Top 10 National/International Stories of 2011

10. The End of the Iraq War

After nearly nine years, the Iraq War ended with a whimper last week with the last U.S. combat troops crossing back over the border to Kuwait. The violence that has erupted since was more or less prophesied, but really, what else could have possibly happened? Would staying another year, another two years, been enough to change the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people? Doubtful. As for the American people, the majority of whom felt that war with Iraq was not just necessary, but the very right of the U.S. in aid of guarding their own security, they had more or less abandoned the support of the fight, especially in the wake of the ongoing economic crisis in America. In fact, the only chicken hawks still walking upright are most of the Republican nominees for President, the majority of whom feel that President Barack Obama was too premature in his withdrawal, and are now looking at a confrontation with Iran as inevitable. Hopefully, the appetite of the American people is for diplomacy over military conflict.

9. Quebec Enjoys an Orange Crush

There were numerous fascinating and surprising stories to come out of this spring's Federal Election, but few were more surprising, or fascinating, than Quebec's rejection of the Bloc Quebecois, and its nearly, wholehearted embrace of the NDP. In total, the Jack Layton-led NDP picked up 59 seats in the Province of Quebec, which was several times more than the Conservatives, the Liberals and the Bloc combined. As a side-story, the flip side of the "Orange Crush" was the decimation of the Bloc, who lost 43 seats in Parliament and losing official party status in the process. The real question going in to 2012 is will the NDP be able to hold on to its foothold in Quebec, and whether or not the NDP and its eventual new leader will be able to capitalize on their popularity with the Quebecois, and translate that support nationally.

Layton's Letter to Canadians

As you may have heard, Jack Layton penned a letter to his fellow countrymen and women shortly before his death. The text of that letter was sent around in an e-mail earlier this afternoon by Guelph MPP candidate James Gordon.

A letter to Canadians from the Honourable Jack Layton

August 20, 2011

Toronto, Ontario

Dear Friends,

Tens of thousands of Canadians have written to me in recent weeks to wish me well. I want to thank each and every one of you for your thoughtful, inspiring and often beautiful notes, cards and gifts. Your spirit and love have lit up my home, my spirit, and my determination.

Unfortunately my treatment has not worked out as I hoped. So I am giving this letter to my partner Olivia to share with you in the circumstance in which I cannot continue.

I recommend that Hull-Aylmer MP Nycole Turmel continue her work as our interim leader until a permanent successor is elected.

I recommend the party hold a leadership vote as early as possible in the New Year, on approximately the same timelines as in 2003, so that our new leader has ample time to reconsolidate our team, renew our party and our program, and move forward towards the next election.

A few additional thoughts:

To other Canadians who are on journeys to defeat cancer and to live their lives, I say this: please don’t be discouraged that my own journey hasn’t gone as well as I had hoped. You must not lose your own hope. Treatments and therapies have never been better in the face of this disease. You have every reason to be optimistic, determined, and focused on the future. My only other advice is to cherish every moment with those you love at every stage of your journey, as I have done this summer.

To the members of my party: we’ve done remarkable things together in the past eight years. It has been a privilege to lead the New Democratic Party and I am most grateful for your confidence, your support, and the endless hours of volunteer commitment you have devoted to our cause. There will be those who will try to persuade you to give up our cause. But that cause is much bigger than any one leader. Answer them by recommitting with energy and determination to our work. Remember our proud history of social justice, universal health care, public pensions and making sure no one is left behind. Let’s continue to move forward. Let’s demonstrate in everything we do in the four years before us that we are ready to serve our beloved Canada as its next government.

To the members of our parliamentary caucus: I have been privileged to work with each and every one of you. Our caucus meetings were always the highlight of my week. It has been my role to ask a great deal from you. And now I am going to do so again. Canadians will be closely watching you in the months to come. Colleagues, I know you will make the tens of thousands of members of our party proud of you by demonstrating the same seamless teamwork and solidarity that has earned us the confidence of millions of Canadians in the recent election.

To my fellow Quebecers: On May 2nd, you made an historic decision. You decided that the way to replace Canada’s Conservative federal government with something better was by working together in partnership with progressive-minded Canadians across the country. You made the right decision then; it is still the right decision today; and it will be the right decision right through to the next election, when we will succeed, together. You have elected a superb team of New Democrats to Parliament. They are going to be doing remarkable things in the years to come to make this country better for us all.

To young Canadians: All my life I have worked to make things better. Hope and optimism have defined my political career, and I continue to be hopeful and optimistic about Canada. Young people have been a great source of inspiration for me. I have met and talked with so many of you about your dreams, your frustrations, and your ideas for change. More and more, you are engaging in politics because you want to change things for the better. Many of you have placed your trust in our party. As my time in political life draws to a close I want to share with you my belief in your power to change this country and this world. There are great challenges before you, from the overwhelming nature of climate change to the unfairness of an economy that excludes so many from our collective wealth, and the changes necessary to build a more inclusive and generous Canada. I believe in you. Your energy, your vision, your passion for justice are exactly what this country needs today. You need to be at the heart of our economy, our political life, and our plans for the present and the future.

And finally, to all Canadians: Canada is a great country, one of the hopes of the world. We can be a better one – a country of greater equality, justice, and opportunity. We can build a prosperous economy and a society that shares its benefits more fairly. We can look after our seniors. We can offer better futures for our children. We can do our part to save the world’s environment. We can restore our good name in the world. We can do all of these things because we finally have a party system at the national level where there are real choices; where your vote matters; where working for change can actually bring about change. In the months and years to come, New Democrats will put a compelling new alternative to you. My colleagues in our party are an impressive, committed team. Give them a careful hearing; consider the alternatives; and consider that we can be a better, fairer, more equal country by working together. Don’t let them tell you it can’t be done.

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we’ll change the world.

All my very best,

Jack Layton

Additionally, our local MP Frank Valeriote has a condolence book available for residents to sign in his constituency office on Cork Street. The book will then be given to Layton's family. 

Jack Layton: In Remembrance

NDP, and Official Opposition Leader Jack Layton died this morning at the age of 61 in the midst of fighting his second bout with cancer. The news broke as I was wrapping up on CFRU's Beyond the Ballot Box show, and admittedly it ended our discussion about the upcoming provincial election on a rather dour note. That's not a knock, but a note about the impact and how the news landed.

In other words it was surprising. The man was a lion, and in the last election he campaigned hard and led his party to a well-earned victory despite being a cancer survivor, and walking the trail with a cane after having hip surgery. How could Layton be fell by something as common as death? But still, Layton dies peacefully in his home this morning. 

It's hard to know what to write here, especially since a lot has already been said when last month Layton took a leave of absence to battle cancer once more. But I did like what interem Liberal leader Bob Rae had to say this morning: "It's a loss for the country because he was a political guy who believed strongly in politics and who had a lot of resilience and a lot of guts."

Very true. You may not have agreed with the NDP platform or with Layton politically, but you had to admit that he had passion and that he was a persuasive campaigner. Interviewing Layton when he came her in 2008 to kick off Tom King's campaign was one of the first big political interviews I had done. I had the opportunity to interview him one other time, and heard him speak in person on numerous other occasions and it was hard not to get a feeling of man possessed with great idealism and conviction. And it took a while, but he made that translate from the party faithful and turned it into an Orange Revolution last May. The pity is that he won't be able to see what fruit will be harvest from all those years in the field. 

As a political dynamo on the national stage, Jack Layton's presence will sorely be missed in the days and years ahead.

Summer Editorial Series – The Jack’s Creek Covered Bridge

The news last week that Jack Layton was taking some time off to fight another bout of cancer cams as shocking to a lot of politicos cross-country. This man is a lion. He defeated the strain of pancreatic cancer he was diagnosed with in February, had hip surgery in March, and then got out on the campaign trail in April, leading his party to its biggest victory ever in May. You know the old marine motto about doing more before 6 am… Well Jack Layton may not be a marine, but by any standard, that is a pretty eventful spring.

Now, I’m not a doctor, but anecdotally-speaking some of Layton’s recent public appearances have not painted the picture of a man who’s got a full health bar, to use video game parlance. Of course the stress of a major illness and a cross-country Federal campaign doesn’t do much for one’s stress levels, but all-in-all Layton’s physical struggles seems to have not damped even slightly the man’s vigour and commitment to leading his party to heights never before thought possible. At least until now that is.

Now it’s not all bad news. Layton intends to be back in time for the recommencement of Parliament in mid-September. In the meantime, Hull-Aylmer MP Nycole Turmelhas was Layton’s personal selection for interim leader. She’s a rookie MP and part of the NDP’s “Orange Revolution” during May’s Federal Election, and on the face of things, politically, that makes a lot of sense. But the selection of Turmelhas, no matter how temporary, is odd because she leap-frogged over deputy leaders Thomas Mulcair and Libby Davies, as well as party stalwart Paul Dewar. And all things being equal, the NDP hasn’t had a lot of luck when one of their freshmen class is thrust into the spotlight.

And make no mistake, leadership matters. Could the NDP have made the gains they have without Layton at the helm? Possibly, but not probably. Layton’s miracle with the NDP is that he was able to play on even-keel with the two traditional main party leaders, and in recent years, even best them in national debates. He wasn’t whiny, he wasn’t resentful, and he came across as completely forthright, confident and ready to serve. Cogito ergo sum. Despite his small caucus he believed he was a national leader, therefore he was a national leader.

By comparison, think of the former leader of the Ontario wing of the NDP, Howard Hampton. I remember exactly two things that Hampton did in the 2003 Provincial campaign: 1) he tried nailing Jell-O to a wall, and 2) he had several huge dollar sign sacs on a flat bed truck be driven down a Toronto street as a visual aid during a speech. I can’t remember what either of those things were supposed to symbolize, but I remember that Hampton did them, and along with then-Premier Ernie Eves’ “reptilian kitten eater” comment, they probably painted Dalton McGuinty as the sanest choice for Queen’s Park.

Sadly appearances matter, and in the case of Jack Layton the appearance was of a man working hard to get your vote. Since his first election as party leader in 2004, Layton has led the NDP to posting a bigger share of the popular vote, even if their total number of seats didn’t increase; his predecessor Alexa McDonough didn’t post better than 11.05 per cent in the 1997 election. It’s why commentators were hesitant to call Layton’s ascension to Official Opposition leader an overnight success. It was a victory eight years in the making, and if the intention was to form an NDP government then they’re one more move shy of their goals.

But if Layton’s health continues to be an issue, then a question of more permanent leadership will have to be addressed, and like of all the major Federal parties, no clear successor is obvious. And the NDP is painted in a tight corner too. While the tenor of Quebecers and their new found allegiance to the NDP may not be fly-by-night, they’ll want to see progress on what the Orange can do for them. At the same time though, none of the new 59 NDP MPs from Quebec are probably leadership ready, though do the residents of “La belle province” have expectations that way? I doubt it.

Either way, Layton will be a tough act to follow in Ottawa. Not that we want anyone to follow him yet. He’s worked too long and hard to get that seat directly across from the Prime Minister, and I have a feeling that even Stephen Harper is relishing a real challenge in the Commons. Get well soon, Jack.

Layton Steps Down for Health Issues; Rookie MP is Interim Leader

In a bit of surprising news today, NDP and Official Opposition Leader Jack Layton, is stepping down from his position temporarily in order to combat a new bout of cancer. Hull-Aylmer MP Nycole Turmelhas has been named temporary leader, as its expected that Layton will return to the chair opposite Prime Minister Stephen Harper when Parliament sits in the fall. 

The ascension of Turmelhas as leader comes as a surprise because she is a rookie MP, and part of the vaunted "Orange Revolution" in Quebec during the last Federal Election. She leap-frogged over deputy leaders Thomas Mulcair and Libby Davies, as well as party stalwart Paul Dewar, to get the job, which many see as a concession to Quebec's role in boosting the NDP to Official Opposition status. Turmelhas herself though has national experience. She was a union leader for three decades, as well as serving as national president of the Public Service Alliance of Canada. 

Layton himself seems intent on returning to his job in the fall, and the selection of Turmelhas over more experience MPs seems to reinforce this. However, this is Layton's second bought of cancer this year after being diagnosed with prostate cancer last February. The NDP caucus will meet Wednesday to make their own recommendation to the party's federal council, which will make the final decision.

Source via CTV

The Shifted Ground

It's funny how an election that started with a whimper, ended up shaking the Canadian political landscape in a way not seen in nearly 20 years. In one foul swoop, the Harper Conservatives secured their first majority, the Liberals were near fatally wounded, the Green Party finally landed on the board while the Bloc Quebecois was nearly swept off it, and the NDP had their single greatest election victory ever, not only hitting triple digit seats but became the Official Opposition for the first time too. If you look at the CBC's election map, you'd swear Canada were the new Edmonton Oilers logo (and perhaps given the winner of last night's election, the allegory is apropos).

Now the question is, what will these results mean for the next four years to Canada, and will the political map keep this new order or is it a one-time glitch. Let's break it down:

Conservatives - 167 seats - 39.62 per cent of the popular vote

The third time's the charm. Stephen Harper has secured his majority, but a lot of the problems that plagued him and his party remain. There's the small matter that despite winning a majority of seats, the Conservatives only gained two points in popularity. It makes a case for some serious voting splitting on the left from one end of this nation to the next to the next, as the combined NDP-Liberal vote won nearly 50 per cent of the popular vote. Three out of five people voted for someone that doesn't make up the government. (Incidentally, I think every election now makes a stronger case for electoral reform, but that's another discussion entirely.)

While basking in victory, the morning after analysis might offer some strong sobriety. There were licks taken in this election about the party's secretiveness and limited availability, the fact that they are just a little less of a non-entity in Quebec than the Bloc, and the little change in popular support despite a majority. Given these conditions, can the frequently cited "radical right" agenda people fear about Harper be enacted to its fullest? And the problem remains that Harper still has no obvious successor as the Conservatives are as much a cult of personality as they are a political party.

The fact of the matter is that the people voted for an end to elections every two years. Come what may, we know that the next election is four years away now, and for some people, that's all the piece of mind they need in Harper's Canada. (Or at least for 40 per cent of the 61.4 per cent of eligible votes that rolled out to the polls yesterday.)

NDP - 102 seats - 30.62 per cent of the popular vote

It was a wild night for Jack Layton. Thanks to big, huge gains in Quebec the NDP leader finally broke through and became the voice of Canada's left, and the official Opposition Party. A good question is, what happens now? A better question is, how did it happen in the first place?

While no one can doubt that there was a sudden and complete shift to the NDP in Quebec, I have yet to hear a complete analysis of the reason or reasons. Layton's debate performance? Well, it was a delayed reaction if that's the case. Some talk show appearance? Well then, this must have been the most politically important talk show since David Frost interviewed Richard Nixon. The real picture, again, I think comes down to fatigue. The average Quebecer, seeing no progress in the representation of French issues by voting Bloc, and being reticent about supporting the Liberals again - or heaven forbid, the Conservatives - were looking for a new direction, and by process of elimination, that choice was the NDP.

From here on, one of two things can happen. The next four years could see an NDP building strength and support, gaining the confidence of more and more Canadians and poised for a breakthrough to, at the very least, a minority government situation of their own. But Quebec is the X factor. Will French Canadians be satisfied by NDP representation? Do the NDP know what to do/have what it takes to keep French Canadians in the supporters column? It should be interesting to see what the new Quebecois influence will have on the New Democrats.

Liberals - 34 seats - 18.91 per cent of the popular vote

Ouch. There are no words. This is easily the most crushing defeat of a major Canadian political party since the PC's in 1993 (with one exception discussed next). Michael Ignatieff, once the promise of a new generation of Liberal power, is defeated on almost every level, including personal, losing his own riding of Etobicoke-Lakeshore by nearly 3,000 votes to Tory Bernard Trottier. The case of Ignatieff is that once again the candidate that looked good on paper did not translate into ballots checked. The Liberals were too soft in response to Conservative attack ads and just couldn't get past the assault. A prime minister and party censured for the first time ever by Parliament, accusations of secret keeping and other shadowy activities, and an economy still in a relative shambles, and the Liberals still weren't able to capitalize. Where was the disconnect?

The answer to that is, in part, because of Ignatieff's charisma gap, but it's not all on him. The NDP surge was too strong, and the momentum was with Jack Layton. The Liberals couldn't make the point to vote strategically, and if they could, people were already starting to think of the NDP as the strategic option. Where does the Liberal Party go from here? Well, not gently into that good night. There may be an opportunity for rebound, if only because the party still has nearly three dozen MPs in the House, and a storied history that goes back to Confederation. The gap may still be too wide for official merger talks with the NDP, and Layton may not think he needs the help, but there is the possibility, and likely probability, for more collusion. As for leader replacements, that's going to be tough; tough to see who might step in, tough to see how anyone can turn the boat around. But if the Liberals could say one thing this morning, it's that they aren't the...

Bloc Quebecois - 4 seats - 6.05 per cent of the popular vote 

Considering the enormous personal popularity of Gilles Duceppe, it seems that Quebecers left the party like rats fleeing a sinking ship. I don't think anyone called this reversal of fortune for the Bloc, even me. As I pointed out the day before the election, the Bloc surges and then it ebbs. But in this case, it's like the tide went out completely, and the question is will it ever return? Can the Bloc come back from this defeat? It depends on how you answer this question: Is separation still important to a significant percentage of French Canadians? If the answer is yes, then the Bloc will be back in some form in 2015; if not, then this might be the last we've seen of the Separatist Party. 

Green Party - 1 seat - 3.9 per cent of the popular vote

Elizabeth May finally won her seat in the House of Commons, but the cost seems to be a loss of about half of the Green Party's popular support over the 2008 election (in '08, that was 6.8 per cent). Really, the Greens were as much a victim of the NDP's surge as the Liberals, but that didn't stop May from making history by becoming the Green MP for Saanich-Gulf Islands. (And not only that, but she defeated Conservative incumbent Gary Lunn by over 7,000 votes.) The question is what happens now? Can May be effectual in the House as a party of one? Where do the Green Party's fortunes go from here? One thing's for sure, no one will be able to block May from a leaders' debate again.

But no matter what happens next, this is what Canada looks like today. Who would have guessed that 40 days ago...?

...And Now For My Final Thought

It's been a weird, wacky ride this election. Despite initial guffaws over the pointlessness of this poll, cynacism gave way to one of the most vibrant and surprising campaigns in recent memory. A cocksure Conservative Party was expecting to strut to an easy majority, only to find their odds upset by a surging opposition. What's more surprising is that opposition party turned out to be the NDP. 

Meanwhile, the Liberal Party primed for a comeback, seemed stuck in neutral, as Michael Ignatieff's first campaign as Liberal Party leader was unable to capitalize on the Conservatives vulnerabilities in the same way that the NDP's Jack Layton has. Suddenly, the golden boy, world-traveling professor that was going to return the Grits to their former glory looks more like a golden goose. Ignatieff says he wants to stay on as Liberal leader, but if the party can't even maintain its current status as the Official Opposition, will he even have that option?

But there maybe more immediate concerns off the top. If the NDP gets enough seats to become the Official Opposition, will an NDP-Liberal coalition come about? It seems unlikely that should the Conservatives return to Parliament with a minority that anyone on the opposition bench is going to be satisfied with the status quo. And despite refusing to answer questions about it yesterday, Stephen Harper and his inner circle have got to be sweating the possibilities.

Since we're talking about it, what happens to Harper if he returns to Parliament with his third consecutive minority? What happens to him if a coalition NDP-Liberal government takes power instead? I think that either way, tomorrow might be Stephen Harper's last election as leader of the Conservative Party of Canada.

As for the Bloc Quebecois, they're being hurt the most by the NDP surge, but the Green Party must be smarting too for that matter. The Bloc has taken hits before and always come back when Quebecers tire of the shenanigans of the main parties. The Greens, however, are in a much more precarious position. Moving ever closer to the breakthrough they need to get a Green in Parliament, the last thing they needed was one of the main parties to get the wind, and the press, at their backs. I find it unlikely that the Greens will win a seat in this election, but I thought for sure they would win one last time. So maybe I'll be wrong. 

No matter what your opinion is, please make sure that you get out their and vote tomorrow. Remember your voter card AND a piece of I.D. with your name, address and photo on it, or two pieces of I.D. with a combination of those three. I'll be working at the polling station at St. Francis of Assisi as an Information Officer so if you're coming to vote there, say hi. Afterward, I'm scheduled to do a bit of punditry on the CFRU Guelph Election Radio show.

Hopefully, tomorrow's polls will run smoothly and civilly, and we can avoid any Kent Brockman-like overreaction or hyperbole. I'll be back Tuesday with post-game analysis.
 

Coalition of the Willing

Someone on my Facebook - someone of the Conservative persuasion - posited that Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff should be asked in tomorrow night's English-language Leaders Debate about why he wants to ruin Canada by having a political threesome with Jack Layton and Gilles Duceppe. The rhetorical flourish of that question is mine, but the intent is the same: A vote for the opposition parties is a vote for some kind of Voltron government that's both unlawful and unwanted.

Except that it isn't. Not only is a coalition government perfectly legal and constitutional, but I think it's what Canadians have been asking for the last seven years. If you just scoffed, I don't blame you. A Globe and Mail/CTV poll from last week showed that 49 per cent of respondents had a negative or somewhat negative reaction to the idea of a coalition government; 40 per cent had the opposite reaction and the rest was made up people who were uncertain.

While a poll can certainly be scientific, I have a much more scientific polling option: the results from the last election. I have put to a couple of the candidates, namely Bobbi Stewart and Frank Valeriote, their point of view about a coalition. My thesis is that the way Canadians have been voting in the last three elections (and seemingly for the fourth) it seems that what they're looking for is a coalition. If you think about it, the parties are more or less breaking down regionally. Tories cover the Prairies and the West, as well as southwestern Ontario; Liberals take urban and suburban areas in southern Ontario, Montreal, Vancouver, Winnipeg and the Maritimes; the NDP in denser urban areas, coastal B.C., urban Manitoba, northern Ontario and parts of the Maritimes; and the Bloc takes most of Quebec outside Montreal and Quebec City.

So what's wrong with this picture? Well, you'll notice that aside from the Bloc Quebecois, there's not a regional area in this country where the parties don't have influence (and some would argue, especially in the coalition debate, that the Bloc's influence does extend beyond the Quebec border). Even the northern territories are evenly split with one riding each for the Conservatives, the Liberals and the NDP.

To me, this suggests that the country is rather schizophrenic about where it wants to be. They like the idea of economy-centric priorities and tax cuts, but there still remains that concern of an un-Canadian social policy that many think lingers immediately behind a Conservative majority in the House. People like the Liberals fine, but without a strong voice and constitution they come across as U.S. Democrats: a party of big ideas incapable of executing. Everyone loves the NDP, but the fiscally-conservative half of our collective brains remember how NDP governments provincially have chased a road of good intentions down a financial rabbit hole.

Still, what if we took the qualities we liked from all the major parties, and combined them into some kind of super-government. On the campaign trail, Prime Minister Stephen Harper paints a picture of disorganization and instability. On the stump, he's been equating the need to give his party a majority as a matter of national security. “These series of minority Parliaments, in my judgment, is becoming a dangerous game for this country," Harper said in Guelph last week. "This election needs to put an end to that political uncertainty and focus on Canada’s security.”

Harper can make an argument for that, although I think its fundamentally wrong. A majority government unchecked could just as well be a force for instability, and the truth of the matter is that the current election began with the government's refusal to be completely open and honest with the Opposition - even in a minority situation. The more troubling aspect, to my mind, is the inference that a coalition is illegal or that somehow it constiutes a conspiracy to usurp the will of the Canadian electorate.

In Guelph, Harper asked: why Ignatieff was forcing an election. “We all know why," he told the crowd, "because Mr Ignatieff doesn’t think he needs to win this election. He thinks he needs to just hold us to another minority government and after the election, he can make a deal with the NDP and the Bloc Quebecois even if he lost the election.”

Leaving aside Ignatieff's election day proclamation that he had no intention of forming a coalition government, he didn't have to go to an election to get it. A vote of non-confidence doesn't mean an automatic election, it means that the party that forms the government no longer has the confidence of the majority of Parliament. The Governor-General can turn to the opposition parties and ask them if they can see clear to form a government of their own before dropping the writ.

As for Ignatieff and his coalition promises, I can say that from my point of view it's short-sighted. In 2008, the Conservatives formed the Government of Canada in spite of the fact that 62.4 per cent of those that voted, voted for any party or candidate besides Conservatives. Many of those coveted victories by the Conservatives in southern Ontario were won by razor thin margins, and not because the Conservatives were so successful in converting voters, but because a lot of Liberal voters stood at home. I understand that from Ignatieff's point of view, he can't kick off his campaign from the position of "here's something I can do if I don't win," essentially a defeatist position, but by discounting it completely, he opens himself up to the very charges Conservatives are levying against him if he ends up going through with it after Election Day.

To discount a coalition for any reason is simplistic. It fosters a zero sum approach to politics I find distasteful, and it further fosters partisanship and general extra-party negativity. An election victory does not mean universal acceptance of your agenda, especially in a minority situation. But compromise is seen by some politicians as weakness, and if you're weak you can't lead. This is the spirit of Harper's march against the coalition; a campaign against compromise, participation, and engagement.

“You are here for one thing," he told the gathered Guelphites last week. "You are here for Canada. And your fellow citizens here in Guelph and throughout southwestern Ontario believe deeply in this country, and they are not going to choose members of Parliament who are going to sign on to Mr. Ignatieff’s reckless idea that he can lose the election and then run the country with the NDP and the Bloc Quebecois.” 

Well, if the polls show anything right now it's that they are, and they might. "Reckless" though it may be, if the election were held tomorrow, it'd be another minority Parliament that sits. And maybe that's how Canadians want it. Ultimately though, it seems silly to base your campaign on hypotheticals when there are much more tangible issues on your agenda, like accusations that all that money on the G8 was misspent, or that political staffers in Ottawa may come off financially better secure if their party loses than if they win.

Really? Again? Elizabeth May and the Debate

I can't believe I have to write this again. The consortium of Canadian broadcasters that set the ground rules for the Federal debate have decided once again, in their nowhere near infinite wisdom, that Green Party leader Elizabeth May will not be part of the National Leaders' debate. Really? We've got to do this again? Here's how it will go: the people will complain, the other party leaders will say that they want to have May in the debate, the broadcasters will relent, and May will debate. Why? Because she was in the debate last time!!! What's changed? She can debate last election, but not in this one. They tried her out one time, and decided that May wasn't appealing to the TV audience? That's right, Elizabeth May is the Cousin Oliver of Federal politics, I guess.

Well, in more interesting debate news, Stephen Harper said yesterday that he was willing to include Elizabeth May in the leaders debate, the are other possibilities. “We could also have a debate between Mr. Ignatieff and myself since, after all, the real choice in this election is a choice between a Conservative government or an Ignatieff-led government that all of these other parties will support,” Harper said.

Michael Ignatieff accepted the challenge (exact Tweet: “A one-on-one debate? Any time, any place.”), but what happened after that in terms of trying to set this up is a "He Said-He Said" of epic proportions. “Mr. Ignatieff insisted that his first preference was to have his coalition partners there at the debate, so that’s the format that was proposed and we’ve accepted it,” Harper told journalists in Halifax today. “If Mr. Ignatieff wanted that debate, he could have chosen that debate, but he didn’t.”

First of all, is anyone else sick of the coalition drum banging? It's like Stephen Harper is Swan from The Warriors, leading his rag-tag crew through the menacing streets of Manhattan under attack from all sides by a "coalition" of other gangs - The Turnbull AC's, The Baseball Furies, The Lizzies and The Gramercy Riffs - as they try to get back to Staten Island. The Conservatives have been the government for five years, they lead the polls, they've got momentum and funding, yet somehow, they're the underdogs. 

I can understand why Harper would like to face Ignatieff one-on-one, Layton, Duceppe and May can be scary when their Irish is up, but you can't paint them with the same brush as if they've all fallen under the spell of Cyrus in the middle of Van Cortlandt Park asking them if they dig it. After all, we all know Michael Ignatieff charisma level is more on par with Billy Ray Cyrus, than ambitious, and fictional, New York gangsters.

The Shifting Ground

People shifting parties isn't so unusual when Parliament is sitting, but in the middle of an election...

But that's the table we're looking at this morning with yesterday's news that Elgin-Middlesex-London NDP candidate Ryan Dolby was throwing his support behind his riding's Liberal candidate in hopes to stem a potential Conservative majority government on May 2nd. But for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, as they say. In Vaughn this morning, Tony Genco, who ran against Conservative MP Julian Fantino as the Liberal candidate in a by-election last fall, has thrown his support to his old opponent. It's worth noting though that Genco is not running as the Liberal candidate in this election, Vaughan regional Councillor Mario Ferri took his place as the Liberal candidate on the ballot there.

So this is some pretty heavy political maneuvering in the battleground that is Southern Ontario; one step forward, one step back for the Liberals it seems. Sadly, I'm not sure how much the endorsement of Genco is going to help Fantino, he's in pretty fine position as it is, and besides, Genco lost by less than 1,000 votes in the by-election. And Genco's rationale for supporting Fantino, that the former OPP Top Cop "delivered" for the people of Vaughn in just four short months since his election, smells a little like sour grapes to me for getting bumped from the ballot.

As for Dolby, the only person he's really hurting is his former boss, Jack Layton. Layton has been trying to position the NDP as a viable alternative to the Conservatives, replacing the Liberals as the official Opposition if not forming a government of their own. Still, Dolby's reasons why represent the worst in cynical politics, he endorsed the Liberal candidate, Graham Warwick, in order to defeat Conservative incumbent Joseph Preston and thus prevent Stephen Harper from securing a majority government. Apparently, Dolby had reached out to Warwick prior to the election about a joint appearance where Dolby would publicly withdraw and throw his support to Warwick, but the Liberal said that he "didn’t think [Dolby] would do it." Dolby also ran for the NDP in 2008. 

Both occasions are surprising developments in this election that's still not even a week old. Hard to believe that there's still five more weeks of this.

spring election. (Note My Lack of Enthusiasm)

I missed the budget last night as Synn Studios was hosting Business After 5 for the Guelph Chamber of Commerce. It wasn't until Chamber President Lloyd Longfield said that his Blackberry was ringing off the hook with interview requests from media, local and not-local, that I remembered the straw that was supposedly going to break the government's back was going to come down yesterday.

The Globe and Mail did a pretty good job of breaking down the highlights, but overall the budget aired on the side of conservative. The assumption that there would be enough so-called red meat for the NDP to endorse the budget, and save us all from an election, was ruined when Jack Layton told reporters that the budget missed on his party's four conditions for endorsement: elimination of the federal sales tax on home-heating fuel; measures to greatly increase the number of doctors; a big boost in pensions for poor seniors; and restoration of the home eco-energy retrofit program.

The thing of it is, what is an election going to get us? The national polls show cross-country support per party is largely unchanged. The only real news is in the west where Conservative support is down seven points, while NDP support is up nine points. Despite the scandals, the censures, the rapidly inflating price for fighter planes and the ongoing crumminess of the economy, Stephen Harper's support seems pretty solid, while ambivalence about the Liberals and the NDP continues.

As for the numbers themselves, and article from Monday's Globe breaks it down as 39 per cent for the Conservatives, 28 per cent for the Liberals, and 20 per cent for the NDP. Polls before the 2008 election, put the Conservatives at between 34 and 37 per cent support, while the Liberals were as low as 23 and as high as 30. The result was a second minority, and if the election were held today, then chances are that the result would be minority government number three. 

The situation looks grim for all party leaders; Michael Ignatieff is still fighting the charisma gap, Jack Layton tends to take one step forward then two steps back in terms of seats every election, Giles Duceppe has no power ambitions, and Stephen Harper has to deliver a majority government this time out, or his party's going to have to make some managerial changes in order to ensure that they get one next time. Except... is there a clear sucessor to the man that wants the Government of Canada to go by the more official name "The Harper Government?"

So what's going to happen? Election this May. Everyone wants it, except anyone you ask.

It's September 1st, and you know what that means...

...Fall election talk, partner! Yee-Haw!

I think that this headline from an article on the Globe and Mail's website says it all: "Ignatieff to Harper: ‘Your time is up'"

So it seems that Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff has it in his mind to topple the Conservative government of Stephen Harper. “After four years of drifting, of denial, of divisiveness and discord ... Stephen Harper’s time is up,” Ignatieff said Tuesday to party members and national media during a campaign-style rally in Sudbury.

Party on, Iggy! Surely you will find support to bring down Harper in the other opposition parties. All they ever want to do is end the Conservative reign and get another election going, and good thing because you're going to need all three to bring this House of Cards down.

“If the government wants to start acting in the interests of Canadians, then perhaps we can avoid [Ottawa] foisting an election” on voters, NDP finance critic Tom Mulcair said.

Snap! Where's the NDP that will vote against anything Harper puts on the table? Even before they know what it is. But what of Giles Duceppe and the Bloc Quebecois? From Reuters, "Gilles Duceppe, leader of the federal party that advocates separation for the French-speaking province of Quebec, will speak at 4 p.m. (2000 GMT) in Laval, Quebec, on Wednesday, a Bloc spokesman said."

And Mr. Harper, what do you have to say? “The one thing that could screw this all up is political instability. We have a couple of parties in Parliament, the Bloc Québécois in particular, the NDP as well, they vote for an election every day of the week every time, they've got nothing to do other than fight election campaigns. There is a risk that at some point in the future, as we saw last year, that one of the major parties will try to appease those parties and do bad things to this country as a way of trying to get into office.”

Well, he's on the money about the NDP and the Bloc. I've always said that they have that luxury of opposing every confidence motion because they know their votes alone won't get the job done, and the Liberals are always gun shy about going to the polls prematurely. Plus it always gives the NDP and the Bloc the high ground by saying that there's no difference between a vote for the Liberals or the Conservatives since the one props up the other.

Is Ignatieff baiting the other parties, by preemptively issuing an ultimatum to the Conservatives? Is he daring them to call his bluff, or is he deadly serious about moving full speed ahead with a Fall election? Whatever it is, it's smart politics. Ignatieff has put both the Conservatives and the NDP on the defensive and forced them to maybe look at each other in order to save them both. Jack Layton has to choose whether he's going to follow Ignatieff's lead or risk looking the hypocrite by propping up Harper. The Bloc, meanwhile, face a similar conundrum as the NDP, but that's by no means the same kind of compromise required of the Conservatives should they decide to movie forward and try to and pursuade the Bloc to give them the assist.

Could the Bloc and the Conservatives reach an argeement? Probably not becuase the Conservatives would risk losing a lot of face with their western base. And as for the NDP, their requested concessions - usually more money for healthcare, education and other social programs - is sure not to go over very well with the Conservative caucus, especially in a recession economy. So it begs the question: has Ignatieff put his opponents in checkmate? Well, the first chance they'll get to bring the government down doesn't come until the end of September. An eternity in political life.

The Final Countdown

So the most surprising part of the budget was that there were no surprises in the budget. Shoot, even the CBC didn't show it live and instead unleashed the talking heads as Jim Flaherty laid it down for the House.

On the plus side. there's lots of stimulus: $40 billion in the next two years, but on the down side we're looking at $85 billion in deficits over the next five. Then there's $20 billion in personal income tax cuts this fiscal year and business taxes too are also cut by $2 billion, with up to $200 billion to be made available to businesses in liquidity and financing to ensure Canadian consumers and businesses have access to credit. The unemployed get five extra weeks of E/I, but nothing will be done to accelerate the time in which applicants can start receiving those funds.

Quebec? Hosed, changes to the equalization formula will go forward. Cities? Sure, they're going to get some of that infrastructure cash, but they'll have to navigate the usual governmental obstacle course of red tape to get the money. Conservative street cred in being the stewards of sound and balanced budgets? Gone, Flaherty was all about taking a chance because "These are extraordinary times," he said in a news conference.

And that's not to mention the seriously, sudden turn to a more conciliatory tone coming from the Finance Minister and, by proxy, the Prime Minister's Office. "In the past quarter, the world economy has deteriorated substantially. We consulted broadly with Canadians (and) what we heard from Canadians is that we need to do certain things right away to stimulate the economy."

Well not according to the NDP and Bloc. Giles Duceppe said that there was "nothing in [the budget] to obtain our support." And Jack Layton said it fails to "protect the vulnerable, doesn't create jobs for today and doesn't create jobs for tomorrow." So the fate of the Harper government is now up to Michael Ignatieff in his first real test as Liberal leader. But Layton warned Red leader today, through reporters, that it's "absolutely" Ignatieff's responsibility to defeat the budget because it fails to meet the tests "at a minimum" that he set out for his support.

Oh. what to do, what to do? I'm sure it's going to be a sleepless night for Iggy, but we'll know by 11 am tomorrow what way he's going to swing. Smart money says he'll support the budget with conditions. But it appears in the meantime that things are back to normal on Parliament Hill: the NDP and the Bloc hate everything, the Conservatives get stabby and the Liberals are forced to decide how deep they want the shiv to go.

Look! A press release:

Frank Valeriote reviewing budget with caucus

Frank Valeriote, Member of Parliament, is joining his Liberal colleagues for a careful review of the federal budget.

"The Liberal party has been clear and concise on what we wanted to see in the budget—protection for the most vulnerable Canadians, protection of Canadian jobs and creation of the jobs of tomorrow," said Valeriote. "This government is long-overdue for action to address the economic crisis. This budget must be considered carefully to determine if it will provide the action necessary to get our economy back on track. Above all else, the Liberal Party will act in the best interests of the country."

The economic challenges facing Canada were evident long before the government tabled its autumn economic statement and Parliament was prorogued. It is discouraging that this Conservative government has taken so long to signal a willingness to act.

In September, the Prime Minister said if we were going to have a recession, we would have had it by now. In October, he told us there was no recession, but there were ―a lot of great buying opportunities emerging as a consequence of all the panic.‖ In November, Mr. Flaherty presented an economic update setting out a surplus, when now we know that this Conservative government was aware we were headed into a recession and nevertheless mislead us about it.

"Over 100,000 Canadians have lost their jobs in the past two months. It is absolutely unacceptable that this government has wasted time playing political games instead of focusing on the economic crisis," said Valeriote. "It makes one wonder whether we can believe anything that comes out of this Conservative government."

"In these tough economic times Liberals will do our best to make Parliament work for the sake of Canadians," said Valeriote. "However, making Parliament work does not mean that the Prime Minister gets a free ride – he remains accountable to all Canadians and Parliament."

Flashback

This is the 70th, and final, posting of the Guelph By-Election '08 blog, and what a ride it's been. Our little six week by-election turned into a 12 week free for all as a full blown Federal campaign got underway.

Now normally, I consider anything to do with politics to be a happy occasion, but as this race closed on Tuesday, I saw a lot of sadness. I saw disappointment. And I saw humility.

Tuesday night (or Wednesday morning, whenever it was), I saw a lot of humility from the winners. Whether it was Stephen Harper glumly accepting the election results and the fact he just might have to get along with the other parties, or, more locally, with Frank Valeriote's words of co-operation that probably stem from the fact he's the only Liberal MP from Mississauga and North London.

But mostly I remember the disappointment; like the day after "Keep on Truckin'" e-mail from the Department of Culture or the melancholy looks of Green and NDP supporters, especially after they tasted victory during the care-free, summer days of the by-election.

As for the sadness, that's probably all me, I think. The by-election made Guelph special, more special than we usually think it is, anyway. I loved the cavalcade of special politician appearances and the regular chats with leaders and high profile MPs, and townhalls and press conferences and such. It was awesome! For a time. And then Harper canceled the whole thing and we had to start from scratch with much less fanfare.

So it goes.

But now it's time for my final thoughts.

1) I hope Frank Valeriote's sincere about working to build bridges with the other parties, though I have no reason to doubt he isn't. Over 60 per cent of the country voted for someone who's not a Conservative, so it's important that the centre-left parties work out their petty differences to focus on their greater commonalities.

2) Maybe next election, Jack Layton should focus on a different battleground than Ontario, Western Canada. The NDP won 9 ridings in British Columbia, 8 in Central Northern Ontario, 4 in Manitoba, and most importantly, one in Edmonton-Scrathcona. Plus the party finished second in a great many ridings, a distant second mind you, but it's a base to build on nonetheless.

3) Don't get Stéphane Dion angry. You won't like him when he's angry.

4) Greens shouldn't look on this election as a failure. You got Elizabeth May in the leaders' debate and that's a monumental achievement. There were strong Green finishes it terms of both vote share (like Mike Nagy's 21 per cent share in Guelph) and placement (like a second place finish in the Macleod riding in Alberta). There's some incredible political ground to capitalize on here.

5) Stephen Harper liked to brag about leadership, well now he has to show some. No provoking the parties into bringing down Parliament. No making every vote a confidence motion. And no jockeying and fronting like you've got a mandate from the Canadian people, especially when 62.37 per cent of those people don't want you there.

Anyway, that's all for now. Before signing off I want to thank all of you who read my blog and especially the ones who went so far as to leave comments. It's been a heck of a commitment, but it's been a blast. Keep following my stuff in Echo, which I hope will be more municipally focused in the weeks to come. And who knows, maybe we'll try this again in a couple of years.

From all of us at Guelph By-Election '08, and by 'us,' I mean 'me,' I say, "Good Night and Good Luck."

http://www.myspace.com/adamadonaldson

Post-Election New Rules

After every election, I like to take stock and outline briefly some of my thoughts and opinions about the spectacle we all just witnessed. To facilitate the organization of thought, and to inject a little humour, I take a page from the book of Bill Maher, literally...

...and come up with some New Rules of my own.

New Rule: Danny Williams has to be the new leader of the Liberal Party. - Granted he's currently the Progressive Conservative Premier of Newfoundland, but the idea of prominent party leaders crossing the floor is not unheard of - ask Jean Charet. Williams, mad as hell and not going to take it anymore, effectively cock-blocked Harper from getting a seat in NFLD. First he denounced Harper for backing out of the Atlantic Accords, then he started the "Anyone But Conservative" campaign and then he told the fundraisers in his province that if they wanted to keep doing business with him, they won't do business with Harper. The only thing left for Williams to do is take this thing 'cross Canada.

New Rule: If you say you're going to co-operate in Parliament, you have to mean it. - This is the third minority government we've sent to Ottawa, and for the third time, all the party leaders came out afterward saying, "We are going to work together to make Parliament work." But instead of a collegial atmosphere of dialogue and hard work, we've gotten this:






New Rule: Alberta has to get over it. - Remember: "The West wants in." Well, the west is in now. The party they back is the party in power. The oil sands of Alberta power our economy. So why, oh why, is that province still all coloured blue. I know that Canadians have an inferiority complex, but come on!

New Rule: Ignatieff supporters can't say I told you so to Stéphane Dion. - I know a lot of you out there are saying that this wouldn't have happened if Iggy was running the boat. But the fact of the matter is he's just as professorial as Dion, and he has the notable demerit of having only returned to Canada 2 years ago after some 30 years abroad and only came back after practically being begged by Ian Davey and Daniel Brock. Harper may have called Canada a "northern European welfare state," but at least he was here when he said it.

New Rule: Don't break you're own fixed election rule. - $300 million is a lot of money to spend in order to realize that most of the people in this country, still don't really like you that much.

New Rule: John Turmel has to keep running. - With the long list of candidates, the rules at many of the debates were kind of stringent. But Turmel's off the cuff and brutally honest debate responses kept things lively, no matter where you sat on the issue of LETS or professional gambling.

New Rule: Dalton McGuinty should get off the pot. - He didn't endorse his own party, saying that he was just looking out for the best interest of Ontarians because he was going to have to work with the person that formed the government, whoever they may be. I recognize the political tact of hedging your bets, but does the Premier really think that his relationship with the Conservative government can get any worse?

New Rule: Manuel Couto has to reveal himself so that we know he's real. - To my knowledge, the Marxist-Leninist candidate didn't give one interview, make a single public appearance or participate in any all-candidate forum or debate. You've gotta play to win and for me the biggest surprise of the evening was that 29 people knew enough about Couto to want to vote for him.

New Rule: Jack Layton has to stop comparing himself to Barack Obama. - Okay, he never said it out right, but we all saw the little wink when he said, "Vote for the New Democrats." Because we all know who else is a Democrat...

New Rule: We need to have a serious conversation about reforming our democracy. - Now, I've never been a fan of proportional representation. And the form of mixed-member proportional representation proposed by the Ontario government last year never explained where the proportional members would come from, which is one of many reasons why it failed.

But when a party nearly gets majority status with less than 40 per cent of the vote, it's time to look at how and why we elect our government. The fact that the Bloc Quebecois got 50 seats with 10 per cent of the vote, while the Greens got zero with 7 per cent really says a lot about why people might think their vote doesn't count.

Beyond simple numbers though, look at the geography. If NDP or Green voters in Guelph really think their voices aren't heard hear in Ontario, imagine what's like for your colleagues out in Alberta.

In Quebec, it looked like the fortunes of the Bloc were going down until the Conservatives imploded in the fallout of the arts cuts, and went on to win two-thirds of the seats in Quebec. This despite the fact that in Quebec, the Parti Quebecois has become the third ranked party, suggesting that separation isn't the hot topic it once was. But now Quebecers find their fortunes represented by what is essentially a special interest party, and you've got to figure that there a lot of voters displeased. Look at the numbers in Quebec and it's practically a reflection of those nationwide with the Bloc getting only 38 per cent support.

So what to do? Well, Harper's such a big supporter of Senate reform, why not let the Upper House be elected, and elected through proportionality, along with the other proposed changes. Let the Senate have greater influence on policy, by making it more reflective of proper party support, and their policies there in, while the House members remain chosen as the representatives of their riding in the Parliament by being elected by majority.

Now I admit, I haven't thoroughly thought out the details of this plan, and it might not work, but let's at least start the discussion. Otherwise, I fear we're going to do this again and again till either a majority like Harper or the Liberals get smarter. In other words: forever.

Lazy Sunday

The Mercury's Brad Needham posted this list on the paper's Guelph Votes blog Wednesday, and I loved it, so I felt like sharing.

Top 10 signs the election campaign, which started in Guelph on July 25, has gone on too long.

10. Prime Minister Stephen Harper almost made it to Guelph.
(Editor's Note: Remember: Wednesday, the PM did, in fact make it to Guelph)
9. NDP Leader Jack Layton has run out of Stephen Harper sweater jokes.
8. Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion is actually starting to make sensee.
7. Karen Levenson of the Animal Alliance Environment Voters party has been talking about giving a voice to animals. Beverly Hills Chihuahua is the Number 1 movie in the country. Coincidence? I think not.
6. The kids riding bikes outside Green candidate Mike Nagy’s Gordon Street office are thinking about university.
5. Independent candidate John Turmel hasn’t been arrested in weeks.
4. The NDP’s Tom King is out of stories.
3. Even Liberal Frank Valeriote would admit that getting his law degree was easier than trying to explain the Green Shift.
2. Conservative Gloria Kovach has been spotted at some all-candidates debates.
1. Even the vandals are getting bored. Guelph’s election signs have never looked better.

Anyway, in actual news, while Mike Nagy managed to score the endorsement of the Guelph Mercury last week, Tom King managed to find some press in another paper... the New York Times. King was the subject of Saturday's Profile by Ian Austen, who talks to King about his life, career and political campaign. "Now Mr. King, 65, has set aside the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation’s microphones to make his first foray into electoral politics," it goes in the article. "His decision to run for a seat in the House of Commons in a campaign that ends Tuesday is, in an American context, about as predictable as Garrison Keillor abandoning Lake Wobegon for a shot at Congress."

Leaders take it to us, as Election comes to close

As the final weekend before the Election begins, the Royal City is getting some royal treatment again as leaders make a list ditch effort to score points.

It began today with Stephen Harper's very brief layover at Gloria Kovach's campaign office, in an appearance that was sandwiched between two others in London and Quebec. It came by long enough to greet voters, attack Dion and spark a small protest before he was on the road again.“It’s a choice between staying the course and moving forward, or throwing caution to the wind, embracing expensive schemes," said Harper. “Mr. Dion may be a professor, but he hasn’t had much luck teaching Canadians about the carbon tax.”

Tomorrow night, Jack Layton will pull into the Woolwich Arms for a pre-election push for Tom King called "Momentum: United for Change." This will be the first appearance of Layton in Guelph since an outdoor event with Naomi Klein way back on September 5th in Royal City Park. Politicos will remember that Layton was a frequent flyer in the riding during the by-election. He's scheduled to appear at the Wooly at 9 pm.

Leader's Debate Tonight - Follow My Live Blog

11:02 - Okay, so that was pretty lively. Harper got smoked in a junk pile though. Dion stood pretty strong, but I'm not sure if it was strong enough. Layton was solid, Duceppe got in numerous well placed points and May was a breath of fresh air I thought; I'm glad she finally made it. Well, that's it for tonight. Daily Show time, and then I want to see the repeat of Biden/Palin.

But this was fun, I liked it. Sorry, but Jon Stewart made a Balki from Perfect Strangers jokes and I can't focus.

10:58 - Time out. That went fast.

10:57 - Ah, Dion. So polite...

10:55 - Those lav mics really pick up sound good. Oh, and May had a good point there.

10:54 - Yeah, but Danny Williams never hated Chretien or Martin the way he rrrreeeeaaalllllyyy hates Harper

10:53 - Gotta love the way Layton can talk broadly despite never forming a government

10:52 - Layton refers to self in third person - not good.

10:51 - The sweater is nice. Very Cameron Frye.

10:51 - Yes, take a look at the invisible Harper platform

10:50 - 10 minute mark, folks

10:47 - Ugh. I hate this discussion. "I don't know who to vote for." "Nobody talks to me." "I don't trust politicians."

Look, if you don't think anyone on the ballot talks to you, (and that's a hard place to be in Guelph with 10 people on the ballot) you can cast an unmarked ballot... and it's still counted. Can you imagine if everyone that didn't vote cast blank ballots and what kind of statement that can make?

10:46 - Income trust, Harper's fatal weakness

10:44 - Interesting. We can't afford $5 billion on income splitting, but we can afford all these new tax credits

10:43 - Uh, oh... Okay, that wasn't going were I thought it was going.

10:40 - "Keep surpluses!" That's a bold statement considering the global economy, and probably untrue given some of the rumours coming out of Ottawa that we're already in deficit country.

10:39 - Dion's answer surprised me, I thought for sure he was going to lean on the Green Shift. But shoring up the economy - good call.

10:37 - Big burn by Duceppe, but at least he's honest about his chances

10:36 - 2 to go.... time flies

10:35 - This pie in the sky for Layton.

10:33 - Nice try. I think we all know that if Harper was PM in '03, Canadians would be dying in Iraq now.

10:31 - Oops, potential trap for Harper.
"Absolutely in error," Harper on invading Iraq. You heard it here last

10:31 - Eep, heard that before. And I don't just mean the Liberals

10:27 - "History free zone," exactly. No one wants to see Afghanistan fall backwards again.

10:23 - Ooh Kitchener... But I don't know that guy.

10:21 - Exactly. If any example proves the correlation between poverty and crime it's the case of Canada's Native peoples .

10:17 - Exactly. Ask a lawyer about the practicalities of the law. The neo-con view of the law is so far from the intent enshrined they're not nearly the same.

10:16 - I love that. "We didn't cut literacy, we just cut literacy programs."

10:15 - I'll do Layton one better, do we need hand guns period? Are you going to go hunting with a hand gun?

10:12 - Oh, here we go...

10:11 - Right on! It's a perception that violent crime is going up, it's not really. Listening to some people, you'd think we're living in Gotham City.

10:10 - That was brief.

10:09 - I just noticed this, but Harper is wearing a Canadian flag pin. Give. Me. A. Break. Really? Is this the kind of mind game the PM is playing here? The "I'm a real patriot because I wear the flag game." Come on!

10:08 - Right on! Don't tell me its not ideological.
"More fun in Canada." Well, I'm all for that.

10:06 - Yes, they were so ineffective. Which is why there was such a big outcry about the cuts, it's not like anyone's taking advantage of these programs.

10:03 - Barbarians? But I like Dion's answer, I think, like US neo-cons, Harper sees artists as the enemy

10:02 - Tax credit for the arts. That makes me laugh. We'll give you a tax credit to enroll your kids in the arts, but when they're adults we won't help them to make a living.

10:01 - I love that. The arts are fun, says Dion

9:59 - Sweet. Good topic.

9:56 - That was a weird camera angle (Duceppe and Harper)

9:55 - Word.

9:53 - SINCE WHEN? Again, read that speech!

9:50 - Sorry, but Harper's critique of 90s Liberal cuts really leaves a bad taste in my mouth considering his past remarks. And considering that Tony Clement is now our federal health minister after everything that went down when he held the job in Ontario...

9:49 - That's a killer for the Liberals. Their fiscal policy in the 90s did some harm in the healthcare sector.

9:46 - Whales? I guess that's something.

9:44 - Visual aids, Mr. Duceppe?

9:43 - "How we're dealing with the tar sands..." Now that's "lazy fair" policy.

9:39 - "Don't believe this man." Man, I don't want to mess with Dion right now.

9:38 - I've never seen Dion snippy. Man, he's getting intense.

9:35 - Finally, address the questioner Layton!

9:34 - He knows what page its on in the French version?

9:33 - That was a good point about Bob Rae.

9:31 - Again, who said increase taxes?
"Under the sweater!" Layton, that was awesome!

9:27 - ...yet.

9:27 - "Lazy fair?"

9:25 - Harper looks like he's being spoon fed castor oil

9:23 - Well, so many manufacturing jobs have been created to replace the lost ones under Harper's policy, oh wait...

9:22 - Good question!

9:19 - lol. Duceppe really wants that tax credit. ;-)

9:17 - "You should be on the way out too." Snap! That one goes to Layton.

9:17 - Boo ya! If you haven't read that speech, read that speech. It'll make you want to punch someone out.

9:14 - Right on, Dion! he's got to be strong like this if he wants to come out of the debate better off than he went into. He has to come up more to May and Layton's level of attack. I want to see passion!

9:13 - I've gotta say, I'm lovin' this format.
Oh, and Harper's getting smoked.

9:12 - Uh, which opposition parties have announced tax increases?

9:08 - THANK YOU! Where is the CPC platform?

9:07 - Because Paul Martin told the banks No on sub-prime mortgages.

9:07 - Yeah, thanks to Paul Martin!

9:06 - "The invisible hand is in hand with the oil companies" - Nice.

9:04 - I thought the point was to address the questioner, Harper.

9:03 - Elizabeth May really smoked through that first question, can't say I agree with everything she said, but she certainly showed a commanding control of the issue

9:00 - Here we go

8:38 - The English-language debate gets underway in just over 20 minutes. When it begins, I'll begin to blog live from beginning to end. I've never done this before so it should be interesting. I hope some people (body?) follows along, after all, I'm sacrificing watching the Biden-Palin debate to give my full attention to homegrown politics. Anyway, see you in a few...

Up In Smoke

As talked about in yesterday's blog, it was a bit of a rough week for Stephen Harper. Well, it wasn't any much better for Stéphane Dion and Jack Layton either.

Dion had to talk around the fact that he backing away from the Green Shift... but not really, because it was never the centrepiece of the Liberal platform... but it is. Alas, it's too bad that the Liberals seemed to be doubting their own policy, for their own sake, because it gave Harper the fuel he needed to try and overcome his own issues in regards to Gerry Ritz.

What about Layton? He never misses an opportunity to hop on pop so long as "pop" is a less-than-affectionate nickname for either Harper or Dion. Well, it begins with one Dana Larsen, candidate for West Vancouver-Sunshine Coast-Sea to Sky Country, and ends with Kirk Tousaw, running for the NDP in Vancouver Quadra. Before politics Larsen was the former editor of Cannabis Culture magazine and was a co-founder of both the B.C. Marijuana Party and the Marijuana Party of Canada and Tousaw was a lawyer and campaign director for the B.C. Marijuana Party in 2005 and has done drug-policy work for the B.C. Civil Liberties Association.

Larsen had to resign Wednesday after some pretty incriminating video was leaked showing Larsen lighting a mouthful of joints before driving while stoned and taking, wait for it, LSD and DMT, both powerful hallucinogenics. Video killed the political star in the case of Tousaw too, as film of him judging various varieties of pot for a competition in 2005 made it's way to Google. Tousaw stepped down Friday. And Americans think that the McCain Campaign had problems with its limited vetting of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin.

But in all fairness, where is all this surprise coming from? Larsen was "co-founder of both the B.C. Marijuana Party and the Marijuana Party of Canada" for crying out load, is it at least conceivable that there might be a little Pineapple Express-like footage from his past. We know many Canadians are kind of laissez-faire about pot-use, and those people usually count the NDP amongst the allies in marijuana-friendly politics. Which is why these "resignations" have hit Layton so thoroughly; the NDP supports decriminalization. So why let these men be tossed aside for matters an NDP government would barely write you a ticket for?

Another layer was added today when a Marijuana Party activist said that he raised money and recruited people to the NDP because Layton and the New Democrats promised to support legalization. Today. in Edmonton, Layton says that he made no such deal, nor did he force the resignation of Larsen and Tousaw. Marge Groenendyk, a pro-pot activist that uses the drug for medicinal purposes, says that's not what she's heard in talking to the two former candidates.

Marijuana party activist Marc Emery, who was the one that accused Layton of breaking the alleged deal, said he expected at least a dozen more candidates would resign because of marijuana use before the Oct. 14 vote. "Every party has members of Parliament, cabinet ministers and former prime ministers who've smoked marijuana," Emery said. "Why someone who has used marijuana in the past, or is not repentant about it, is bumped as a candidate from the NDP, I still can't understand."