petroom

Self-Interest: Surgeons and Ministers

2009-01-10T13:56:00.000-08:00

Three excerpts from a well-written article from the Times of London:

"In the emergency room of Al Shifa hospital in Gaza City, Dr Raed al-Arayni was entering his 12th day of nonstop work and was preparing for yet another operation when his worst nightmare came true.

The bloodied little boy being carried into the room by a neighbour was screaming at him. “Baba, baba [daddy, daddy],” the child cried."

---

'“Israel has acted, is acting and will act only according to its considerations, the security needs of its citizens and its right to self-defence,” Tzipi Livni, the foreign minister and the ruling Kadima party’s candidate for prime minister, said on Friday.'

---

And perhaps, what the purpose of all this is:

"Likud is still leading the race with an expected 32 seats and Kadima is likely to win 27 or so seats, but the centre-left block is closing fast."

On Killing and Guilt

2009-01-07T12:56:00.000-08:00

I cannot look a child in the eye and tell them that down the street, or even next door, a murderer lives and I am going to kill him but in doing so I might kill the child. I cannot say this to the child's mother or father.

But if I allow someone else to take this risk, am I not guilty in some way?

Beyond what the murderer deserves or the need to stop the person, this child's life would be taken as a calculated risk, but a risk that was accepted. By accepting the risk, one accepts the responsibility for it.

We have to move on in our own lives but we are party to the actions of the leaders we elect. When Harper says he accepts the risk that a child will be killed in order to murder a murderer, then he accepts it on my behalf. I am guilty as a Canadian in the child's death.

I cannot support this. As a Liberal, I do not like Mr. Ignatieff, as the party leader, accepting the risks of manslaughter in Israel and Gaza on my behalf. I am now guilty in the killing of humans.

Are inactive shareholders not responsible for the demise of a company? Maybe not but they lose their shirts.

Liberals Kill 40 At School

2009-01-06T16:26:00.000-08:00

Is there any question that fighting should be stopped through international intervention if necessary:

"A single Israeli strike kills at least 40 at a school, the third involving UN-run schools on the same day."

Here.

Another few days is unacceptable. We are guilty already and worse if we continue just standby. It's time for leadership, Mr. Ignatieff, at the least from you; we can expect nothing from our Prime Minister.

To continue with some moral leadership...

"UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon called it "totally unacceptable" that Israeli bombardments would strike near four UN facilities - three schools and a health centre - where Palestinians had sought refuge in Gaza.

Some 15,000 Palestinians have packed the UN's 23 Gaza schools because their homes were destroyed or to flee the violence. The UN provided the Israeli military with GPS co-ordinates for all of them."

Senator David Smith: A Coward?

2008-12-29T12:13:00.000-08:00

The title is just meant to be provocative. I would however like to hear Senator Smith and MP Anita Neville, of the "Liberal Parliamentarians for Israel", to comment on the disgusting behaviour of the Israeli goverment. To object as a caucus to Harper's decision to not intervene in cases of Canadians sentenced to death in other countries, but to stay mum about the arbitrary (let's be honest) and immoral killings of the people locked into the concentration camp that is the Gaza Strip, is cowardly. Senator Smith, stand up for the Jewish people in Canada, and demonstrate how the government has abandoned morality.

ONLINE Vote: T-Minus...?

2008-12-07T23:18:00.000-08:00

Dear IT-inclined bloggers,

How long would it take the Liberal Party to set up a robust online leadership vote? Given that it took me about 10 minutes to set up an online poll, I cannot imagine it is really that hard to do. Maybe one problem is compiling all the national membership lists, as was suppose to be done after the last convention. Perhaps the Executive would be against this because it would show how little important work they had done!

There seems to be a possible excuse to go against OMOV as the motion for this system did not pass at the convention with the required 2/3 majority to change the party constitution. Fine. But there should be a process of popular expression for any non-convention selected leader. A non-binding online one member, one vote is perfectly legitimate for that purpose.

For worried Iggy fans, I dare say he'd probably win anyway; it would just be important for the membership to express what direction they wanted Iggy to go in, as he seems to be rather non-committal on issues right now. Maybe even combine the vote with a referendum on a publicized terms of agreement on NDP-Liberal coalition - well, that might not work as a good tactic against Harper.

Humour

2008-12-05T01:11:00.001-08:00

Edmonton MP Linda Duncan to bring down Harper!

2008-12-05T00:45:00.000-08:00

The perfect icon to move a motion of no confidence in Mr. Harper's dictatorship is NDP MP Linda Duncan. She represents a crack in Harper's Alberta firewall, dispells the smokescreen of "western alienation" and represents a change in Canadian politics.

Conservatives Would Hold Balance of Power, Not Bloc

2008-12-01T23:09:00.000-08:00

If the Conservatives found themselves in opposition then the balance of power would be with them not the Bloc. Indeed, if they chose to never support the government then this power would be with the Bloc. Thus, the conclusion is that if the Conservatives could not help make Parliament work then they would be destabilizing the government and allowing the Bloc to play their "nasty" cards on controversial issues.

Results: Large Majority Support Dion

2008-10-19T20:04:00.000-07:00

The results: 65% of us remain in support of Mr. Dion staying on as leader.

The poll I put up on Oct 18th for Liblog participants received 126 votes that day, but only 10 the next. I think it is safe to say, all votes are cast. I do not think it was descended upon by Tory bloggers and believe it represents a fair size of the Liblog-reading public.

Personally, I hope the Liberal Party of Canada does not make the wrong choice tomorrow.

If you want to keep voting, here ya go...

Polls Powered By MicroPoll

Liberal Leadership Poll: Dion - Yes/No

2008-10-18T07:07:00.000-07:00

The aim of this poll is to poll Liblogs, NOT push people either way, i.e. don't be a loser and keep answering.

Click Here for Poll Survey Software
| Polls
| Email Marketing

| Innovation Management
View MicroPoll

Dion Should Stay

2008-10-16T21:26:00.001-07:00

Mr. Dion has guts and brains. I believe this election has taught him a few brawler moves, at least I hope so. He learned the French fighting techniques with his Clarity Act fight. The liberal leadership have lessons to learn; most important to them and those of us who are addicted to politics, 'how do we engage the electorate and generate enthusiasm for a progressive party?'

Dion's experience and familiarity with today's public is the key ingredient to a progressive liberal government next time around.

Dion Should Stay

2008-10-16T21:18:00.000-07:00

BOuNCE... It's actually a good political tune.

2008-10-06T22:46:00.000-07:00

HERE>>> Listen.

Check out Baba Brinkman's website: <<>>

Pretty cool that's he's Joyce Murray's son, too.

BOUNCE... It's actually a good political tune.

2008-10-06T22:34:00.000-07:00

HERE>>> Listen.

You can see Baba Brinkman's website here: >>>XXXX<<<

He's Joyce Murray's son, oddly enough.

Rural Women: "Sexy Stephane"

2008-09-28T12:46:00.000-07:00

Getting his fashion right at the Stampede seems to have been his foundation. The latest Harris-Decima poll shows a steady, dramatic climb for Liberal popularity amoungst "rural women"* at the same time as the media at the Liberal's Celebration of Women event today were asking about the possible downward trend in support from "urban women".

See for yourself:

A consistent rise from 20 to 30% over the course of 10 days. Does this suggest the Conservative "rural advantage" a cracking foundation? And, what's this, Ekos predicting a Liberal seat in Alberta?

*Of course, it does depend on what is "rural" and what is "urban" in these polls

Make Poverty History: Dion is Brilliant!

2008-09-28T11:48:00.000-07:00

Make Poverty History is a media savvy and well publicized organization. They have posted short clips of one-on-one interviews with the party leaders answering 5 specific questions on poverty. Dion's answers are excellent - specific, compassionate and intelligent. Harper refused to sit down with the group.

Education: Student Loans... Navigating the platforms

2008-09-28T09:29:00.000-07:00

One of the most difficult things when you graduate from post-secondary education is realizing you have yet to earn proper income but your student loan becomes due in 6 months. The challenge shifts from paying it off to paying off just the interest.

For me, the two policy changes I would like to see made are:

1) Lowering the interest rate to the prime rate (it's now prime+3%)

2) Extending the interest-free period to at least two years

I reviewed the websites/platforms of the Tories, Grits, NDP and Greens to see what they had to say to the issue of student loans. I did NOT look at their wider post-secondary policies, such as lowering tuition fees and increasing university funding.

A) Conservatives:

There is nothing on their website that I could find. I even did a word search for "student" in their posted October 2007 Throne Speech, 0 hits. Education was not listed in their section "Key Issues"... sovereignty was though. In the "Taxes" section they do say they "eliminated income taxes on student scholarships, fellowships and bursaries." Sadly, I was never bright enough to gain much from those.

B) NDP:

Their platform was released today but I can't find it on their website anywhere. Looking through their section on "Education & training your family can afford", they highlight a couple of achievements, all seemingly led by Victoria MP, Denise Savoie:

- Tabled the "Canada Post-Secondary Education Act" which gave the provinces cash in exchange for guaranteeing "reasonable access" to such education regardless of socio-economic status. Sadly, C-398 was tabled in February of 2007 and never got further than first reading; of course, I don't know why, as there was never a vote on it.

- Started a petition calling for: increasing grants, decreasing interest rates, a student loan ombudsman, conduct rules for collecting agencies, increased relief situations, extending full-time studies to include medical residency, liberalize bankruptcy protection. When this petition was sent out I don't know but it does call for decreased rates and hints at increased interest-free periods. Strangely, they ask for this period to be 6 months, which it already is.

C) Green Party:

I dared myself to first go through the platform. Wow, that didn't take long, it's written in bullet points using large fonts. Their "Vision Green" section is more detailed and costed in their budget:

-"Increase funding for a needs-based Canadian National Student Loan and Bursary Program with low interest rates and reasonable repayment schedules." There is no line for this in their budget. Does that mean it doesn't really exist as a policy?

-"Forgive 50% of a student's loan when they complete a degree or certificate program." ($2.2 Billion/year)

-In the budget only, it mentions: 200 tuition-free university positions for art students ($3 million, increasing over three years to $9 million/year), and tuition-free graduate studies for healthcare professionals who agree to work in under-serviced areas ($30 million/year, rising to $150 million/year).

D) Liberals:

I left this party last due to my bias, hopefully I am now informed what others have on offer to compare whether they truly have a "real plan" not "monopoly money" like they claim about the NDP and (probably) the Greens.

Well, to start, it took me much longer to download the Grit plan than the Green platform. Then, you actually get to read, with logic and goals explained using real sentences. The section on "Reforming Student Loans" and the one just before it presents:

- The creation of "200,000 needs-based bursaries of up to $3,500 per year and 100,000 access bursaries of up to $4,000 per year" once fully implemented.

- All students eligible for $5,000 student loans regardless of parent income

- Lower loan interest rates to prime rate +0.5%, claiming this is the rate given by banks to their best and most credit-worthy customers. Hm, I know students that negotiated student loans paid off by banks for lines of credit at the prime rate. Maybe these are rare exceptions.

- Increase interest-free grace period from 6 months to 2 years. Well, that's exactly what I wanted, plus they actually knew the period as it stands now.

- Extend the repayment period.

- Increase access to loans for under-represented groups.

The total "Support for Students" section is costed at $1.15 Billion spread over a three-year period. Of this, $550 million are spending plans and $600 million come from tax changes.

In summary, the Conservative plan doesn't exist. The NDP plan lacks firm commitments, dollar numbers and is founded on claims of half-efforts lacking follow-up. I suppose their platform will have more details. The Green Party have some numbers, big numbers, and I'm not sure how some of their plans benefit the majority of students. While the half-relief of debt for graduates is a positive idea, it doesn't fix any problems; nor does it help those who have socio-economic reasons for interrupting their studies.

Inspite of my bias, the standout choice is the Liberal platform which is aggressive and covers all students. It addresses my concerns of interest rates and payment schedules. The bursary programs could help the poorer and under-represented students. I was impressed with the low cost of the programs.

Harper's National Energy Program

2008-09-27T17:40:00.000-07:00

Harper pledged to limit exports of bitumen* if re-elected. But according to the Deputy Premier of Alberta, Alberta disagrees and the province has jurisdiction. Let's make some noise so this sticks out as Harper's National Energy Program. The truth of the matter is that Harper will walk over any jurisdiction or person to benefit himself. Here he's contrived a pointless policy that is no more than a headline and didn't consult or hesitate to ignore the government of Alberta.

*As I read elsewhere: the limit is in fact all nonsense as it applies only to "new" contracts and the conditions for limitation are a joke.

Dion's Video Blog

2008-09-27T14:14:00.000-07:00

Stephane's video blog posts on the Liberal website are excellent. They are personal, natural and really well produced. They show the day's events without media editing. We should encourage voters to look them up. Also, the Harper's Indexes are great.

The 2006 CBC Ombudsman Report

2008-09-08T23:55:00.000-07:00

The previous election raised the same problem for the Green Party; my advised complaint now was also made back in 2005. In reply then, the ombudsmen wax on about the difference between "equitable" coverage vs "equal" coverage. But, they cite the Consortium's submission of debate inclusion criteria and the right to "editorial freedom". As Ms. May has said, her party has fulfilled all of these strict criteria.

Regarding editorial rights, the ombudsmen had even warned the Consortium to set some proper ground rules to account for the lack of proportional representation in government and the advent of minority governments.

The rather wanting report is here: 2006 Ombudsman Report

Dis-May'ed: Contact CBC Ombudsman!

2008-09-08T22:59:00.000-07:00

Does CBC not have a mandate to include Ms. May as Green Party leader in their televised debates?

As the national public broadcaster, the CBC do have an obligation (more than CTV or Global TV).

I have been troubled with who to push to object to the "Consortium's" disgusting, undemocratic decision but surely the CBC Ombudsman has a role in this affair. I suggest like-minded individuals email him:

ombudsman@cbc.ca

Politicians Fail on CTV's QP

2008-05-18T09:56:00.000-07:00

Watching Jane Taber interviewing the politicians then David Suzuki this morning provided a shocking reminder how poorly politicians are at leading, informing and debating.

Some Tory, Peggy Nash and David McGuinty squared off with Taber throwing questions at them about their view of Dion's new proposed tax reform. The Conservative guy with Trailer Park Boys hair was pretty obviously rotten. Peggy Nash and David McGuinty did a good job saying "my policy was better". I thought it was a reasonable back-and-forth between them. I have to say, McGuinty got the benefit of the argument from Taber.

But then Suzuki came on and demonstrated why politicians are subsidized with their own shows outside the real world, with the only 'intelligent' interjections coming from the tiresome talking heads and columnists. They don't do well with anything but talking-point politics.

Suzuki, in probably less than 5 minutes, actually explained policy beyond rhetoric, criticized the Harper government for inaction, the NDP for obstruction and the past Liberal government for inaction. Indeed, he spoke passionately and convincingly about how past "aspirational reductions" don't work and how Canadians need our noses put in it.

He cites the NDP opposition to the BC gas tax as a tempest in a teacup, $10 per tonne of fuel, whereas in Sweden for years they have had a $150 per tonne charge on fuel.

Our proposed action seems a joke, but at least it's a start.

He chided politicians for endless rhetoric, committee-ing, and myopic vote-hunting. He cited a 1977 government panel during the OPEC crisis that came to conclusions that are the same as today, energy efficiency, 30 years ago!

I'd love to read that committee report, if anyone reads this post that knows could you please post a link?

Women: Us vs Them

2008-05-16T19:50:00.000-07:00

Women are big in politics in the US this year. We haven't had a woman in a key position of political power in ages, many columnists have written about this before.

I was just looking at the numbers again, and the Senate is surprisingly better than the House; I guess that's because women live longer, especially with Hugh Segal stealing all the guys' lunch money. Imagine those frail male bodies, spare a little change for food?

Senate: 32 (34.4%)

House of Commons: 65 (21.3%)

I get the feeling Harper would only appoint men to the Senate. The number of women should drop further. Imagine the House of Commons numbers and how they would plummet if there was a Conservative landslide.

Worldwide, we are 49th (fitting maybe). I thought the US was going to do better in their Senate or House, but nope:

#69:

US Senate: 16 (16%)

US House: 73 (16.8%)

And our parents, the UK and France?

#58, UK (tied with Cambodia)

House: 126 (19.5%)

Lords: 148 (19.7%)

#62, France (tied with the Grenadines)

Lower: 105 (18.2%)

Upper: 60 (18.2%)

None of this is close to the equality in Cuba and Scandinavia, but we are working towards it. I wonder how many people vote for gender more than anything else. That would be an interesting poll. Maybe it's one that Dion did back in his days as a sociology prof?

The House: Dion & Rae

2008-05-11T11:46:00.001-07:00

Bob Rae and Stephane Dion were very clear and well-spoken again in the media, on May 10th's The House (link to the podcast). Mr. Dion was clear with his views of pricing carbon pollution. The clarity was enlightening, he was honest and convincing. If the Liberals could replay that segment in ads right now, Canadians would vote for the Dion team ASAP.

Beyond the above, I think the strong Liberal team should be sold to the public. There is a huge amount of skill and competence to contrast with the Tory cabinet joke.

To that end, Rae will get slagged by opponents for his rocky Premiership in Ontario. To counter that, the Liberals should be promoting Rae's international experience of mediating in Sri Lanka.

I have a great deal of respect for Lloyd Axworthy, who spearheaded the anti-landmine campaign and deservedly received a nod for the Nobel Prize-winning work. Rae and others can further this popular legacy of peace and mediation; I think Ignatieff's missteps don't poise him to stand on his own at this point.

A New Candidate? Blair's waiting. BC is waiting!

2008-05-11T10:23:00.000-07:00

The riding is a mouthful: West Vancouver-Sunshine Coast-Sea to Sky Country... sooo westcoast, haha. Damned hippies.

We should all remember this: Blair Wilson, excommunicated from Liberal caucus for not being entirely above the board... according to his own father-in-law. Well, Wilson is still working as the MP and seems not to be a thorn in the local riding association's side. Now, who will be the new candidate, and when?

This riding is one of great wealth, great diversity and will be the focus of the World in 2010.

It is a microcosm of a lot of BC issues. Tourism, logging, quality of life, money. West Vancouver, a tony suburb of Vancouver; Whistler, the tourism Mecca of BC; Squamish, the resource town in between, with large working class and First Nations populations; the Sunshine Coast, resource workers and hippies, not to mention a few retirees.

The riding is a battleground. In 2004, John Reynolds, Tory house leader (and creep), was prematurely called the loser. In the end, he won by a scant 1687 votes (3%, down from a 21% margin in 2000).

In 2006, with Reynolds retired, his perennial opponent Liberal Blair Wilson beat the new Conservative candidate, John Weston, by only 986 votes (1.5% margin). Then, in 2006, things went pear-shaped for Wilson, (as linked above).

It was claimed that Weston was a "star" candidate. Sure, maybe, I dunno. But here we are now, post-sponsorship scandal (having won the riding), with a new slippery Liberal MP. How will the riding's voters react?

Likely, same as last time. If they didn't mind voting for a Liberal when the country was sick of doing so and more than a little turned off of the party, why would they change their vote now? At the same time, Reynolds was never a popular figure but rather won the riding through name recognition. Obviously his successor didn't have that advantage in 2006 but may in the coming election. While likely that the Liberal vote will stick, it is in no way guaranteed. Politics is local and the Liberal MP is scandalized.

The riding must be carried by the Liberals to keep their lock on the big cities. It will also give them a much needed seat in BC. The riding cannot be neglected. The Conservatives have a strong organization in the riding, and surely taste blood in Wilson's ejection. The Conservatives spent $86'000 in the riding in 2006 (the Liberals spent $82'000).

It's time to focus, build a campaign and select a strong, well-respected, progressive candidate for West Vancouver - Sunshine Coast - Sea to Sky Country - Candy and Bubble Gum - Trees and Shrubs - Skis and Snowboards.

Afterall, we want a progressive Liberal on the podium in 2010.

Polls: The UNdecideds

2008-05-03T22:54:00.000-07:00

The polling numbers are always around 30-34 or something... but that's committed voters. I want to know what the undecided numbers are.

What are they?

They seem to be the most important numbers if we've known for months that the committed numbers haven't changed. In the past I always remember the undecided votes to be about 10-15% and that a big hoopla was made when they were at 20%.

I have a feeling that if both Tories and Liberals are stuck at 1/3 each, the undecided number is big.

CPC & Double-dipping?

2008-05-01T19:05:00.000-07:00

If you look on the CPC 1st Quarter donations list there are two entries on different dates:

Edward S. Rogers March 13th, 2008 $1000

Edward S. Rogers March 25th, 2008 $1000

Hmm, I'd be curious to know whether these entries were the same person or not.

Here is another less suspicious one I noticed:

Frederick H. Mannix February 5th, 2008 $1000

Frederick P. Mannix March 17th, 2008 $1000

DION on Question Period, also Bill C-51

2008-04-27T20:11:00.000-07:00

I thought Dion was excellent on QP this Sunday. He answered questions earnestly and clearly, (in english). He didn't sound like a used car salesman, unlike Flaherty.

Bill C-51, Food and Drug Act changes, was put to first reading recently; I've just read about them. It seems there are two issues:

1) New over-reliance on drug company research results in new drug approval

2) New powers for Health Canada to inspect more easily

Now, my first reaction is "oh no!" to Item 1 and "oh good!" to Item 2. I don't really know how to interpret the changes. I hope I can read more about it in the near future.

Robert Silver at Macleans: Media Spin

2008-03-25T13:46:00.000-07:00

Robert Silver

20, March, 2008 | 12:43 am

While the pile-on Dion continues, a bit of reflection:

Collective Media Groupthink ("CMG"): “It is so unseemly to have disagreement on matters of war between the two major political parties in Canada. Come on Dion, won’t you compromise with Harper and find a common position to extend the mission in Afghanistan? For the good of the country?”

Dion compromises on Afghanistan

CMG: “I can’t believe Dion caved like that on Afghanistan. I mean, it was the only issue he had going and he just handed it to Harper. He’s such a loser.”

CMG: “Dion is crazy if he forces an election any time soon. I mean, it would be just nuts to do it”

Dion decides to not cause an election through the only means possible – abstaining on confidence votes.

CMG: “Dion is killing himself and his party by not bringing down the government. He’s such a loser”

CMG: “Dion had better win at least three of the four by-elections this week or he is toast, I mean, really toast”

Dion wins three of four by-elections

CMG: “I cant believe Dion only won three of four by-elections and one of them was really, really close. This can only be taken as a repudiation of Dion. What a loser."

Finally, Media in March 2008: paints a picture of Dion winning the Liberal leadership as if he was some homeless guy who walked in off the streets of Montreal in sweat-pants and was selected by the collectively drunk Liberal Delegates without any rational or reason as they ignored two clearly superior candidates. Why did they choose this loser?

But...but....Media in 2006:

Globe and Mail: “There is no perfect choice for Liberal delegates, but Stéphane Dion comes the closest to deserving their support for leader.” – Globe and Mail, November 26, 2006 Editorial Endorsing Dion

Montreal Gazette: “Liberal grandees have been making their choices, and expect rank-and-file party members to follow them to this or that candidate. But this weekend, at least, each card-carrying Liberal still has some individual clout. Using it to advance the cause of Stephane Dion would be a service to the party, and to the country.” – Montreal Gazette, September 29, 2006, Editorial Endorsing Dion

Toronto Sun (!): “Which brings us to Stephane Dion, our choice for leader because he was willing to fight for Canadian unity when it counted, despite the fact most of his academic peers in Quebec were separatists, who made his life hell. That took courage. While we think he's out to lunch in his support of the pie-in-the-sky Kyoto accord, we also think he's smart enough and tough enough to be a leader. And that's rare these days.” - Toronto Sun, November 26, 2006 Editorial Endorsing Dion

And I won’t even start pulling out quotes from folks on this site talking positively about the man.

The media may have bought into their own ridiculous narrative about it being a two man leadership race between Rae and Ignatieff but a plurality of papers in Canada thought Liberals SHOULD choose Dion - even if they thought Liberals WOULD choose Rae or Ignatieff.

I have about 100 problems with the Liberal Party of Canada these days – the party, its caucus, its members, its bloggers and yes, its leader are about three inches away from permanently turning into a sad caricature of a political party (I would include the party's symbolic bird, if only the party had one...). Even with that depressing state, some reality from time to time is called for.

Coyne: Dion's DEEP tax cuts

2007-10-17T21:02:00.000-07:00

An interesting column by Andrew Coyne:

A Liberal tax opportunity

Last Friday, while the Tories were busy putting the finishing touches on the Speech from the Throne, the Liberal leader, Stephane Dion, was delivering a Throne Speech of his own. Okay, it was only a speech to the Economic Club of Toronto, and it only had one real bit of news in it, and it didn’t get nearly the press that last night’s prime time extravaganza did (“tonight, on a very special Speech from the Throne...”), but as an indicator of what’s on the party’s mind, it was every bit as intriguing. ...

It began with the ritual ticking off of Liberal “priorities” the party would like to see the government address -- “clarity” on Afghanistan, action on global warming, “a plan” to fight poverty, and, um, something on the economy. Only instead of the usual warmed-over hash about encouraging excellence and “investing” in this or that, the Liberal leader put forward a serious, substantive proposal, of a kind not historically associated with Liberals in general or Mr. Dion in particular. Indeed, he came perilously close to being specific.

In brief, he promised to cut taxes -- but not just any taxes. He promised to cut corporate tax rates, and to cut them deeply. How deeply? Here’s what he said: “The previous Liberal government reduced the federal corporate tax rate from 28% to 19%. The Conservatives took the “bold step” of going further… to 18.5% in 2011. I would go deeper than that.”

Okay, a little on the vague side, granted. But baby steps: this is a Liberal leader, making an unadorned and unambiguous commitment to cut corporate tax rates. No hedging about, no rider about cutting rates first for “the forgotten middle class.” As important were the reasons he offered:

“A lower corporate tax rate is a powerful weapon in the federal government’s arsenal to generate more investment, higher living standards and better jobs.” How? Three ways. One, “if you lower the corporate tax rate, you lower the cost of capital for Canadian companies. Therefore, these companies are induced to spend more on capital equipment.”

Two, “to create a new Canadian advantage,” in the competition for footloose investment capital -- specifically, “a much lower corporate tax than in the United States.” And three, “to strengthen Canadian companies against foreign takeover.” In case anyone missed his meaning, that’s “to strengthen our companies by taxing them less.” (Emphasis added.) I think we can say point three marks the end of the Liberal flirtation with the economic nationalists.

Well. Much will depend on precisely (or even vaguely) how deep Mr. Dion’s proposed tax cuts turn out to be. He would go further than the Tories have. Would he go further than they would? Is this part of a Liberal strategy, as some have mooted, to outflank the Conservatives on taxes?

If so, then federal politics is about to get very interesting. A radical tax-cutting agenda would not merely offer some much needed balance to the Liberal program, after a spring and summer spent chasing the NDP and the Greens further and further out to the left. It would turn the political spectrum inside out. It would be unclear just what “left” and “right” meant any more. As Mr. Dion put it, if corporate tax cuts are a right-wing policy, then “Sweden, with its low corporate tax rate, is the hot bed of neo-conservatism while the United States, with its very high corporate tax rate, is a socialist paradise.”

But it has to be radical. Conservatives are all about “incrementalism” these days, to allay fears of a hidden agenda. Liberals have to be radicals, just to convince people they have an agenda.

Fortunately, there is ample room for radicalism on the tax front. Liberals have a historic opening to propose deep cuts in tax rates, corporate and personal, without cutting a dime out of current (vastly profligate) levels of spending. Three factors combine to make this possible.

The first is the surplus. The long fight against the deficit, years of raising taxes and cutting spending, have given federal finances a virtually unstoppable momentum towards surplus. The Tories will likely draw down much of this to pay for tax cuts of their own, but Liberals could go further, if they also make use of factors two and three.

Tax reform is one. The tax code has long been cluttered with all sorts of useless, distortionary tax preferences, encouraging people to make decisions for tax purposes, rather than for productive purposes. Strike these out, broaden the base, and you can cut rates even more.

And the other? Whisper it, Liberals, if you dare: a carbon tax. Conspicuously missing from both parties’ global warming plans, it is universally regarded as political poison. But what if the revenues from a carbon tax were used to slash -- and I mean slash -- income taxes? Then what you have is a cleaner environment, a more productive economy -- and maybe a winning political strategy.

YOUR blog, YOUR riding

2007-09-23T18:41:00.000-07:00

Bloggers can improve the grassroots of the Liberals, help a newly-invigorated party connect with communities, and provide Canadians with a real government.

I propose that Liblogs' bloggers each commit to a federal riding. Be the eyes and ears of that riding over the next year.

There are enough of us to do this. Ideally, one would cover their own riding but no doubt there will be a missing blogger somewhere and too many glued to Downtown Canada City.

We need to be in touch with our communities. Be active and give the blogosphere insight into what is important in different ridings, the dynamics. Do some armchair research, email locals, ask questions of candidates. Engage the public.

Most importantly, matching blog-talk with our communities will engage people. It will demonstrate that Liberal party understands its public duties, and will create trust in Dion's plan for governing. All politics is local.

PS - I'm going to keep posting about this until Liblog Master Cherniak engages the idea and someone works out how to establish a riding-blogger matching system.

Michael Byers: Arctic Strength

2007-09-23T18:27:00.000-07:00

Our North is shameful. Our future lies there and so its foundation must be rebuilt. A rich culture, amazing people, but living in conditions unacceptable for a wealthy nation.

Thin-walled houses, overcrowding, poor education and health.

Read Michael Byers' insightful article on Tyee.ca.

The Liberal Party must highlight this situation and demonstrate why our dollars should clean up our own backyard and care for our own citizens and environment.

The North is an opportunity for Mr. Dion to apply his three-pillar approach in a tangible, productive way that captures the imagination of Canadians.

Faceless Canadians in America

2007-09-11T21:25:00.000-07:00

I was in the US when Paul Martin was kicked down to a minority. I voted in that election and I didn't show my face when I voted.

I sent in a photocopy of my driver's licence and my passport and I was mailed back an absentee ballot.

So, to create a "someone has to see your face on voting day" rule would likely disenfranchise the huge number of Canadians that live abroad but are actively involved in Canadian society.

Let's be honest, most people DON'T like the idea of women in our society covering their faces. However, to express this concern using voting laws is problematic.

Where Conservatives' Energy Comes From?

2007-08-20T22:53:00.000-07:00

Did anyone catch this picture link on the Tories' website?

"John, let's make the slogan reflect what we think of people who we crap on once elected."

Dion's Deep Throat: Aug 19th News Conference

2007-08-20T21:28:00.000-07:00

Garth Turner pointed to the MPtv video of Stephane's news conference on the Liberal SPP Blueprint. Watching the video, I soon became bored and skipped to the questions that start at 15 minutes in, but the last five minutes is the real gold.

At first, the reporters seemed to want to make Dion say what he defined as a "combat mission" in Afghanistan. Not really the point of the news conference, and Dion gave wonky answers, not surprisingly.

But then, came the "who's the mole" stuff...

Romeo St. Martin asks:

Yesterday, [PM's Spokesperson] Sandra Buckler was here [...] She said there was no negotiation of bulk water. You said in french, that you have some information that the Liberals are receiving?

Dion interrupts:

We've heard some noise; we have some network of people telling us, 'be very careful cuz things are happening.' And we want put a marker very clearly, this should not be the case. [pointing to Blueprint]

St. Martin:

Why do you think the government would say we're not in negotiations about water; why do you think they are lying?

Dion:

Oh, they are under pressure, coming from our American friends, to remove Canadian water, to help the problems with the shortage of fresh water. [...] I heared that many times, while I was in government. There is a strong lobby for that. We should be very strong to resist it. It would be a big mistake.

He goes on to explain how bulk water removal is not a solution to address shortages, when 2 billion people have inadequate supply.... But back to the juicy parts... Who's the mole?!

Norma Greenaway:

When [the Liberal government] started the SPP, were water exports on the table? [...] Were the Americans asking you to put it on the table?

Dion:

By many networks we received requests of this kind. Not necessarily by the government of the US, though it may have happened. Each time I visited the US there was this view that water must be part of the negotiations.

Greenaway:

Can you name some names about the people asking?

Dion:

No, no, I will not give names but I may tell you that it happened many times, including when I was in California, for instance, speaking with the governor himself, not to say that he himself asked that, but there is a sense that California [...] is looking for another solution and Canada is very attractive.

Greenaway:

But lobbying is different from negotiating. You are saying that you have information that there are talks?

Dion:

There are talks, yes.

Then the moderator cuts in to end the questions, but Dion breaks in...

Dion:

There are talks. The line between official and unofficial should be clarified, certainly.

St. Martin:

Could you be more clear about that? You say that you have information that there are negotiations going on, sir. And, yesterday, the spokesperson for the Prime Minister said 'It is not on the table. It is not being discussed. There are no negotiations.'

So you are calling the government a liar, the Prime Minister a liar. You say you've got some secret information. Could you share that with us?

Dion:

I have some information that I cannot share about talks about that, and these talks should not become negotiations. The line between the two is so ambiguous I want it to dismiss any ambiguity, and it's why as a Liberal opposition we came with this marker, today.

Then a french-language question along the same lines as St. Martin's, Dion replies that things are happening despite what the PMO says. Then another one in english.

(female reporter):

What level are the discussions at?

Dion:

I will not say more.

The moderator ends the news conference again, and Dion again breaks in...

Dion:

The interest to me is to protect my country, and I have done that today.

Wow, huh?! Dion is a bold Mofo. That's some good opposition, real opposition.

PS - Garth Turner, thanks for joining the Liberals, I have never felt more in touch with parliament than through your blog, honestly. I wish more MPs, my own Liberal included, were half as dedicated and outgoing as yourself, at least with respect to communicating with their constituents.

Mulroney licks Harper's Wounds... Ouch!

2007-07-26T18:47:00.000-07:00

As BCer in Toronto pointed out earlier today, Mulroney complimented Harper on his first abuses of the public trust. As Lyin' Brian said, Harpie will eventually come up with "some very attractive ideas."

"Aw, shucks, thanks Brian." replies Harpie... well, Harpie might if it weren't for an awkward news item about his big-chinned admirer the same day:

Mulroney ordered to pay $470,000 to Schreiber

Hmm, the optics don't look so good on that. I'd love to see a Quebec by-election right now.

From the Desk of Farley Mowat

2007-07-16T18:45:00.000-07:00

Farley Mowat?! Holy F*ck! I almost sent them money. One cannot deny how powerful it is to have a real icon of Canada stumping for you. Farley Mowat recently wrote a letter of support for the Green Party.

There is such honesty and idealism of youth conjured when I read his words. Farley Mowat for me evokes the memory of an idealic Canada- an expansive, beautiful and preserved wilderness.

Its a powerful image for most Canadians and so when the author of that imagery raises the alarm, Canadians will react.

In case you didn't see it, I'm posting the original link. We really need to make sure that real action on the environment happens, at all levels of government, and more importantly, in our own lives.

Here is the letter (click here for the link):

Dear Green Party Friend:

Eighty-six years as participant and observer have convinced me we are facing an ecological and environmental crisis that could precipitate the greatest die-off in the history of our planet.

The current situation is so ominous and the potential for disaster so diverse and imminent as to threaten not just human life but all of animate creation. If this sounds like Chicken Little, it is because this time the sky truly may be falling.

The unwillingness of the powers-that-be to accept the scope and urgency of the threat convinces me that the cement-heads who currently control our destiny are incapable of responding to the approaching tornado. They will remain engrossed in their own self-interests, trusting that a consortium of super-science, technology, and the Entrepreneurial Gods will see them safely into Heaven on Earth.

I don’t believe it will. Which is why I am now giving my support to the Green Party, the only political entity demonstrating a real and potential effective concern for the planet and its myriad inhabitants.

All of its inhabitants!

For it is not just we human beings who are at risk. We are all in the same crucible together – and the temperature is rising rapidly, both figuratively and actually.

The Green Party, led by Elizabeth May, is the one political party clearly committed to averting the catastrophic consequences of our continuing to treat the Earth as mere dirt beneath our feet, so it is imperative that we elect Green Party members to our next parliament. This cannot happen without a lot of help from a lot of us.

The Harper Conservatives boast of their war chest of $15 million, and their War Room from which they will send out their Attack Ads and fire their Media Barrages. The Green Party and its leader, Elizabeth May, have only the Green Hope Chest, which at the moment is virtually empty. Nevertheless, they are promising a peaceable campaign focused on the survival of a peaceable kingdom.

I very much want them to succeed and I hope you do too, so I invite you to join me in making it financially possible for the Greens to vanquish the vandals and thereby help re-establish a viable future for life on Earth.

Farley Mowat

Juicy... I love seeing a story evolve

2007-04-24T18:36:00.000-07:00

"Breach in security sees Tory emissions plan faxed to Liberals"

OTTAWA — The federal Liberals are demanding answers from the Conservative government after details of its new environmental regulations were accidentally leaked.

Environment critic David Mcguinty, who read the document, refused to divulge details, but called on the government to immediately release its full plan before the markets open on Wednesday.

Ooo, what's gonna happen tomorrow? So exciting.

Poll: A BCer is now happy.

2007-04-21T07:49:00.000-07:00

No, not that blogger, but me, another BCer.

From the latest Ipsos-Reid poll:

"In British Columbia, the Liberals stood at 34 per cent, while the Tories trailed at 30 per cent, dropping nine points."

So, while nationally the Tories lead the Liberals 39% to 29% according to this poll, I'm wondering what happens when we remove the Tories' 70% polling in Alberta.

It's amazing how the Liberals are so unpopular in Alberta (17%) and Quebec (20%). What's up?

And in Quebec, what does a seat projection look like if the Tories take over some Bloc ridings? Is Tory popularity in Quebec coming at the expense of Liberal seats? I imagine Liberals could not be any less popular in Quebce than they were last election.

Harper: A Gun To Our Heads

2007-04-17T00:22:00.000-07:00

Yesterday was another sad day in the tale of North American gun crime. It is the opportunity for Liberals to reflect citizens' concern and by showing, as representatives, the Liberals are serious about doing their part by seizing the moment to push the government to finalize the gun registry.

Last week, MP Marlene Jennings accused the government of attempting to "confuse people even more, so that they erode support among Canadians for the gun registry and they weaken the registry."

As Ken Dryden said "I hate guns".

To quote this Ottawa Citizen article:

"The Harper government proposed to extend an amnesty for unregistered rifles and shotguns, but at the same time warned gun owners they could be charged if they don't register the weapons and renew licences."

"Following up on an election pledge, the government last June tabled a bill that would repeal a law requiring gun owners to register rifles and shotguns, although a previous registry for handguns and bans on other weapons would remain."

I hope the government and opposition seize this opportunity to limit gun crime in Canada. The Registry is paid for, let's use it!

Congratulations, Dion and May!

2007-04-12T15:48:00.000-07:00

I am proud to see Mr. Dion putting his money where his mouth is. Progressive voters can be more comfortable voting for the Liberals from this day, knowing that it's not just the same old boys' game of promising action but never delivering.

As a progressive voter, I am always split at election time in a riding that swings between Tories and Liberals. Do I vote for Liberals who won't rock the boat but (unless forced) won't take action? Or, do I vote for a progressive party like the Greens to show where I want the country to go, but risk letting a Tory win?

Today, I can vote Liberal with a clear conscience. I hope the Liberal family realizes that I represent a good proportion of the voter pool.

Alarm bells are ringing at the Tory Fear Factory!

PS - Greens who oppose this move either don't believe in their most effective leader or are smoking crack. They are established as a political party, they have to win a seat and must be pragmatic about how to do that. If they want to be a political action group then stop running candidates.

What does 30 mean to you?

2007-04-11T17:19:00.000-07:00

What does the -30- at the bottom of press releases mean?

I use to think it was an internal reference, like Page 30 in this year's volume of press releases, but my brain slowly realized that everyone can't be on the same page.

Please help.

By-election Fever!

2007-04-11T17:09:00.000-07:00

Oh, here it is... I noticed this at the bottom of a Canadian Press article today:

"The Tories will wait to call an election in order to gauge their support in Quebec through federal three byelections, said a report published Wednesday in Montreal La Presse.
Two ridings — one in Montreal and one east of the city — are currently vacant. Another riding in the Lac St-Jean region, north of Quebec City, will open up in June when Bloc Quebecois MP Michel Gauthier steps down."

So we, political junkies, who need something when playoff games are not on, can start getting excite about a Quebec mini-election. Oh, better than any SES poll, how exciting.

Sinestra's blog entry has already beat me to it in getting the party started.

King Leonidion's 308

2007-03-30T15:56:00.000-07:00

BCE: Harper, the Wolf from 300

2007-03-30T14:07:00.000-07:00

I read an article by the National Post's chief business correspondent entitled "Election first, takeover later".

In it, there is a hint of the Harperites' policy moves post-winning a majority. Let's call it a paw showing out from under the sheepskin.

It of course dovetails nicely with Harper's kick in the balls to income trusts. The article describes how BCE was lobbying Ottawa to allow it to recover money via an American takeover of it.

This push has now stopped and BCE is holding off because it would be bad politics for Harper to have to defend, during an election, the GIANT takeover of a Canadian iconic corporations under his watch. Nevertheless, as Theresa Tedesco writes, Maxime Bernier, has mused "about deregulation and busting down protective barriers in the telecom industry".

Somewhat related...

King Leonidas' analogy of Xerxes as the wolf fits my Harper reference well. If one remembers, Xerxes in the film believes himself a god. Enough said. Harper isn't as camp or as large (height-wise if not by weight) as 300's Xerxes but he definitely has the same moral compass.

Let's hope that Dion's Liberals manage to get close to the Spartan's 300 soldiers to defeat this Canadian Xerxes. Hmm, 308 soldiers has a nice ring to it... I'll have to figure out how to use Photoshop to make a graphic of that!

GG: Libs invited to form government?

2007-03-27T08:07:00.000-07:00

This Quebec election has me thinking more about minorities. If the Harperites lost a non-confidence vote, is the GG not obliged to ask the Liberals and other opposition parties to form a government? Liberals plus NDP would fit; is that enough seats?

I'm too lazy to look up the federal history on these things, but shouldn't that be what happens?

And back to Quebec... Wouldn't it be funny if the Liberals and the PQ formed a coalition government? It is not in the ADQ's interest politically and as opposition to support the government. The ADQ would win the next election for sure, now that people scared of the PQ feel confident in not having to vote Liberal.

PQ + Lib = Love, how ironic.

"Huge Loophole" - Lobbying for Lobbyists - Thanks, Toews!

2007-03-06T10:06:00.000-08:00

The Accountability Act is weak; I have no doubt about that. With so many government backroom mid-weights wanting to scrape something out of their influence, the government must oblige their buddies and allow lobbying. Also, how else would government know what it should do to help big companies and fat cats. It's wrong.

What's more wrong is the latest crap in the news, that rules whose ink is barely dried and only half signed into law are now going to be made weaker!

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070305.wxlobbying05/BNStory/Front/home

The more awful part is that the government is the one pushing for the watering-down.

Canadians deserve respect from their government. This new move is disgusting. People should register their dissatisfaction: www.consultingcanadians.gc.ca

TAXI for ONE!

2007-02-20T06:58:00.000-08:00

Take a F@cking TAXI!

It is disgusting that cabinet ministers are hiring limosine services for transportation (to say nothing about the waiting charges, with the engine on no doubt!).

Dion has proved for more than a decade that a high-profile, controversial cabinet minister does not need special transport privileges that come at a huge and wasteful expense to taxpayers.

The government should ban such waste as a policy to be implemented immediately.

Billion-dollar companies have strict rules about transport/travel perks. Canada's government should be no different. Why do shareholders get more responsibility and accountability than taxpayers?

Social Justice: Healthcare

2007-01-15T03:39:00.000-08:00

I took a step back from this week's news and saw the following forest from the trees:

1. Dion took his sustainable development policy to its most seemingly infertile ground and came away with positive growth.
2. He went to the Prairies to meet and greet shortly after defending the Wheat Board.
3. Overall, he's a player on the Prairies and his policies sell.

(4. The Wajid Kahn stunt blew up in Harper's face.)

So, I'd say that's the "Environment Pillar" box ticked. What about the other three pillars? Dion needs to sell a unified policy platform, and quick.

Next up, SOCIAL JUSTICE: Healthcare should be the focus.

Jeffrey Simpson often gives me my thoughts on the federal government:

thoughts

As Simpson suggests, BE REAL! Address not the retail healthcare politics of "wait times" but show you can do more. Healthcare issues affect everyone and addressing issues of drug costs, provincial patchwork and healthcare management will have max resonance. The federal government has a HUGE influence on drug costs.

There is not a family in Canada that is not concerned about care for the elderly and costs for that care. They worry about their own retirement as well as their elderly parents. The below-35's worry about having to pay for everything themselves these days.

"E-Health" fits nicely with streamlining through innovation. While Conservatives might sell "cuts" and such, Liberals can sell "sustainable healthcare". Better technology improves diagnosis, better patient info management streamlines care. The more digital we get, the less waste - both of money and resources. This all dovetails nicely with the work Dion has done already.

The Liberal record on healthcare is easily defendable. The Chretien and Martin governments put huge quantities of money into both research and provincial transfers. Meanwhile, Canadians still don't trust the Tory agenda on Health and Harper's ridiculous announcement on a Friday afternoon (no surprise there) is such an easy target.



So, let's get talking!

Revisited: Martin's View of Dion's Potential

2007-01-04T12:40:00.000-08:00

This was from Dec. 14 's Globe:

Dion's defining moments

LAWRENCE MARTIN

The image is being set now. In the next few fortnights, Canadians will decide whether they have finally found something fresh and noble in a political leader or whether it's the same old carnival act that can never be changed.

There is a suspicion out there that Stéphane Dion is a man of honour, a politician of dignity with true character.

True character is the reverse of trying to be all things to all people. It means not seeking others' approval. When, as a political leader, you stop doing that, and just be the essential you, people want some of what you've got, some of that core. You're the magnetic field.

But politics is about selling, reaching out, pandering. And so here was Stéphane Dion in his first week as Liberal leader, already in the grip of the ugly claws of the enterprise. He was faced with a middling controversy over whether he should maintain his dual French citizenship. It was a sensitive issue for him, one that cut to his heart and, in responding, he got testy.

His answer was sound enough, but he couldn't help thinking of the political equation. Well, if maintaining my French citizenship loses me votes, he said, he might have to reconsider. In other words, let's cast aside the principle involved here and make a decision on the basis of politics.

That wasn't the man of honour talking. It was hardly the new politics. It was an example of him looking over his shoulder, seeing the dark shadow of pollsters in pursuit, about to smother the light within.

If Canadians see more of that, they will lump Stéphane Dion with the others and his advantage will disappear. Opponents sense his appeal, his self-contained piety. They see it in the polls and are out to drag him down to their level. No one can remain unsullied in this game, they think. We'll get him.

So here was Stephen Harper in the House of Commons Tuesday, coming at Mr. Dion with a calumny almost in league with Richard Rich's slandering of Thomas More. Your record on the environment, the Prime Minister hollered is “no different than the record of Alfonso Gagliano on accountability.”

The cerebral Quebecker turned his head away in despair as the acolytes on the government benches — forgetting that their own global-warming record is one of shamefaced foot-dragging — bellowed their approval of their PM's odious comparison.

Stephen Harper has an impressive skill set. He had a chance, himself, to bring more honour to governance. But since the opening bell when he elevated a floor-crosser and an unelected senator to his Cabinet, he has shown himself to be a leader whose abiding imperative is political opportunism. His Senate reform, announced yesterday, which would allow voters at last some say in Senate appointments, is a step forward that he need not have framed in the context of political partisanship. His brazen approach in this regard has cost him, as voters, turned off by this kind of politics, have responded with declining approval ratings.

Hence the Dion opening is all the greater. The Leader of the Opposition must find a way to resist the temptation to respond in kind to the cheap attacks and slanders. To succeed, to avoid being dragged down into the brothel, the rules of engagement are many: He must be a champion of principle. He must remain stoic, keeping the level of discourse high and noble, holding to his true character. He must, while letting other caucus members tackle the seamy questions, be seen as frequently as possible with the other tower of integrity in the Liberal thicket, Ken Dryden. Mr. Dion must avoid overexposure and he must avoid the big type of position change — remember John Turner's accepting Pierre Trudeau's list of patronage appointments in 1984 — that can be so damaging to the stature of a leader.

There have been others who have come to the big job unsullied, only to be pulled down into the sludge. They stopped being themselves.

Few have had the opportunity Stéphane Dion now possesses. He can do something greater than score a win for his party. He can bring respect to what Liberal Stan Keyes once fittingly labelled “a whore's game.”

lmartin@globeandmail.com

HOLY SHIT! We Did It!

2006-12-02T11:46:00.000-08:00

Dion DION DIIIIOOON!

I have a smug email to write to Chantal Hebert, and a pie to bake her.

With elation in me, may I just say there are no other ministers from Chretien's government that I respect more than Stephane Dion and Lloyd Axworthy.

I wish Dion the best as he takes off to the battle of the backroom and has to deal with all the creepy crawlies in the halls of power, this time with his finger on the trigger.

It has been over a year since I declared my support for the dark horse in the race and I hope he remembers us little guys when we offer our opinions in the future.

KEEP IT REAL

Now, Dion, get Lloyd to be Foreign Minister again.

Disgusting Tactics

2006-12-02T11:34:00.000-08:00

VijaySappani.com highlights something I really do not like; the use of "ethnic votes" to command politics. Politicians use the tactics too much, as I've posted before.

"More Sikh supporters of Kennedy have moved over to Iggy, this is in addition to the other Indo-Canadians who have moved to Iggy earlier. We are working to hear on a deal on something big with the Tamil delegates, who will hopefully come over to Iggy, addiing another 75 delegates."

It's precisely this management of divisions to control people that I believe the "nation" debate alluded to.

Shame on those who do it.

Leadership Bollocks in the Mashed Potatoes

2006-11-23T09:26:00.000-08:00

Today is a very disappointing day. Ignatieff should really be kicked hard in the emotional balls for his methods, however I oppose violence of all types.

He got the ball rolling, passed it to the separatists, they chucked it to Harper, he scored... with parliament and maybe "soft-nationalists".

I totally agree with Wells' comments today and Dion's comment BCerinToronto highlighted - what are the rest of us, mashed potatoes?

I don't get it, these motions are not intellectual debate, they are politics, to start playing with them means you want to start playing the political game they are.

Dion does not, why then would he support the motion? I suppose for politics. But it bothers me. He better explain it to me.

The argument that Kinsella puts up that Dion cannot say "it doesn't matter, everyone calm down" is not totally valid for me. HOWEVER, it is not "nothing". It is in the long-run, I imagine. Afterall can anyone remember the "Calgary Declaration" wording which Bouchard didn't sign? Not many.

In the short term, with a week before the leadership convention, the optics of Dion's support do not make sense. I think Dion should explain why supporting this resolution does not detract from his stance on federalism. Or, force us to move on to bigger issues. Prove it is nonsense.

Rae sent out a spokesman to say "no comment", as did Kennedy. This does not show leadership. Rae is so full of hot air you'd think he exhaled straight into Ignatieff's ego.

Did I mention Ignatieff is a complete twit? His antics remind me of his support for Iraq's invasion. He thinks he can invade Canada and fix it. I imagine the only articles he read outside of the country over thirty years were the bimonthly ones in the NYT that state "Canada is still cold, the French Canadians want to separate."

Wii: His #1 Choice

2006-11-22T05:54:00.000-08:00

Simpson Touching the 3rd Rail? Most Intriguing.

2006-11-22T01:13:00.000-08:00

Is this as close to openly saying it?

I have to give it to Simpson, he's a professional. I don't think there is a columnist in the national news that I respect more than Simpson. I was surprised to read today's supportive but balanced spout on Dion.

In previous columns, Simpson has been supportive of Dion and made efforts to highlight his campaign. So, given the weight of these taken with today's column, I'd say this is as close as Simpson will come to touching the 3rd rail and outright supporting a Liberal candidate.

In case you can't get to the Globe column, here it is:

The most intriguing candidate in the Liberal race

JEFFREY SIMPSON

From Wednesday's Globe and Mail

Stéphane Dion yesterday released a modest but intriguing policy on modifying pensions for those who work past 65, an intelligent bit of thinking about the future shape of the Canadian work force.

Will any delegates at next week's Liberal convention read it, and be swayed to join him? Probably not, because the leadership contest is not, by now, about policies, but character, judgment and who can win the country.

Mr. Dion has presented the most policy-oriented campaign. He's focused on three critical issues: making Canada much greener, improving its competitiveness and, of course, maintaining national unity. He's also run a very smart strategic campaign on a limited budget, impressing a lot of Liberals who gave him little or no chance to win.

A string of cards, however, must fall his way for him to become leader. It's unlikely they all will fall, but an outside chance exists that they could. In which case, Mr. Dion would have pulled off an astonishing political upset and defied most of the party establishment who favour either Michael Ignatieff or Bob Rae.

The Dion path to victory runs as follows, but be forewarned: The path is complicated.

Mr. Dion finished fourth in the delegate-selection process, about 60 votes behind Gerard Kennedy.

But Mr. Dion slides into third place on the first or second ballot. He does so because he wins more ex-officio support (such as former Treasury Board president Marcel Massé, yesterday) or support from delegates of the four also-rans.

At this point, Mr. Dion's path to victory depends on the deal now being negotiated with the Kennedy camp. The deal is the classic prisoner's dilemma: Whoever is fourth agrees to support whoever is third. So if Mr. Dion is, indeed, third, Mr. Kennedy would go to him. (And vice versa.)

Why might that happen? Partly because of similar policy positions. Partly because too many Kennedy supporters in Ontario cannot abide Mr. Rae, the former NDP premier, and disagree with Mr. Ignatieff's views on Quebec. And partly (largely, perhaps) because if Mr. Kennedy sees himself as an eventual chief, he would want a francophone to be the next leader.

With many Kennedy supporters coming on board, Mr. Dion then jumps ahead of Bob Rae, who was in second place. Mr. Rae then moves to Mr. Dion, who thereby defeats Mr. Ignatieff on the final ballot.

Or, Mr. Ignatieff fades after the second ballot when it becomes clear that he cannot win, so that Mr. Dion faces off against Mr. Rae on the final ballot. Mr. Ignatieff's Quebec supporters largely support Mr. Rae, but his Ontario and Western ones can't abide Mr. Rae and go to Mr. Dion, making the Quebecker a narrow winner.

If, if, if and if. No other candidate has so many imponderables to resolve en route to victory. Yet, it is surprising how many people no longer discount Mr. Dion's admittedly outside chance.

Mr. Dion's strongest asset, and biggest liability, is himself.

He's a man of integrity, courage and intelligence. He demonstrated those characteristics for nine years as a cabinet minister. He survived the grossest abuse in Quebec for his fierce defence of federalism.

Civil servants who worked for him admired his masterly briefs and penetrating questions. He did a fine job on climate change at home and presiding over the United Nations conference on the subject in Montreal.

But, as former cabinet colleagues will attest, Mr. Dion can be dogmatic. He neither suffers fools gladly nor compromises easily. It is significant how few former ministers and MPs he has attracted. He tends to lecture, even hector, those with whom he disagrees. He does not let people down lightly.

He is also from Quebec. His English is good, and getting better, but is not perfect. A lot of Liberals, some of whom would never say so publicly, believe the party has been too long led by Quebeckers.

The movers and shakers of the Quebec Liberal Party, emaciated as it is, don't want Mr. Dion. They think he would be poison in his home province. They are quite likely wrong, but they spread this message outside the province to Mr. Dion's detriment.

With his policy ideas and his ironic positioning as a long-time minister running almost as an outsider against the establishment, Mr. Dion is the most intriguing candidate in the race.

jsimpson@globeandmail.com

Rae 37, Dion 34

2006-11-18T05:49:00.000-08:00

I like these numbers, ladies and gentleman, I believe we have a race!

"Thirty-seven per cent of respondents said they would vote Liberal or consider doing so if Rae was the leader, compared with 34 per cent for Dion, 33 per cent for Ignatieff and 31 per cent for Gerard Kennedy."

-Toronto Star

Of course, if you read the Decima poll's other numbers, Dion should really be making an appointment to get his teeth glossed up.

Garth 1, Lib Leaders 0. Hey, Brison?!

2006-11-16T07:54:00.000-08:00

I was disappointed to not hear a peep out of the Liberal leadership candidates regarding Garth's announcement. While woefully difficult to get elected, independents are popular. People like me like the underdog. With Garth in the spotlight, a candidate could have taken the opportunity to comment on how they would rejuvenate the democratic process.

As I've posted before, free-mouthed MPs make for a responsive government. I still believe in the whip system to get things done, but I believe the UK has it right in allowing backbenchers to speak up.

And with respect to nomination meetings, I think it is funny that the guy with the most street cred is Brison. Unlike Dion, Iggy, and Dryden, he wasn't a celebrity or handed a safe seat. Firstly, he can comment with respect to his stepping-aside for Joe Clark. Then, he can talk about how he wrestled with becoming an independent when Mackay screwed the PC's, and Brison's decision to join the Liberals.

For the Conservatives, they've had a few flights as well, remember the DRC. That was an adventure. And the continuing issue of floor-walking is no doubt related, affecting both parties.

I don't think Garth was too far wrong to say '10 to 20 independents wouldn't be a bad thing. It is a democracy, share the wealth.

Too bad the Liberal leaders didn't think it worthwhile talking about.

Rae 858, Dion 859

2006-11-15T05:06:00.000-08:00

From the Edmonton Sun today:

As of the most recent fundraising reports to Elections Canada, Rae received 858 donations totalling $992,879, for an average donation of $1,157.20.

On the other end of the spectrum, Dion's 859 donors each chipped in an average of $318.50, adding up to $273,611.

Was encouraged to read that.

Canada 19, USA 9

2006-11-14T00:44:00.000-08:00

From CBC's Sunday night interview with Dion, after having to wax on about the 'nation' issue, Dion conveys exactly what the average family is thinking:

"But, what I want to say above all, is it’s sad that we have spent minutes about [the 'nation' question] when we have so few minutes to discuss about the real challenge Canada has to face.

Do you [know] in China there are 350,000 engineers more every year in China paid $14 per hour.
Do you know in Canada from any nation you want to choose who will want to be paid $14 per hour?

We need to compete with them, and if we want to make it a priority to count the number of nations in Canada to put in the constitution I will not be this leader."

He goes on to answer the question of Economy vs Environment:

"The truth is our economy is built on waste and we have enjoyed it for more than a century: a lot of natural resources, a lot of water, a lot of space to dump everything. And we have not been careful and up to now it didn’t hurt us too much. I think now it will hurt us. And we need to learn to be energy efficient. The Liberal government has been good under the circumstances.

Don’t forget that 19% of our GDP in Canada is in the hands of what we call the large funnel emitters the big polluters, 19%. It’s 9% in the United States, so I don’t want these industries to leave the country because if they leave the country we’ll loose jobs. But also they will go in countries where there is no regulation and they will pollute even more and the planet will not be in the better situation. I want them to stay. I want to give them demanding but reasonable regulations that meet targets to reach.

I want to work with them, with the market in creating a carbon market in Canada. It’s the best way to proceed. I want to boost the efficiency of the new sources of energy in Canada, to wake up all the innovation that is dormant in this country, to find the solutions.

Let me talk about Alberta. If we reconcile the incredible economic growth in the very, very worrying environmental threat that you have in Alberta to make something sustainable, if we succeed in Alberta we’ll succeed everywhere in the world after. And we will export these solutions and we will make mega tonnes of money with it. It’s what I want to do!"

Actually, a funny read of the transcript is here:

CBC's Evan Solomon: [...] We didn’t hit out Kyoto targets. so, for all the talk, there was no action. How do people trust that Stéphane Dion is talking action and not just more talk?

Dion: When I became minister of the environment? July 2004.

Solomon: 2004, that’s right.

Dion: So one year and a half.

Solomon: And you released the green paper and yes I know about the Montreal Protocol, but…

Dion: But what?

Solomon: Well, I just ask you: was the Liberal leadership record on the environment, in their decade of leadership or more, was it good or bad?

Cute. It shows that reporters are so use to politicians making promises that huge things can be done properly in a short period of time.

More Oil than Water

2006-11-13T15:18:00.000-08:00

Fort McMurray, the town of tar, black gold, and a beautiful meandering Athabasca river. The oil in the sands naturally gives the river water in some pools a rainbow sheen. Scary that.

The above pictures are of the same general area, around the tar sands outside Fort McMurray. You can guess which photo is predevelopment. The projects are incredible, they don't go deep, they go wide. But heck, the area is huge. The problem is energy.

The planned projects taken together will use more water in the river than actually exists. But as these plans are still being developed, well, it's first man built wins. One feels bad for the guys who built earlier downriver; then again, they're already reeling in the cash, and got in when there was no labour crisis.

Dion was on top of the issue that matters most when he went to Ft McMurray today. The place needs energy to function, to work... to fund the government. Things are happening so fast, or slow if you don't consider what's at stake, and the sums being spent are enormous; a half billion dollars on R&D, per project.

Jeffrey Simpson MUST be on his payroll.

Besides being a subtle supporter of Dion, he wrote a series of articles presenting the situation of anarchy in northern Alberta and the challenges faced.

You can read the articles here:

Neutralizing the oil sands' carbon emissions
http://www.sqwalk.com/blog2006/000857.html

Mighty sources of energy, mighty big threats
http://www.sqwalk.com/blog2006/000856.html

Oil sands vision, red herrings and a sea of platitudes
http://www.sqwalk.com/blog2006/000853.html

Fort McMurray gives new meaning to 'boom town'
http://www.sqwalk.com/blog2006/000854.html

Like Dryden says of guns, nuclear power scares me. It probably scares me less in Dion's hands if he keeps his word on being able to look voters in the eye when he says "I have a plan for the nuclear waste". Importantly, the alternatives to provide the power are just as dirty, if not more, and guarantee some degree of environmental disaster.

The tar sands are a reality, the world demands the oil. Canada must shine in our development of them. Good for Dion for highlighting this.

(Stephane, don't forget to send Jeff some new glasses for Christmas)

Coyne on Dion... Dean to follow

2006-11-11T14:48:00.000-08:00

I look forward to Howard Dean waxing on about Canada for an hour; it will be interesting to see how his speech writers and him present the cross-border relationship, now that he's been DNC Chair for a while (with a nice big win in his hat).

I hope the closing speech of the Liberal convention is made by a triumphant Dion, someone who I hope Dean will acknowledge as a fellow progressive, thoughtful leader who's not affraid of a fight.

Andrew Coyne's Nov.11th National Post column is a nice piece of support for Dion:

The surprising Mr. Dion

Andrew Coyne, National Post
Published: Saturday, November 11, 2006

'For example, you are no doubt aware that France insisted on portioning the island of Mayotte from the Comoros at the time the latter gained independence because the residents of Mayotte unequivocally expressed their desire to maintain their link with France."

Well, it's not quite "we shall fight them on the beaches," but it was unquestionably Stephane Dion's finest hour: the guerre de plume with Lucien Bouchard, Bernard Landry and other separatist luminaries in the tense aftermath of the 1995 referendum, in which the then Intergovernmental Affairs minister publicly demolished the legal and political arguments underpinning their claims of a unilateral right of secession.

It is for that, and the associated Clarity Act, that the owlish Mr. Dion is most renowned. Which makes him a rarity in Canadian politics: a candidate for high office whose rise to prominence was fuelled, not by back-stabbing his colleagues or the patronage of powerful families, but by closely reasoned arguments.

I stress: This is Canadian politics, where nice guys do not even get a decent burial, let alone the chance to finish last. Yet here we are, with three weeks to go until the Liberal leadership vote, and Mr. Dion -- decent, upright, clinically logical -- has as good a chance as any to win.

This was not supposed to happen. "Even Stephane Dion might be in the race" was the exasperated headline in Le Devoir at the news he was considering a run. A dogged adversary, even the nationalists had to concede, and a surprisingly passionate Environment minister, but come on: leader? Yet if Mr. Dion has exceeded expectations in this campaign, it has not been for parading his virtue, as the principled intellectual who floats above the fray. He has not campaigned as an "anti-politician," promising to "do politics differently" and otherwise advertising his disdain for his chosen profession. He has simply demonstrated a practical mastery of it.

"When Stephane Dion spoke, his [Cabinet] colleagues put down their coffees, stopped signing correspondence and listened attentively," Eddie Goldenberg, Jean Chretien's lifetime factotum, writes in his just-released memoirs. "He had learned a lot about government, a lot about politics, and a lot about how to get things done." This sounds right to me. Even as a political scientist, Mr. Dion's work had tended more to the applied than the theoretical. In office, his studies continued, only with himself as the research subject. He was learning how to do politics -- not differently, but better.

Or more precisely, how to do politics, while remaining true to himself. Other academics-turned-politician have not managed the transition well. Either they develop into barking partisans, in the mould of John McCallum or Irwin Cotler, self-consciously parodying themselves in the hope that everyone will get that they are playing a game. Or, like Michael Ignatieff, they shrink before our very eyes. The question Mr. Dion faced was how to advance as a politician without turning into a prancing buffoon: how to succeed in politics without becoming really trying.

The way to square that circle was not to play the game of politics, but to learn the art of being politic -- politics, in the best sense of the word. In Summer Meditations, written after he had been president of Czechoslovakia for a year, Vaclav Havel wrote of how surprisingly easy he had found the adjustment from dissident writer to practical politician -- he, who had dedicated his life to "living in truth." All it took, he wrote, was "taste." Or that's the word his translator used. Another word is "tact."

These are the skills Mr. Dion has acquired: of choosing your words carefully; of framing issues to your advantage; of showing different sides of yourself at different times, as events dictate and circumstances allow. Nothing in that requires one to be insincere or inauthentic -- you can be tactful without being guileful -- and so it is that he almost never rings a false note. Even when he boasts -- for example, that he has never had to retract or clarify a statement -- it is matter-of-fact, straightforward, the kind of thing you say in a job interview when asked to name your strengths.

The only question was whether Mr. Dion could attack, when the occasion demanded. We have seen that he can. What was it he said about Bob Rae's tenure as premier? That he had the worst record in the western world? That his disastrous experiment in deficit spending amounted to "giving Monopoly money to the people"? Harsh, yes. But unfair? No.

If there is a politician he resembles, it is Stephen Harper. I think Harper has perhaps the broader strategic vision, and a greater capacity for ruthlessness. But Dion is at least a match in analytical rigor, and far more disciplined. Both men get tagged with that lazy journalistic cliche, that they lack "charisma." But they are the furthest thing, either of them, from the cautious timeservers that would suggest. Both are risk-takers, aggressive in combat, unafraid of being unpopular, determined to prevail. The best minds of their parties, it would be a treat to watch them debate.

Anybody-But-Iggy Results

2006-10-27T03:32:00.000-07:00

As no new votes seem to be coming in, here are the results.

Out of 129 votes:

The Winner: Dion 38%

Kennedy 24%
Rae 22%
Hall Findlay 6%
Volpe 3%
Dryden 3%
Brison 3%

I think you can still see the results Here.

Anybody-But-Ignatieff Web POLL! (no booing allowed)

2006-10-23T08:42:00.000-07:00

Poll now closed. Thanks for playing!

The True D'eau

2006-10-20T07:20:00.000-07:00

For much of my late teens, I loved The Economist. We divorced over the newspaper's dishonest support for the pre-emptive destruction of civil society in Iraq. Nevertheless, their worldwide coverage always has me over for one-night stands.

This week's article on Ignatieff is fair enough. One part really gets my goat.

Ignatieff = Nouveau Trudeau.

Despite the packaging, the analogy doesn't fit, even the article slyly points this out:

"For all his youthful globetrotting, Trudeau spent his adult life working in Canada, and served as a member of parliament and a cabinet minister. He may have been little known outside the universities of Quebec when he went for the top job, but he was not inexperienced."

The obvious contrast makes me wonder how others decided that Ignatieff is as close to the Liberal Jesus as a mere mortal can be.

True, Ignatieff is getting a baptism of blood right now but that is for another day's religious analogy.

It seems obvious that Stephane Dion most closely follows the path of Trudeau righteousness. Perhaps he is the second-coming of Christ? (Dion...Dieuon?)

Oops, I mean:

Oops, I mean:

PS - With regards language, while Trudeau's english was lovely, I prefer Dion's stilted but intelligent phrases to Landry's posh yet biggotted King's english.

Parliamentary Parallels, More Please! Go Garth!

2006-10-19T03:24:00.000-07:00

It always strikes me as funny how the British media don't realize they have a crystal ball to stare into on this side of the Atlantic. How an "unpopular" PM's heir-apparent and finance minister, Gordon Brown, will do once he is annointed leader/PM is no doubt hidden in the tea leaves of Paul Martin's story. Anyway, that's for them to figure out - I feel bad for New Labour's ignorance.

(I prefer the Lib Dems of the UK; how could one not love a progressive party with a leader named Sir Menzies Campbell. I think he's got a trademark on it.)

THE DIVIDE, now.

MPs in Britain are free of chains. We need more MPs that are able to speak freely here. Labour in the UK has held onto power by not muzzling it's MPs. For example, the Iraq war is hugely unpopular and by allowing their own MPs to show their opposition and in fact argue directly against Cabinet, the government has not polarized itself as the pro-Iraq party. People will vote for them knowing that their MP might stand up to government nonsense.

Indeed, at times the party has had to worry about MP "rebellions" when passing tough legislation but in the end, "miraculously" it passes. The government is weakened by the rebellions but more so the inner cabinet and PM. There's no problem with that. You can replace those guys when you need to without losing office.

Renewal in fact may help keep everyone else in office.

So, to Garth Turner, I say congrats on not napping with rats quietly. Sorry you're homeless.

With regards to joining the Greens, on your blog you call them "anti-conservative" - note the small 'c'. I'm not sure how you would justify this. It would make more sense to join the Libs for the sole purpose of getting a chance to ask questions in QP. It makes the Libs smug too, though that's probably not worth raising the issue of floor-crossing again.

Reading this from Garth's blog reminded me never to go into politics:

"Even before the caucus room doors opened at noon to let the world know my fate, the House of Commons tech guys told me they were under orders from the party to unplug my office computers. I asked what was going on, and was told they had written orders earlier that day from the Conservative Whip to shut me down and reconfigure."

The Harper boys at work in caucus:

Liberals and Poppies are red. Dion saw red!

2006-10-15T12:44:00.000-07:00

The Winners:

Round 1: Martha. Obviously her issue, but she took the moment to shine.

Round 2: Dion, only because he threw Rae on the defensive

Round 3: Kennedy, good focus, took it through clarity. Ignatieff was dull. Martha almost called Kennedy a winner herself.

Round 4: Dion is on fire in the debate section, you'd think his kid was taken hostage! "Do you think it's easy!" I think he might have tore Iggy a new one.

Round 5: Brison took it away with facts and heart. Kennedy looks dashing, nice voice; he was hogging time on it though. Volpe is nonsense.

Round 6 (Iggy's tough one - foreign policy time!): Findlay did it - "Gentleman!". "He has no strategy on poppy!"-MI... No one said anything in their speeches. The debate, Findlay threw Ig on the defensive but he pulled it out of the fire, no not really. It's all about poppy. Rae got boo'ed that's bad. Oooo, Ig gave Rae his opening to bite about Qa'na! Ig had it coming!

Round 7: Dryden,"I hate guns." He spoke to me. Dion was good to point out they were all on the same side and opened it to ideas. Dion got the troops going. Brison was dull, bit mean of Dion to make fun of him. I think Dryden was right to speak of his philosphy on this.

Round 8: Kennedy. Rae was flat. None of them said anything. I don't even know what they are talking about.

Closings:

Findlay - Lovely pashmina. She's re-branding herself as Minister of Women, i.e. making herself a product to sell to another candidate. I like her.

Dion - "I have never had to apologize for any of my words or actions." "I am proud to be a Liberal and it did not take a leadership race to say so." Good camera shot as he waved and walked off stage.

Kennedy - He sounds so cheesy. I feel he's coach in an American sports movie.

Dryden - I could feel his heart on my lap. He is welcome for dinner anytime. I loved Dryden's closing - brilliant.

Brison - Best opening! He re-branded himself as Minister of Finance, i.e. making himself a product to sell, but not a great sell. Good opening, mediocre speech.

Ignatieff - I don't think people believe him. What a suck up to "dOLton"... I thought it was "dALton". Seems like such a face for hire.

Volpe - Nice opening, more personal than Ignatieff. Ouch, no he didn't!? Yes he did! He totally burned Ignatieff. Good closing.

Rae - Did he actually have a speech? First, he was snide about Ig not being here long. Second, he joked about helping Liberals get elected as part of NDP. Third, odd self-ambition analogy to Mat Sundin. Rae wants to lead from the centre. Whoop-t-doo. Oh, he through in unity as an issue. Nice use of Laurier, but a bit over-dramatic.

(I don't like the stage-walking microphones; like on Oprah.)

SUMMARY:

Ignatieff came across as out of touch.
Dion can't make a speech but can eat anyone alive. When he believes what he is saying, watchout!
Brison is clear-headed.
Kennedy is very photogenic and while he has stuff to say but he lacked grand stature.
Volpe stinks, he communicates like a creep.
Rae is so smug, I don't like him and I could see him getting elected but I'm not impressed.

It seemed easy to score points with the crowd by compliment Chretien and Martin governments. Plus, the boys all wore the same suits.

My choice for cabinet: Dion, Findlay, Kennedy, Brison and Dryden. That would be a good team.

Iraqi Death Toll

2006-10-11T11:41:00.000-07:00

The Lancet article funded by MIT and Johns Hopkins is scary. Here is a link to the actual full article, it's very readable:
Mortality after the 2003 invasion of Iraq: a cross-sectional cluster sample survey

Start

2006-10-07T06:08:00.000-07:00

Just typing this to be able to comment on another blog, but since I'm at it...

Stephane Dion is a great leader. As an independent former-red tory-type from the Westcoast, I cannot wait to vote for his program in a federal election.

How's that for my blogging start?