Bloc is not part of the coalition. And actually the Opposition not only have the right, they have the duty to replace any Government that has lost the support of Parliament.

"The Opposition is attempting to impose this deal without your say, without your consent, and without your vote." There was a vote. And the majority of those MP's Canadians voted for want Mr Harper out. Mr Harper knows this.

That's one lie a minute in his 5 minute speech.

Mr Harper must go. Now. And please, let the door hit you in the.....

Civics

There's a lot of rhetoric flying around these days about just what exactly is and is not going on in Ottawa. Let's look at some of the basics.

In Canada we elect Members of Parliament. We do not elect a government and we most certainly do not elect a Prime Minister. All we elect is Members of Parliament. Most of those Members belong to one of the politcal parties in Canada. Once all the Members of Parliament have assembled, the Governor General asks one of the political parties, traditionally the one with the most seats, if they feel able to form a government. Notice the word tradition. Constitutionally the Governor General's job is to decide which party has the best chance of forming a stable government and asking them to form the Government. By tradition the Governor General starts with the party with the most seats. The Government does not exist outside of Parliament it is an expression of the will of Parliament. This is the very basic core of democracy in Canada. The people we vote for then cast their vote for the one amongst them they feel most able to lead Parliament.

This means that no Government in Canada has a mandate from the Canadian people. The Canadian people give a mandate to Parliament, and Parliament gives a mandate to the Government. Parliament is more important than the Government. Those that form the Government are MP's that were elected in a few ridings in Canada, Parliament represents the vote of every riding in Canada and is the voice of every single Canadian who voted.

Parliament has a mandate from the Canadian people. Everyone else gets their mandate from Parliament.

$300 Million Later...

Many Canadians woke up this morning wondering just what this latest $300 million exercise in politics was good for. It's a damn good question.

Elizabeth May didn't manage a single seat.The Green's popular vote did increase and so will their funding. The one bright light for the Green Party is that a great many Canadians got to hear more of their platform than we were even aware existed. From proportional representation to guaranteed annual income there were a lot of ideas I like and they will definitely be worth watching as the party matures. At the very least some of their ideas might find themselves getting picked up by other parties. Let's hope so. All in all a disappointing finish for the Greens, but some glimmers of hope for the party.

Jack Layton ran a strong campaign, but still hasn't managed to convince Canadians that the NDP is a real option for government. While there was an increase in seats it certainly wasn't the jump they were hoping for and are trying to sell to Canadians. I think before the next election the NDP has a choice. As a third or fourth party, many people see the NDP as an irrelevant force in politics. And perhaps as a mainstream party trying to form the government they are. However they could always run as the conscience of a minority government and this is a place the NDP have performed spectacularly in the past. Think health care. Think EI. Think most of the things we now use to identify ourselves as Canadians.

Gilles Duceppe was his usual charming self, but realistically was handed his victory by the Conservatives. Once they realised that the arts cuts and tough on crime were not going to get them any seats in Quebec, the plan for Quebec was to block the Liberals. When the Conservatives attacked Dion's command of the English language and replayed the tape of his interview problems they knew it would push people to the Bloc. So did Duceppe and he took full advantage of the gift.

Stephane Dion put a brave face on the election last night, but his time is up. The Liberals were sharpening their knives before the polls closed, and perhaps rightly so. There was a moment in this campaign when there was a chance of a Liberal minority, and the movement from there to losing seats in the House will not sit well with the Liberals. I have no trouble with the Liberal Party fielding intellectuals as their party leader, but those intellectuals need to have something more. Because I'm smart and several smart people agree with me is not a way to win elections in Canada. People expect the Liberal Party to inspire them, to make them dream of a better Canada, and this inspiration was lacking from the campaign. It wasn't the Green Shift plan that killed them, it was that they allowed the Conservatives to define their plan. It's difficult to understand was the Conservative message and the Liberals never over came it. It's not difficult to understand. Tax polluters and pass that money directly to Canadians thru tax cuts. The tax cuts will be written into the same legislation that implements the carbon taxes. There you go - two sentences.

Stephen Harper's lot is more difficult to figure out. There shouldn't be any doubt that this election was called because Stephen Harper thought he could get a majority in parliament. There were other bonuses to be had, but the real goal was a majority government and the ability to unveil a plan that could then be pushed thru without any opposition until it hit the Senate, and any slowdown there would be used as fodder for eliminating the Senate. The main goals of this campaign were not reached. However there was an increase in seats and he has very effectively splintered his opposition As long as one party supports his legislation it will get thru the House. The fact that their main opposition will shortly be once again undergoing a leadership race should also give the Conservatives some satisfaction and some breathing room. There is one inescapable fact of this election tho, and it is getting a lot of press. With the opposition is complete disarray, with a fiscal crisis and the Conservatives usually seen as the fiscally responsible government, with the Green Shift being so easily managed, this should have been a stomp. This election should have returned a huge majority for the Conservatives and yet Stephen Harper could only manage to hold on to his minority. Surprisingly, when asked about this and whether he would resign because of it, Stephen Harper said he would fulfill his mandate, but didn't sound so enthusiastic about leading the Party through another election. Perhaps even Stephen knows he blew what will probably be his only chance to be King without opposition.

That leaves us with the Canadian people. You know, the folks who are supposed to be represented by parliament. $300 million dollars buys us a new Liberal leader, but not much else has changed. There's a chance that the Conservatives will strike a more cooperative tone once the House resumes, but I'm not holding my breath. Experience has told us that when Stephen Harper thinks the other parties are reluctant to force an election, he makes every vote a matter of confidence and acts as if he has a majority. I'm hopeful but not holding my breath. Then there's the voter turnout. The lowest voter turnout in Canadian history.

Voter turnout should be telling our politicians something loud and clear. The conservatives may have won just under 38% of the popular vote, but that's just 38% of half of the eligible voters, or somewhat less than 20% of eligible voters. Our country is now being run by someone that over 80% of eligible voters could not see themselves voting for. This should be sharing the stage with the economic crisis. It is as important. The strength of our democracy depends on people voting. The more people vote, the healthier our system is. There's not enough discussion in the mainstream about this, and when there is discussion the prevailing sentiment seems to be election fatigue. Too many elections in too short a time and so people drop out. I think this is a simplistic explanation, but it does touch on what I think the problem is.

Canadians overwhelmingly did not want an election, and yet we had one. Canadians expect our politicians to represent our views in Parliament, and yet there's been nothing but political infighting. Canadians voices are being ignored and lost in Ottawa. People see their vote as useless. That is what you hear if you actually ask the people who didn't vote instead of media pundits. "My vote doesn't mean anything." And you know what? They're right. Perhaps it's time we started talking about that.

All in all it was a disappointing evening for everyone involved. Now we have another minority government. Maybe we'll get that election in the fall of 2009 like we were supposed to after all.

Today Is The Day

Today is the day we get to vote. We get to vote. I'm not going to rant about why it's a privilege or any of that. Just think of it as the ultimate combination of Canadian Idol and So You Think You Can Dance. Vote for your favourite entertainer if politics bores you.

For me there are a couple of things that are driving me this election. One hasn't been mentioned at all in the media, by any of the parties or even this blog. Digital rights. The Conservatives introduced legislation that would see Canada have some of the most restrictive copyright rules in the world. More restrictive even than the U.S. Remember, in the U.S., record labels chase down little old ladies and preteens in their rabid approach to copyright protection. For more information on this topic, Michael Geist has prepared a list of parties and candidates who are willing to pursue more reasonable approaches to copyright protection in Canada. I'm an artist and a writer, I believe in the need for artistic creators to have control over their work, but I also believe in strong "fair use" laws, and if I buy a cd, I want to be able to make a copy for the car.

Integrity is the other. Look at my blog posting for yesterday and it will be obvious which party strikes me as having the most trouble with integrity in government, and has shown no signs that either they understand or are going to stop. Liberals complain that the Conservatives tried bribing a dying MP for his vote. The Conservatives take them to court, not because they will win the court case, but because it pushes that discussion until after the election. It seems apparent now that the Conservatives will lose the court case, but they will have won by pushing it out of the election discussion. When Elections Canada found the Conservatives had broken the rules of campaigning last election did the Conservative Party vow to punish those responsible? No, they took Elections Canada to court. Once again the Conservatives will lose the court case, but succeeded in pushing it out of the election discussion. The list is long. And then of course there was the law passed to set election dates. If the Conservatives don't even respect the laws they themselves passed, what chance is there for them to abide by the rule of law in this country?

ABC my friends. Anything But Conservative.

Talking Turkey

Some families have rules against talking politics during dinner, but I suspect that there will be a lot of conversation this weekend about the upcoming election. So, what shall we talk about?

How about a party that follows the rule of law? There wasn't supposed to be an election until next year.

How about a party that doesn't try to bribe dying candidates? And then push it to a lawsuit that won't be decided until after the election to keep it from becoming an issue during the campaign.

How about a party that believes in climate change and actually wants to try and do something about it?

How about a party that, if elected, will represent all Canadians, not just those who voted for them?

How about a party that won't push Quebecers into the arms of the Bloc, just to stop their opponents?

How about a party that let's it's members actually speak without being afraid of their flat earth views frightening most Canadians?

How about a party that doesn't continue chanting deregulation even after the listeriosis deaths, the market melt down and say, does anyone remember Enron?

How about a party that actually practices fiscal responsibility, instead of breaking the bank and wiping out our contigency fund?

How about a party that tres to inspire people to attract their votes instead of frightening voters by name calling and mud slinging?

How about a party that isn't the Conservative Party of Canada?

Anything but Conservative.

The Race

Jim Flaherty was speaking today from the finance minister summits in Washington. His interview was on CBC and it was his chance to tell Canadians and international markets what Canada's thoughts and plans were. And while a well placed swipe at his opponents in this election may have been expected, spending the entire end of the interview bashing Liberal policies reflect badly on our government and will not help the markets. But then maybe the markets are just waiting for someone to get elected who doesn't think everything is grand as they watch their world melting down.

Stephane Dion seems to have become re energised of late. While we didn't see Jean Chretien until yesterday, Stephane Dion's recent ability to take the cheap shots from the Conservatives and turn it into momentum hasn't been seen since, well, Jean Chretien. Whatever it takes. ABC.

Unfortunately for Elizabeth May and Jack Layton, the Conservatives self destruction gave the Liberal's a glimmer of hope, and the media has followed along, speculating as to the possibility of a Liberal minority. Our media seems to feel a need to reduce this to a 2 team race, and so marginalises anyone it perceives as not being a front runner. Think of how confused those poor folks would get if we had proportional representation.

Oh, and "nothing is certain" is not a big idea. It's not even a medium idea. It's the kind of idea teenagers find earth shattering the first time they get high.

Conservative Slogans And Inspiration

Vote for Conservative and avoid a recession.

That was Stephen Harper's slogan today. Wow. I feel inspired. Come on people, is that all we're hoping for from our future? Not to mention the Conservative record on keeping Canada in good fiscal shape is lousy. And speaking of recessions....if I had bought stock a couple of days ago like Stephen told me to, I would have lost more money wouldn't I???

The Green Party is once again being accused of being in cahoots with the Liberals and the Conservatives are once again suggesting that Green candidates are going to throw their support behind the Liberals before Tuesday. I doubt if the Green Party would do that before the election. It would spell death for the party just as they were breaking through the popular vote. After the election is a different story. Personally I would be impressed if I saw two or more parties actually working together in the House.

Also of note today was Ed Broadbent campaigning with Jack Layton, and Jean Chretien touring with Stephane Dion. Notice the Conservatives aren't touring their former stars. I wonder why.....

Stealing The Bully's Marbles

Stephen Harper has often been called a bully, and it's a name that has, in the past, fit. His attitude and actions were seen as taking advantage of his opponents weaknesses, and repeatedly kicking them while they were down. His political maneuvering has displayed a ruthlessness that stood apart in a city of ruthlessness. And while most professional politicians have mastered the two face dance, Mr Harper is exceptionally good at it.

Mr Harper's plan this election was to win a majority government. He was watching support wane for the Bloc in Quebec where he knew the Liberals were disorganised. The new Liberal leader had been having problems reaching out to members of his own party as well as the public at large. And while the NDP may be getting better at wielding their third party power, I don't think Mr Harper ever took the NDP seriously as a threat to his quest for power.

This morning Stephen Harper rearranged his travel schedule to let the reporters following his campaign watch tape of Stephane Dion. Seems Stephane had a bit of trouble during an interview last night and the Conservatives grabbed tape from the cutting room floor to show off and claim it proved Stephane wasn't ready to rule. Normally this would have been seen as another classic bully by Mr Harper, but what happens when the bullying no longer inspires fear and respect?

Mr Harper's move hasn't gotten the expected response. No-one is willing to jump on the bandwagon with him and even Jack Layton brushes it off as irrelevant. Which it was. Unfortunately for Mr Harper, when a bully no longer inspires fear, his actions are seen in a very different light. Perhaps in a more realistic light. Stephen Harper's actions this morning seem less like a bully, and more like a spoiled child stamping it's feet when he doesn't get what he wants.

The Morning Speeches

Stephane Dion gave a very passionate speech today, and is no longer trying to hold the Conservative Party to a minority - he's talking about winning the election himself. He's reached this new plateau because of two things. First of all he got out of the leader vs leader debate that Stephen Harper tried to make this election, and has turned it into a party vs party election. And Stephane Dion and the Liberals have a much deeper and impressive back cast than the Conservatives do. Perhaps more important to Mr Dion's recent success.....Mr Harper has been sinking like a rock since the debate and his lack luster approach to the economy. Note to Stephane Dion - change that "aren't you impressed?" to "aren't they impressive?"

Mr Haper seems to be getting bad advice. Really bad advice. Let's take as given that the core supporters of the Conservative Party are always going to vote conservative and this election is all about the undecided and people to the left of the Prime Minister. "There's lots of bargains in the stock market right now" doesn't speak to the average Canadian. In today's speech it was,"I talk to my mother every night about her stocks". Your mother? Apparently this is aimed at the teenage vote. Don't have any stock of your own Stephen? What does that say?

Game Plans

This election campaign has been great for allowing insight into the runnings of an election. We are given three very different views of a campaign. Stephen Harper is playing the purest politics out there. His iron grip is around the throats of his candidates so they can't say anything. The message that they want to put out to the voter is very controlled and they are terrified of falling off of their message. So what is their message? That in the absence of any real discussion on the issues they are the party of choice. You'll notice this hasn't been done by putting forth ideas, policy and proposal. Instead they are demonising they're opponents. If you want to see who they think is closest on their heels - watch and see who they are putting down the hardest. Right now it seems to be the NDP in BC and the Liberals in Ontario.

The Liberals are running what I think to be the most painful of political campaigns. An earnest guy with an obsession for policy thinks that's all it takes to sweep us all away in his mad vision. Ok, so maybe his vision isn't that mad. It's hard to tell. I'm not sure I have ever heard so many people complain about a candidate's ability to speak English. Let's be honest here, Mr Dion is no more difficult to understand than say, Mr Chretien. Remember him? Mr Chretien had us smiling and feeling slightly protective of his mangled English, so why are we so down on Mr Dion? I think because his ability or lack thereof with language is a perfect symbol of his campaign and it's inability to make us feel. People want to vote with their heads, but they vote with their hearts.

Mr Layton and the NDP have perhaps the most difficult campaign to run. For years the NDP have had no hope of actually getting anywhere federally, and so were able to make all kinds of wild promises and use stirring election slogans that frightened anyone even vaguely right of centre. This was perfect for rallying their core group of a dozen voters, however this election they actually see some light at the end of that tunnel to mainstream. If they run their campaign properly they could replace the Liberals as the "other" choice for most Canadians. Unfortunately the NDP can't seem to bring their game up to mainstream political standards. Their message is getting better, but still has much of that "fringe party" feel to it that becomes more annoying to voters the further right of left you move. If the NDP are ever going to make it to the Official Opposition or even Government, they need to mainstream their message and stop scaring the centrist voters.

I'd like to evaluate the Bloc's election plan, but it doesn't matter. I live in "other than Quebec". Just as well. I really like Gilles and it's hard enough loving a separatist when you can't vote for him. If he were a Liberal I doubt this would even be a close race, and his English isn't a lot better - he is. As for Elizabeth May - I hope the NDP are paying attention. With absolutely no ability to do any more than hope and pray for a couple of seats, their message is decidedly not fringe. More mainstream than the NDP, the Greens are watching their policy get picked up by the big boys, and that's something that hasn't happened as often to the NDP as almost everyone thinks it should. I like Green policy. I've been surprised how much of it sounds exactly like me in the last few years.

That said, I still believe that this in an ABC election. Anything But Conservative. Unfortunately my vote will not go for a vision, but against one. Why? Because Harper's Conservatives would change the world into a place where it was impossible to actually do any of the things I'd like to see us try. And I'd still like to see us try.

The Great Debate Round One

My apologies for the pause, there was some travelling that interupted. But enough about me.

Unfortunately I was listening to the translated debate as my French is not practised as my English. My over all first impression was that Mr Harper was very close to releasing the demon within, diving over the table and throttling someone. His eyes were cold and his smile tight even if the voice was smooth as silk. He stuck on message fairly well though. I am king and none of these other clowns could do the job.

Elizabeth May did very well, and was very blunt and direct in her crticisms of the Governments serious lack of policy in regards the environment. She was much softer in her crticisms of the other leaders, which is her stated agenda. ABC.

Jack Layton looked good. He managed to maintain focus on Mr Harper. He easily dismissed a fiesty Stephane Dion with a nod to the number of years the Liberal Party had a chance to do things, like child care and environment. A wierd alliance was struck with Mr Duceppe on the cap and trade system that helped him deal with the carbon tax of the Liberals and Greens.

Stephane Dion did well. He managed to easily hold his own at the table, let Elizabeth May be the knife to Mr Harper's enviromental throat and looked very comfortable. He will be trying very hard to turn in an equally good performance in English tonight.

Gilles Duceppe has always made me wish he wasn't for Quebec independance and did again last night. The man is sharp, witty and clever. He too was on more of an ABC mission than he was bothering with anyone else. His shots at Mr Dion were for the most part gentle ribbings, but he landed some wonderful shots on Mr Haper. I am looking forward to his performance the most tonight to see how and what message he tries to drive home to English Canadians. Will it just be ABC or will the wiley politician pull some sort of odd endorsement out of his pocket.

All in all it's as a good a wind up to the English debates as we're going to get. I'm looking forward to them.

What Do You Call An Angry Liberal?

An NDP. And each day Stephane Dion grows angrier and angrier the NDP gets closer and closer to becoming the official opposition. It's an odd election. Why do our ivory tower politicians take so long to realise the electorate doesn't mind their idealism as long as they prove they're human first?

Meanwhile Stephen Harper tries selling his latest spin. A little scary as far as spin goes but very telling. Vote for me so that you have a voice in Government. If Quebec votes for the Bloc they won't have a Conservative member at the table. If BC votes for the NDP, or Toronto votes Liberal they won't be represented by the government apparently. Unfortunately the Government of Canada is supposed to care about every Canadian citizen, not just the ones who vote for them. More glimpses of the mean spirited bunch behind the Prime Minister's muzzles.

New Policy?

The Liberal Party has released it's campaign note book of promises. It's interesting to me that while most Canadians don't believe a thing politicians tell them in the lead up to an election (at the very least), the parties still insist on rolling out a list of things they probably won't accomplish while in Government So just what do these platforms represent then?

If your cynical, they represent what each party has decided the voters want to hear. A more generous interpretation would be that they lay out the vision that each party has, and once they get into office the realities of the political scene make moving forward on that vision more or less difficult.

So how does the Liberal vision look?

Well it's certainly filled with lots of feel good slogans and plans that at first glance should make anyone but the most extreme left and rightists smile. Investment in infrastructure help for the poor and the beginning of a move toward a "green" economy. There is one thing conspicuously absent. To be fair it also seems to be absent from the Conservative platform.

Remember last election? Honesty and integrity in Government were the obsessions of the day. Everyone promised to "clean up" the Federal Government. Since the Conservatives came to power nothing has been done. And the new Liberal platform doesn't seem to address the issue either.

Guess it isn't important anymore.

And The Mean Streak Starts To Show

And now we see why Stephen Harper won't let any of his MP's talk. Seems that every time one of them opens their mouth there's an immediate need for foot removal surgery. Now we find out that the Minister in charge was making jokes about Canadians dying during the listeriosis crisis that is perhaps still not over. And he's still in charge. Story at CBC is here.

And finally someone saying something intelligent on Afghanistan - why is it the Greens? Canada is in Afghanistan as part of a NATO led mission. It is not a scenario we can act unilaterally in without upsetting our partners and ignoring our international obligations. The only hope for getting thru this quagmire might be to move the mission from NATO led to UN led. No matter that the UN doesn't want it, it's the direction our leaders should be trying to move it. Now I have nothing against Elizabeth May having great ideas, including one of my long time favourites - Guaranteed Annual Income - but with being the sane champion of the environment, the poor and now our international relations well....just what are the other folks going to do when she makes more sense than any of them at the debates on every issue but what colour blue fuzzy sweater to wear?

Daze of Rest

Well it's Sunday and t seems that the news is slow on the political front. The two Stephens are taking the day off, and Jack and Elizabeth seem to be following a light schedule. Probably hoping that simply putting in an appearance while the other two are resting would vault them to the lead political story. But it, of course, was not to be.

Sundays are for review. Even outside of politics, nothing happens on Sunday. There is very little real news on a Sunday, just reviews of the weeks news and perhaps a slightly outdated story that got squeezed out of the previous weeks news by something more titillating And so while both Jack's and Elizabeth's Sunday schedule did get noted, it was a passing comment on our way to the Week in Review. Naturally this focused on the trials and tribulations of the the two front runners.

It is a symptom of our "first past the post" system that we can have front runners right from the start of a race. In reality no-one is out in front until the ballots are being counted.

Green, With Envy

Oh my what a week for folks who are green and I'm not talking about Kermit here. With the campaign only hours old, the new kid on the block has already stolen the thunder. Elizabeth May finally gets an independent to go Green, thus giving the Green party a seat in the house. Of course a seat in the house and the Federal funding that comes with it means that the Green Party is now taken seriously by the political establishment right?

In fact it does. As the story unravels it now becomes apparent that there were two parties trying hard to keep Elizabeth May from taking her well deserved place at the Leaders Debate. Surprising to some, altho not perhaps, on reflection, the two parties working hardest to block her appearance were the Conservatives and the NDP. That the Conservatives were against including someone new in the club should not have been a surprise to anyone. This Conservative Party has been, pretty much since it's inception, a mean spirited bunch with their eyes firmly fixed on the prize - world domination, er, a majority Government. By most people's reckoning the Greens are good for the Conservatives, in that they fracture the Left leaning voters even more, and in some ridings should guarantee a Conservative win. Think 25% voting Liberal, 25% voting NDP, 25% voting Green and 30% voting Conservative. The Conservatives could pick up a seat with only 30% of the vote. And surely there are 30% mean spirited selfish people in every riding? But there is one thing the Conservative party does not want to hear during the debates. A well spoken, intelligent defense of the environment. It would easily show the other parties environmental platforms for exactly what they are - lip service for votes.

The only party that might actually be able to keep up with the Green Party in terms of environmental policy is the NDP. While most NDP supporters see their party as they only "honest" party in Canadian politics, that image was severely damaged by Jack Layton's crawling in bed with the Conservative Party to block the Green Party from appearing. Very bad image that......ooh I need a toothbrush for the brain. However Jack has made his bed and now must crawl into it. I guess he was serious about trying for the job of Prime Minister - he seems to have learned what is needed to get there.

What has surprised me in all of this is how quickly and completely the Canadian public jumped to her defense. Within hours those responsible for organizing the debates were inundated with thousands of protest voices. And those voices cut right across the political spectrum. Canadians from the left, the middle and the right all seemed united in insisting that everyone be heard from. And apart from a basic sense of fair play this does say something else about Canadians. If some leader were to actually put forward a platform that appealed across the board, they could perhaps win an overwhelming majority - one where the majority of people actually vote for something, instead of fracturing into enough slices to let someone with 30% public support rule the world, er, win a majority Government.