Showing posts with label Family Feud. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Family Feud. Show all posts

06 October 2008

Trevor's duck and cover explained

Trevor Taylor, part-time substitute fisheries minister in the Provincial Conservative government has been busily ducking a looming issue in the fisheries world.  In a system already grossly overstocked with processing capacity, Taylor's department has a recommendation under consideration to add a few more licenses.

The local CBC fisheries broadcast has been trying desperately to get Taylor on the air.

He's been unavailable.

Apparently, Trevor's been too busy campaigning against Fabian Manning, not in his free time or anything mind you but during the day time  - normal government working hours - when one might expect he could have found a few hours to devote to his custodial responsibilities in the fish department.

Seems Trevor has been joined on the hustings by attorney general Jerome Kennedy and intergovernmental affairs genius Tom Hedderson. 

You will recall Hedderson as the guy writing letters to Ottawa last June lobbying on a decision that was made...18 months earlier.

Trevor sees no problem with this carrying on partisan family fights during daylight hours.

Trevor also decided on Monday to issue a news release criticizing the federal government for a deal giving 1500 tonnes of yellowtail flounder from Canada's NAFO allocation to the Americans.

But sure Trevor and the boys are supporting the ABC campaign, you say.

Yes, sez your humble e-scribbler, but don't forget the real motivation for all these cabinet ministers to join in the Family Feud.

There's a big cabinet shuffle coming very shortly.  Being seen out there hammering away at The Boss' favourite cause is much better for the old career path than spending time doing other things, like say the job you get paid to do.

Oh.  That's right. 

Trevor did find time in his hectic hectoring schedule to call the Fisheries Broadcast and do an interview.

But that was after one of his predecessors outed him on the Family Feud thing.

-srbp-

02 October 2008

Now will someone start reporting it correctly?

The ABC campaign is a Family Feud.

The Provincial Conservatives are sticking it to their federal brothers and sisters.

That's it.

That's all of it.

-srbp-

24 September 2008

"A" but "C" except before seal

Danny Williams may like to claim Stephen Harper is a kitten-eating lizard from outer space but when push came to shove last week, Williams gave up the chance to campaign against a key Harper minister in Nova Scotia.

Williams chief publicity agent responded via Blackberry (that's pretty much how she deals with everyone, apparently) to a Green Party request telling them that Williams wouldn't campaign with Elizabeth May against Peter MacKay "in large part due" to the Green Party stance on the seal hunt.

Huh? What about getting rid of Stephen Harper? What about spreading the word about how Steve and his minions will destroy the country? 

Geez, from the amount of time spent discussing this ABC Family Feud thingy you'd believe it trumped just about anything else.

Apparently, not.

Apparently, seal-bashing is that much more important than opposing pure evil. 

Or largely more important.

Or maybe the real reason is less about seals and more about the politics of the whole Family Feud.

Firstly, the ABC campaign is really just a family affair;  it's a gripe one bunch of Conservatives have about another bunch.

Secondly, it's a negative thing.  As such, the rhetoric will centre on why people should vote against one federal party but there is absolutely nothing in it to explain what people should vote for.

Thirdly, and related to that, Danny Williams would have a hard time justifying spending time on the ground campaigning for one federal candidate against another federal candidate.  There's an unwritten rule in Canadian politics that federal politicians and parties don't inject themselves directly in a federal campaign and vice versa.  If Danny Williams takes to the campaign trail actively working against a federal party, he'd be inviting retaliation the next time he goes to the polls.

That's no small issue, especially in a small province like Newfoundland and Labrador. Having screwed over the federal Liberals and now the federal Conservatives, Williams would be running a huge political gamble that they wouldn't look for some payback in 2011 or whenever Williams calls a vote again.

And make no mistake:  it wouldn't be about punishing either the province as a whole or the party Williams leads. Any intervention by federal parties would every bit as personal as Williams' attacks.  There's a good reason why Williams pulled back from focusing on Fabian Manning, the only incumbent Conservative and the one most likely to hang on to his seat.

Fourthly, the unwillingness to campaign actively for a candidate can be traced back to the polls. Initial polls show that after two years of ABC rhetoric 30-odd percent of voters in Newfoundland and Labrador intend to vote for the federal Conservatives in this election.

As much as some people would like you to believe the two parties are completely different, they aren't.  That 30-odd percent is entirely made up of the core that in provincial elections votes with the Provincial Conservatives.  Depending on which poll you want to look at, that percentage makes up a half or three quarters of Williams' core vote. If those people are immune to his ministrations at the outset, the only way to suppress them or swing them would be with a campaign that ultimately would have runs the risk of opening up severe cracks within Williams' own party.

The federal Conservatives have already pressed on that sore spot several times.  Williams himself gave some credence to it when he responded to a claim by Loyola Hearn about fissures in the provincial Tory caucus by demanding loyalty declarations from his 43 caucus mates.  Other politicians would have sloughed off the Hearn claim.  Williams' actions left the clear impression there was a concern over caucus solidarity.

Think about it for a second. Danny Williams already redefined the objectives for his ABC campaign and he did so - fairly obviously - in the face of public opinion polls that shows he likely won't even be able to deliver a goose egg to the Conservatives in his own province, as he consistently used to claim as the goal.  If he is unlikely to deliver a goose egg in his own province, any effort to unseat incumbent Conservatives elsewhere in the country would only serve to weaken his political position later on. Better to haul back now than have to face the jibes and taunts later on.

And look, fifthly, it's not like Williams ever considered Elizabeth May important enough to bother with before.  She may be a national party leader in the leaders' debate but Danny didn't send her a begging letter.  Odds were against him hitting the doorsteps on her behalf now.

If not of that was persuasive, there's a sixth good reason why Danny Williams won't be spending much time on the hustings outside Newfoundland and Labrador. There are major issues on the public agenda right now in Newfoundland and Labrador. Huge ones.  Ones that typically turn up at the top of polls about what weighs on voters' minds.  There is simply no political value for Danny Williams to spend four or five weeks knocking doors and giving speeches across the country when the job he was elected to door appears to be left untended. As much as it might be possible to run the place and campaign simultaneously, the public perception  - especially in light of the polls and the likelihood of success - make that an even more risky venture than any of the others alone.

Put it together in a package and the whole idea of an active ABC campaign just becomes too dangerous a political proposition.

So Danny won't help Elizabeth May, in large part due to the seal hunt.

If that helps you sleep at night, go ahead and believe it.

-srbp-

23 September 2008

Family Feud, world of wonder version

hearn   PC Only two short years ago, Provincial Conservatives were lining up to get their picture taken with a Conservative brother running for re-election for what turned out to be the last time.

This ad - paid for by the federal Conservatives - appeared in the Telegram in early December 2005.

The guy seated on the far right of the picture is Loyola Sullivan, the finance minister at the time.  He quit federal politics not long after this picture only to take up a job with the federal Conservatives.

The guy behind him is former speaker Harvey Hodder.  He retired before the 2007 provincial election.

Immediately to Loyola Hearn's right is Sheila Osborne, part of the Osborne-Ridgley political machine.

The guy standing right behind Loyola Hearn - with that great big grin on his face - is Bob Ridgley, brother of Sheila. You will recall him as the Conservative who supported Belinda Stronach for leader even though, by his own words, he thought she was "shallow as a saucer".

Bob is now Danny Williams' parliamentary assistant.

The other two guys are - left to right - Shawn Skinner and Dave Denine. Skinner is the provincial human resources cabinet minister and Denine is looking after municipal affairs.

You'll recall Skinner was taken to the woodshed by Danny Williams for going off the ABC message track.  He was made to apologize publicly for his transgression.

Denine's had a few problems of his own, but never for doing something that went against orders from the top.

Interesting picture that, if only because it makes you wonder when they line up behind a candidate if they really do it out of personal choice or if they have been directed by some authority or other.

Makes you wonder that if they lend you support do they expect a quid pro quo, a back scratch in return.

Makes you wonder what happens if you don't do what they (or the authority doing the directing) wants.

Of course, it makes you wonder too if one of these is Loyola's mole.

-srbp-

21 September 2008

How time flies

The year:  2004

The issue:  Premier Danny Williams legislates public servants back to work and his caucus votes to impose a two year wage freeze on them.

Unknown at the time:  At the same time, members of the House of Assembly gave themselves a bonus payment of $2800 bucks, a fact kept secret until the province's auditor general ripped the lid off.   Danny Williams didn't take the cash but he didn't stop it from going to others, either.

What Danny said about Reg:

“I don't like to use the word liar. But he's misleading and he's wrong and it's dishonest. Now that's as close as we can come."

What then NDP leader Jack Harris said about Danny:

"I’m surprised and dismayed that the Premier would launch such an attack. There is a strong body of opinion that government is exaggerating the nature of the province’s fiscal situation. And it’s pretty clear that the Price Waterhouse Report’s assumptions for the future were extremely negative. There’s also no doubt the Premier used these numbers to frighten the public and try to build support for drastic measures by government...”.

Frighten the public?

Oh dear.

Such nasty words.

How time flies.

-srbp-

Reg didn't get the memo

Lorraine Michael, provincial New Democratic party leader at her party's 2008 biennial convention:

One of the things that I hear people say, and I hear it over and over…I’ve heard it a number of times actually is ”…now you have to remember that this government is not like Ottawa. Danny [Williams] is not Stephen Harper.” And part of me says “yea, that’s true, they’re [government] not as bad.” But when I look at it, a conservative, is a conservative, is a conservative. And we’ve got to get that message across to the people in this province.

(Applause)

And I wanted to speak a bit, well not a bit as a lot of it is going to be based on that…a conservative is a conservative is a conservative. [Emphasis added]

Apparently, outgoing labour uber-boss  Reg Anstey is of a different opinion, at least as voice of the cabinet minister is reporting:

Meanwhile, the Federation of Labour is standing behind Danny Williams and his ABC campaign. President Reg Anstey says Canada run by Stephen Harper will not be kind to workers, their families, or to this province. He says Harper's agenda has the potential to be very dangerous for Newfoundland and Labrador. He says it will be a good thing if at the end of the day they send a goose egg to Ottawa. He says we've only seen the tip of what the government will look like if it gets a majority.

-srbp-

Autonomy!

The wisdom from the centre of the universe:

There is nothing to be gained from stoking federal-provincial tensions, particularly at a time when Canada is facing sweeping economic challenges that will require co-operative responses. Yet that is the likely result when provincial leaders decide that their own ponds are not big enough.

Such a definitive answer to a good question the Globe editorial writer might have asked before tapping indignantly on the keyboard.

-srbp-

Family Feud Surreality Check

"You can't run a government with a one-man show, and that's what Mr. Harper wants to do," [Bob Rae] said. "I don't think that's the way Canadians want their government to operate."

Then there's this comment by columnist Peter Pickersgill about someone else:

The premier is a great campaigner at election time. He's a great man to pick a fight. Just ask the members of the Hebron consortium or Stephen Harper. But I wouldn't accuse him of being a creative thinker or a shaper of innovative policy. That's too bad, because he's running a one-man band.

From the this is now file:

Williams also rehashed past statements Harper made in which the prime minister referred to Canada as being a "northern European welfare state" and spoke of Atlantic Canada's "culture of defeat."

"For hard-working Newfoundlanders and Labradorians ... this stereotypical slur did not sit well with any of us," Williams said.

and the that was then file:

"I think Atlantic Canadians are going to be very pleasantly surprised and pleased with the performance of Mr. Harper," said Williams.

Maybe someone should invoke names to conjure with:

Fact is, Newfoundland and Labrador hasn't had a truly effective minister in Ottawa since John Crosbie.

while conveniently forgetting how the effective fellow dealt with the Equalization issue almost 20 years ago:

"I'm getting a little tired of them trying to have their cake and throwing it up too. They can't do both."

 

-srbp-

20 September 2008

"Reality Check" reality check on Equalization and the Family Feud

The crew that put together's CBC's usually fine "Reality Check" can be forgiven if they missed a few points by a country mile in a summary of the Family Feud.

Forgiveness is easy since the issues involved are complex and  - at least on the provincial side since 2003 - there has never been a clear statement of what was going on.  Regular Bond Papers readers will be familiar with that.  For others, just flip back to the archives for 2005 and the story is laid out there.

Let's see if we can sort through some of the high points here.

With its fragile economy, Newfoundland and Labrador has always depended on money from the federal government. When they struck oil off the coast, the federal government concluded it would not have to continue shelling out as much money to the provincial treasury. N.L.'s oil would save Ottawa money.

Not really.

Newfoundland and Labrador is no different from most provinces in the country, at least as far as Equalization goes.  Since 1957 - when the current Equalization program started - the provincial government has received that particular form of federal transfer.  So have all the others, at various times, except Ontario.  Quebec remains one of the biggest recipients of Equalization cash, if not on a per capita basis than on a total basis. Economic "fragility" has nothing to do with receiving Equalization.

In the dispute over jurisdiction over the offshore, there was never much of a dispute as far as Equalization fundamentally works.

Had Brian Peckford's view prevailed in 1983/1984, Equalization would have worked just as it always has.  As soon as the province's own source revenues went beyond the national average, the Equalization transfers would have stopped.

Period.

That didn't work out.  Both the Supreme Court of Newfoundland (as it then was called) and in the Supreme Court of Canada, both courts found that jurisdiction over the offshore rested solely with the Government of Canada.  All the royalties went with it.

In the 1985 Atlantic Accord, the Brian Mulroney and Brian Peckford governments worked out a joint management deal.  Under that agreement - the one that is most important for Newfoundland and Labrador - the provincial government sets and collects royalties as if the oil and gas were on land.

And here's the big thing:  the provincial government keeps every single penny.  It always has and always will, as long as the 1985 Accord is in force.

As far as Equalization is concerned, both governments agreed that Equalization would work as it always had.  When a provincial government makes more money on its own than the national average, the Equalization cash stops.

But...they agreed that for a limited period of time, the provincial government would get a special transfer, based on Equalization that would offset the drop in Equalization that came as oil revenues grew.  Not only was the extra cash limited in time, it would also decline such that 12 years after the first oil, there'd be no extra payment.

If the province didn't qualify for Equalization at that point, then that's all there was.  If it still fell under the average, then it would get whatever Equalization it was entitled to under the program at the time.

The CBC reality check leaves a huge gap as far as that goes, making it seem as though the whole thing came down to an argument between Danny Williams and Paul Martin and then Danny and Stephen Harper.

Nothing could be further from the truth, to use an overworked phrase.

During negotiations on the Hibernia project, the provincial government realized the formula wouldn't work out as intended. Rather than leave the provincial government with some extra cash, the 1985 deal would actually function just like there was no offset clause. For every dollar of new cash in from oil, the Equalization system would drop Newfoundland's entitlement by 97 cents, net.

The first efforts to raise this issue - by Clyde Wells and energy minister Rex Gibbons in 1990 - were rebuffed by the Mulroney Conservatives.  They didn't pussy foot around. John Crosbie accused the provincial government of biting the hand that fed it and of wanting to eat its cake and "vomit it up" as well.

It wasn't until the Liberal victory in 1993 that the first efforts were made to address the problem.  Prime Jean Chretien and finance minister Paul Martin amended the Equalization formula to give the provincial government an option of shielding up to 30% of its oil revenue from Equalization calculations.  That option wasn't time limited and for the 12 years in which the 1985 deal allowed for offsets the provincial government could always have the chance to pick the option that gave the most cash.  It only picked the wrong option once.

The Equalization issue remained a cause celebre, especially for those who had been involved in the original negotiations.  It resurfaced in the a 2003 provincial government royal commission study which introduced the idea of a clawback into the vocabulary.  The presentation in the commission reported grossly distorted the reality and the history involved. Some charts that purported to show the financial issues bordered on fraud.

Danny Williams took up the issue in 2004 with the Martin administration and fought a pitched battle - largely in public - over the issue.  He gave a taste of his anti-Ottawa rhetoric in a 2001 speech to Nova Scotia Tories. Little in the way of formal correspondence appears to have been exchanged throughout the early part of 2004.  Up to the fall of 2004 - when detailed discussions started -  the provincial government offered three different versions of what it was looking for.  None matched the final agreement.

The CBC "Reality Check" describes the 2005 agreement this way:

The agreement was that the calculation of equalization payments to Newfoundland and Labrador would not include oil revenue. As the saying goes, oil revenues would not be clawed back. Martin agreed and then-opposition leader Harper also agreed.

Simply put, that's dead wrong.

The 2005 deal provided for another type of transfer to Newfoundland and Labrador from Ottawa on top of the 1985 offset payment.  The Equalization program was not changed in any way. Until the substantive changes to Equalization under Stephen Harper 100% of oil revenues was included to calculate Equalization entitlements.  That's exactly what Danny Williams stated as provincial government policy in January 2006, incidentally.  The Harper changes hid 50% of all non-renewable resource revenues from Equalization (oil and mining) and imposed a cap on total transfers.

As for the revenues being "clawed back", one of the key terms of the 2005 deal is that the whole thing operates based on the Equalization formula that is in place at any given time. Oil revenues are treated like gas taxes, income tax, sales tax, motor vehicle registration and any other type of provincial own-source revenue, just like they have been as long as Equalization has been around.

What the federal Conservatives proposed in 2004 and 2006 as a part of their campaign platform - not just in a letter to Danny Williams - was to let all provinces hide their revenues from oil, gas and other non-renewable resources from the Equalization calculations.  The offer didn't apply just to one province.  Had it been implemented, it would have applied to all. 

That was clear enough until the Harper government produced its budget 18 months ago. What was clear on budget day became a bit murky a few days later when Wade Locke of Memorial University of Newfoundland began to take a hard look at the numbers.

Again, that's pretty much dead wrong.

It became clear shortly after Harper took office in 2006 that the 100% exclusion idea from the 2004 and 2006 campaigns would be abandoned in favour of something else.  There was nothing murky about it at all. So plain was the problem that at least one local newspaper reported on a fracas at the Provincial Conservative convention in October 2006 supposedly involving the Premier's brother and the Conservative party's national president. That's when the Family Feud started.

As for the 2007 budget bills which amended both the 1985 and 2005 agreements between Ottawa and St. John's, there's a serious question as to whether the provincial government actually consented to the amendments as required under the 1985 Atlantic Accord.

The story about Equalization is a long one and the Family Feud - a.k.a the ABC campaign - has a complex history.  There's no shame in missing some points.  It's just so unusual that CBC's "Reality Check" was so widely off base.

-srbp-

13 September 2008

Family Feud? Try blood feud.

The local media are strangely silent the day of Stephen Harper's visit to the province. The prime minister comes to the province and not a single story graces the website of the Telly, CBC or the voice of the (provincial) cabinet minister. [Update: The Telly posted an extremely short story after 9:00 PM. VO updated at some point this evening but it isn't clear when.]

Okay, it's not like it's the first time a huge local story has been missed by the locals for one reason or another , only to be picked up by the national types and then covered locally later on.

Like this report from CTV's Bob Fife. Watch the video, even if you have to listen to Jim Morgan.

It doesn't matter if the accusations of heavy-handed tactics by the Provincial Conservatives are true or not. The point is that the charges are being made at all and made hard by the federal Conservatives on national news media.

Danny Williams already backpedaled on the ABC campaign's objectives today, likely setting up for a possible win by manning in Avalon. It's a tight race but you never know what can happen. Better to change the objectives to allow for something other than the total victory you wanted only a couple of days ago, you know, just in case.

In the meantime, the federal Conservatives have decided to play their own form of hardball. Even Stephen Harper's use of the Williams campaign slogan in 2007 is designed to get under the Premier's skin.

This is not a family feud. It's rapidly turning into a blood feud.

-srbp-

Williams shifts ABC position in wake of polls

From the outset, Danny Williams has claimed the main goal of his ABC campaign was to deliver a big goose egg - no Conservative seats in Newfoundland and Labrador - to Stephen Harper's Conservative Party.

With publicly available polls showing real cracks in the ABC grip on the public imagination, Williams is now completely changing his views. Williams likely has polls of his own but he won't release those.
"The primary goal is not to deliver the goose egg.  I'd like Newfoundlanders to deliver the goose egg but if they don't, they don't.  That's certainly a goal.  The primary goal is to prevent him from winning a government, certainly a majority government." [Emphasis added; quoted in a Telegram front page story by Peter Walsh. Update:  The full story isn't online.  The link is to an abbreviated version carried by the Telly's sister daily in Corner Brook.]
Gee, it's not like we haven't seen that sort of shifting of position before in the face of bad polls.

Here's an idea, let's take down the flags.
-srbp-
Related:
Harper-Williams family feud affecting how feds deal with NL: poll
Another poll shows the NL starting numbers
Anything But Clear: poll
The first poll: some thoughts

11 September 2008

Harper-Williams family feud affecting how feds deal with NL: poll

Almost two thirds  - 63.6% - of respondents to an NTV/Telelink poll believe that the Family Feud is "having a negative impact on how Ottawa deals with Newfoundland and Labrador." 

29.5% said it wasn't and only 6.9% were unsure.

When asked if the Premier should take his Feud on the road across Canada, things weren't quite as clear. 41.2% felt he should while 39.1% said he shouldn't.  19.7% were not sure.

The telephone survey of 919 voting age Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who were aware of the provincial government's ABC campaign was conducted between September 6 and Septemeber 9.

Most likely, this is the poll picked up by the federal Conservatives and reported by Geoff Meeker.

-srbp-

 

10 September 2008

Anything But Clear: poll

If the latest poll by NTV News is any indication, the Premier has a gigantic job of work ahead of him just in his own province to make the Family Feud relevant to the federal election let alone taking the thing across the country.

Of the 1200 likely voters polled, 27% hadn't heard of the Premier's Anything But Conservative campaign.  That's two years after he started it and despite more than a few references to it on the news.

The poll, conducted by Telelink for NTV, then asked the voters who were aware of ABC - that's 919 respondents for those keeping track - if they though it was appropriate for the Premier to be engaged in it in the first place.
45.6% said yes, 34.5% said no, 19.9% were unsure. The margin of error is +/-3.3 percentage points 19 times out of 20.
Whip out those calculators, ladies and gentlemen, and do some math.  Sensitive people may avert their eyes at this point.

That's 45.6% of the 73% who indicated they'd heard of the Premier's campaign.

A couple of clicks on the old calculator later and you see that works out to only 33% of all respondents.  One third of the public think it's appropriate. 

That's all.

But it gets worse, at least for the ABCers:
Telelink had more difficulty than usual getting people to answer the survey, and those who did -- 55% -- were undecided. Meanwhile, 19.1% said they would vote Liberal, 14.3% said they would vote Conservative and 8.8% said they would vote NDP.
Now it's almost impossible to understand if that means 55% of 1200, 55% of 919 or 55% of some other small number who answered the question but any way you put that together, it should make some people in the province very nervous about the outcome of the election in some of the seats.

Like say the three on the Avalon peninsula that are really the only ones up for grabs.

And through this you have to bear in mind that Telelink's survey during the last provincial election was eerily accurate.  We're talking off by a few percentage points as opposed to the widely quoted CRA poll which was off by a country mile and then some.

People aren't indicating their unquestioning and everlasting support for the crusade.  Who would ever have believed such a thing possible, take one step forward.  Certainly not your humble e-scribbler who has contended that at the very least survey respondents in these parts are adept at concealing their real intentions. 

Sometimes.

Other times, they describe themselves as undecided when they are thinking of doing something that goes against the perceived popular or dominant opinion.  It used to be - not so very long ago - that people in the undecided column were usually those ticked at government about something but either parking there until the matter resolved or leaning toward the opposition party but not sure if it was safe to say it openly.  About 15 to 20% can be genuinely undecided or won't vote.

In this case, a significant chunk of the 55% who were undecided could very well be potential Conservative voters or more likely are Conservatives who have made up their minds but just don't want to say. There may also be a bunch of undecided Liberals who are unsure of the vote or who might be looking at another option.  Heck, with numbers like that, pretty well all three major parties have some softness in their support.

The parties have a job of work to do. In many instances, that job won't be made easier by mixing around party allegiances among workers or by having candidates from one of the provincial parties cuddling up to people they usually don't agree with let alone work beside on a campaign. 

If Telelink and NTV released the full data set, someone could crunch some numbers and give you a much more accurate view of the poll and the electorate than the online story does.  Even as it is, though, this first poll of the campaign should really shake up the popular perception of what has already turned out to be a campaign of surprises.
-srbp-

08 September 2008

Cloverfield 2

In 1988,  Jack Harris was the lively little mammal who emerged amid a battle between a Godzilla and a Mothra of local politics to head off to Ottawa as member of parliament for St. John's East.

How ironic that 20 years later, Harris is one of two political dinosaurs resurrected by the nuclear explosions of the Premier's Family Feud to wage battle across the streets and hills of St. John's East.

The lively mammal in this latest really bad remake of really bad old political horror movies turns out, to everyone's surprise, to be the Conservative candidate, former journalist Craig Westcott.

Odds are the Provincial Conservatives never saw that one coming.  They could have predicted Harris' return like the rest of us did, as far back as six or eight months ago.  Danny Williams' former law partner spent his last few years spending way more time siding with the government and asking softball questions for the Provincial Conservatives to be the least bit worried that as a federal member of parliament he might somehow dare to contradict the Premier or pose any other form of challenge. To some, Harris spent his last years in the legislature sounding more like a Tory backbencher angling for an appointment to cabinet than the leader of the province's social democrats.

And after all, that is really what the ABC campaign is about on one level:  ensuring that there are no federal politicians able to challenge the Premier as the undeniable spokesperson for the heart and soul of the nation.  Some of the Commentariat has asked what Williams would do if there was another Harper administration with no elected Conservative members in his caucus.  Rub his hands in glee would be the answer.

To get his wish, Williams only has to hope the federal Liberals wind up in second place.  If Dion forms a new Liberal administration in mid October, either Judy Foote or Todd Russell would stand a chance of a cabinet seat.  They sit in safe Liberal seats and have no contenders against them as it current stands.

Cynthia Downey is rumoured by some to thinking of running in Random Burin St. George's.  If she does crop up, then you can bet the Provincial Conservatives are behind it.   Downey won't matter much though, since any opponent can simply point to her political blindness in her run for the federal Conservatives last time as proof she lacks anything resembling political judgment.  After all, what person concerned about refugees under a deportation order would run for a political party committed to the rapid execution of deportation orders?

But all that is digression.  As it stands right now, the only real political battles in this federal election are on the Avalon and the most interesting is in the East.

The race will likely see Jack Harris in the lead early on.  He is generally popular, even though the bulk of his old provincial seat is in St. John's South-Mount Pearl. In addition though, the New Democrats can count on support from the Provincial Conservatives - i.e. Jack's old law partner - who can funnel money if needed but more importantly workers and voters into the Orange camp.  The local Dippers will likely be amazed at seeing such political riches to use.

Confirmation of strong Williams support came in the form of Ed Buckingham, a longtime Tory organizer and current member of the provincial legislature, at Harris' campaign launch late Monday afternoon. Buckingham is connected and if he is there, then others are behind the scenes knocking doors to send Danny's man to Ottawa.

Craig Westcott's appearance in the campaign will serve chiefly to get up the Premier's nose and to draw whatever resources will go into the ABC campaign from the Provincial Conservative side into two ridings instead of the one they'd counted on.  Given the history between the two - and the new chapters to be written during the campaign - Williams cannot take the chance of Westcott doing anything but being crushed utterly.

The Provincial Conservatives won't be able to take any chances in that respect, either. The federal Conservatives in the riding can count on some workers and come polling day they can likely count on more votes than some currently give them credit for. The ballot boxes are secret, after all. With no way of precisely polling the district - people lie to pollsters when they want to do something a dominant force wouldn't like - Williams will be fighting the East campaign partially blinded.

As for Walter Noel, he will be struggling to find relevance. The heat of the campaign will be somewhere else and there is simply no way by which Noel can inject himself into the row.  Should he try and step in, one of his opponents will likely deliver him some perfume, women's clothes and a camera so that he can stay busy and stay out of the way.

If voters in St. John's East want an alternative to the Conservatives, they have it in Jack Harris.  The way the votes will likely run in the East, traditional NDP voters, hard core Conservatives who haven't gotten over 1949, provincial Tories and both federal and provincial Liberals who wish that Walter would just know when to stop - a disease that affects too many old politicians - can all find an amenable choice in Jack Harris.  He is offensive to none.

For those who are staunchly Conservative or who like their politicians to be somewhat offensive to the scared cows of provincial politics sometimes, they can chose Westcott.

If nothing else, Westcott's trademark sharp tongue will lash Danny Williams every time he enters the campaign.  If the first few days are any indication, Westcott may likely lash the old boy a few more times just to get a rise out of him.

And every time Williams does rise to the bait - he conspicuously didn't make himself available at all on Monday - Westcott's stock goes up making him potentially even more electable than he is at the start of the campaign.

What a mess this Family Feud could turn out to be.

-srbp-

Family Feud Week 2: Hit early, hit often; Williams starts polling; none of the usual suspects to run for Connies in St. John's East

Last week's smack from the federal Conservatives against their Provincial Conservative brethren sent the Premier off to poll his caucus to confirm everyone would support his promise to campaign against the federal Conservative party.

It was a classic example of using solid information to hit hard against a political foe in a way designed to strike at the foe's weakness.

After his quickie check over his shoulder by e-mail, the Premier found out that one of his caucus mates would abstain from the Feud.

Abstain?  What an odd word.

At the end of the week, outgoing fisheries minister Loyola Hearn took a few more swipes at Williams and his cabinet all of which no doubt heightened tensions considerably.

But if all that weren't enough, the federal Conservatives are claiming on Sunday that the Provincial Conservatives are polling on the Family Feud.  Conservative spokesman Steve Outhouse released the questions gleaned from one person who says she was surveyed. The whole thing is at Geoff Meeker's blog, Meeker on Media.

On top of that, Outhouse follows up with a new twist:  third party campaigning has to be reported to Elections Canada.

“As you know, Elections Canada has rules – and I don’t know them inside and out – that limit and require people to report what third parties are spending on a campaign. If ABC is moving past a philosophy or slogan and into an actual campaign, where money is being spent and polling is being done, with the specific intent to defeat a political party, just like a union or special interest group, all that information would need to be registered with Elections Canada.”

In the second week of campaigning, the Premier is evidently well behind in terms of his planning and definitely off track as far as Family Feud messaging is concerned.

No attacks.

Just defence.

On Monday, he'll be defending on the polling issue, facing questions of his caucus about which one isn't on board with the Feud and he'll also be fending off questions about the name of the new candidate in St. John's East.

The name, apparently, is not any of the ones bandied around so far.  That takes Rideout, Sullivan, Beth Marshall and Terry French out of play.

There'll likely be references to threats being made to deter other candidates, which the Premier will deny with his stock line:  "nothing could be further from the truth." 

Unfortunately for him, that's one of those phrases that just screams the opposite of what the words say.  The more he uses it, the worse it sounds.  And he'll have to keep using it unless and until he actually starts campaigning;  well, if he starts campaigning and that will be determined by the polling numbers.

It's really curious that polling has only started at this point rather than some weeks ago. Asking people if they've heard of the anti-Harper campaign? 

It would appear more bizarre that Williams would be feeling the waters to see if he should campaign across the country:  he's already committed to do just that.

Just think back, though and you can see a familiar pattern re-emerging.

Williams likes to test the waters before he jumps in on major political projects like this.  Like late 2004. Williams hauled down Canadian flags and then was taken aback by the spontaneous and angry response he received. 

A hasty poll - done by Ryan Research - showed that even with the questions and suggested responses skewed to push a Williams-favourable answer, the flag thing pissed off people everywhere across the country, including Newfoundland and Labrador.

Williams' public messaging on the flags shifted too, softening as more and more angry e-mails and letters poured in.  He got the polling data and poof, the flags went up without anything approaching the commitment he demanded the day they came down. He passed it off as a grand gesture at the time, but the reality was revealed in documents obtained by the Telegram through open records laws. 

In Newfoundland and Labrador 38% were completely supportive and 29% were not supportive at all. With a margin of error of almost five percent, those figures could be 33% completely supportive and 34% completely unsupportive. Those results were available to the Premier possibly as early as January 6 and may have prompted his admission to news media on January 7 that the flag issue had cost him support. Even at home, as Williams may well have known, his flag flap was a loser at worst, a distraction at best.

There is no way of knowing for sure, but it is interesting the coincidence that this polling was completed nationally on January 9 and that Premier Williams ordered flags raised on January 10. The move surprised everyone, coming, as it did, in the midst of a news conference to announce a call for expressions of interest in developing the Lower Churchill.

-srbp-

05 September 2008

Family Feud: another angle

So which Provincial Conservatives are gonna sign on to this campaign?

The premier's apparently got answers from all his caucus and only one is abstaining from any involvement.

 

-srbp-

Family Feud: the silverback swipes again

A federal Conservative statement hot off the e-mail:

Minister Hearn Challenges Premier Williams To Allow Caucus to Campaign for Conservatives

The Honourable Loyola Hearn, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans and Minister Responsible for Newfoundland and Labrador, today issued the following statement:

Today Premier Williams said he would not threaten any MHAs to adopt his position of ABC in the next federal campaign.

My comments in local media were based on a growing number of calls we have received from concerned caucus members and Progressive Conservative staffers who used exactly that that phrase.  They felt there was a clear expectation that they needed to publicly campaign for ABC, even if they didn't agree with it, or there was a threat to their career advancement within the Williams government.

If the Premier's statement is true, and he wishes to let democracy take its course, will he send another e-mail to his caucus and clarify that there is no threat?  Will he tell them he means it when he says members are free to do whatever they believe is in the best interests of their districts -- even if that means campaigning for Conservative candidates at the federal level?

If there is no threat, will the Premier commit publicly that there will be no action taken against MHAs who choose to volunteer for Conservative Party of Canada?

He can put this issue to rest by sending another memo to caucus right away.

As your humble e-scribbler already maintained, Hearn is a scrappy silverback politician.  Experienced, used to being dominant, savvy and fully of inherent political strength just like the biggest gorilla in a family group.

He'll tolerate nonsense for a while but at some point he'll be ready to rip apart any challenger.

Hearn's been working the local media this Friday before the writ drops and his language is designed to go right at the heart of the so-called ABC campaign.

With the comment on leaks a couple of days ago, Hearn and his federal Conservative brethren have already shown they know how to campaign hard when they need to and, in the caucus leak story, set the other guys to constantly responding instead of setting the agenda.  Hearn's release today will increase the pressure and counts as another shift in the political agenda.

If this campaign keeps going with the same intensity, the repercussions will be felt in provincial politics.

-srbp-

Friday election round-up

1.  The latest political scuttlebutt has Loyola Sullivan out of the country and not taking the Prime Minister's calls. As it stands now, incumbent Avalon member of parliament Fabian Manning is the only federal Conservative with any profile standing for election in the province in the fall general election.

2.  Former newspaper editor Ryan Cleary and Sierra Club activist Fred Winsor will be squaring off for the New Democrat nomination in St. John's South-Mount Pearl.

3.  For those wondering about the Liberals, all their candidates are in place.

4.  From the "Nothing spells election..." file, nothing can keep politicians from announcing public cash, not even an ABCDLMNOPQ Family Feud.

5.  From the "Surreal Life" file, the cash announcements even include a joint one involving federal Conservative Fabian Manning.

-srbp-

Family Feud: Hollywood style

In 1989, a younger Danny Williams campaigned to make Loyola Hearn premier of the province.

Almost 20 years later, the feud between the two Conservatives - one provincial and federal - is as vicious as a Hollywood divorce.

Hearn called some of Williams' rhetoric both "truth-twisting" and "underhanded."

Hearn said worse in another place as noted by CBC in its coverage of the Premier's scrum:

Williams was reacting Friday to comments Hearn made on a public call-in show after his Thursday announcement, calling the premier a dictator and accusing him of being "as gutless as a capelin."

"As well, if anyone would recognize a dictator he certainly worked for one, so he'd know a dictator I can guarantee ya," Williams said.

 

-srbp-

The Polar Opposites Express

Many of you may already read Mark Watton over at nottawa, but for those who don't, you might rethink what you've been missing.

"Alphabet Soup" is Mark's take on the election, the Family Feud and federal political parties of all stripes.
It is as insightful as it is concise.

Then, when you are done with that, you can ponder something as far from insight as is humanly possible.

-srbp-