I wonder what international seat Newfoundland and Labrador will be looking to have.
The most obvious one is the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO).
Given the disproportionate number of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians in the Canadian Forces, I can see looking for a seat at the North Atlantic Treay Organization council as well. We could do a good job at NATO.
Given that Newfoundland and Labrador used to be an independent country, and just never exercised its right to a seat at the old League of Nations, I can see giving the province a sort of co-seat at the United Nations. Maybe one with shorter legs.
We should also look for a seat at the Commonwealth table, given again that this used to be an independent country and one of the Dominions alongside Canada, New Zealand and India to name a few.
Given the number of aircraft transitting the airspace over the province and its historic role in international aviation, a seat at the International Civil Aviation Council would be in order.
Gimme time and I'll come up with a few more.
[Update: Oooh. Ooooh. I got a new one. International Atomic Energy Agency. Once Danny gets around to uttering his Tobinesque "not one teaspoon" threat over uranium in Labrador, Newfoundland and Labrador can look to become some kind of leader in all things nuclear.
Then there's the Arctic Council, an intergovernmental body addressing concerns of Arctic peoples.
17 January 2006
Welcome to Amerika!
Stephen Harper thinks that the Supreme Court is full of Liberals because the justices were appointed under Liberal administrations.
Obviously, Mr. Harper knows little of how our judges are appointed. It isn't the American system, nor should it be. And while there is room to improve the selection and appointment methods, we are a far cry from having the tortures of judicial appointments that are blatantly politicized as in the United States.
Based on these comments, we can logically conclude that his Prime Minister Harper's criterion for making the next appointment will be Conservative values.
Stephen Harper thinks the bureaucracy is Liberal because senior elements were appointed by Liberals. Mr. Harper might want to check the Progressive Conservative experience in 1979 and again in 1984 .
We can also logically expect a period of upheaval in the bureaucracy and intense suspicion by a Conservative government of anyone not providing Conservative-sounding advice. This will make the early months of a Harper government most interesting.
Lastly, on the Senate, Steve has it right. Yep. The majority have been appointed by Liberals. But, if he wants to check, he'll find that some Liberal administrations have appointed Conservatives and Independents.
Steve wants to reform the senate by having elections. Nice idea.
The major problem is that the senate, which should reflect the provinces of the country as equals, is currently weighted in favour of Ontario and Quebec.
If he really wanted to reform the senate and change the political landscape of the country, Steve would work to have an equal number of senators from each province chosen in elections run by Elections Canada.
Even with the limited powers of the existing senate, which cannot hold up money bills indefinitely, for example and has no power to review appointments of judges and senior officials, an elected senate with equal representation from the provinces would go a long way to making the federal government more representative of Canadians and more effective.
Unfortunately, Mr. Harper hasn't shown any serious interest in reforming the federal legislature. That is one plank from the old Reform Party platforms many Canadians would support.
Obviously, Mr. Harper knows little of how our judges are appointed. It isn't the American system, nor should it be. And while there is room to improve the selection and appointment methods, we are a far cry from having the tortures of judicial appointments that are blatantly politicized as in the United States.
Based on these comments, we can logically conclude that his Prime Minister Harper's criterion for making the next appointment will be Conservative values.
Stephen Harper thinks the bureaucracy is Liberal because senior elements were appointed by Liberals. Mr. Harper might want to check the Progressive Conservative experience in 1979 and again in 1984 .
We can also logically expect a period of upheaval in the bureaucracy and intense suspicion by a Conservative government of anyone not providing Conservative-sounding advice. This will make the early months of a Harper government most interesting.
Lastly, on the Senate, Steve has it right. Yep. The majority have been appointed by Liberals. But, if he wants to check, he'll find that some Liberal administrations have appointed Conservatives and Independents.
Steve wants to reform the senate by having elections. Nice idea.
The major problem is that the senate, which should reflect the provinces of the country as equals, is currently weighted in favour of Ontario and Quebec.
If he really wanted to reform the senate and change the political landscape of the country, Steve would work to have an equal number of senators from each province chosen in elections run by Elections Canada.
Even with the limited powers of the existing senate, which cannot hold up money bills indefinitely, for example and has no power to review appointments of judges and senior officials, an elected senate with equal representation from the provinces would go a long way to making the federal government more representative of Canadians and more effective.
Unfortunately, Mr. Harper hasn't shown any serious interest in reforming the federal legislature. That is one plank from the old Reform Party platforms many Canadians would support.
There's just no pleasing some people
Danny Williams tries to pretend he is not taking sides in the federal election. [The deputy premier is.]
He praises Stephen Harper, even though much of Harper's letter is a promise to talk.
He says nice things about Jack Layton, who actually offered Danny everything he asked for.
When the prime minister's letter comes through, Danny dismisses it as being "disappointing".
That despite the fact it addresses every concern and in considerable detail in some cases. It provides firm opportunities of funding for the Lower Churchill, and actually would increase federal presence in the province in a way that is attainable (unlike Harper's B/s military promises).
It's worth reading the actual letter, compare it to the other two and then try and figure out what Danny is up to. Apparently, it isn't trying to influence the local election results.
Yep. And pulling down the Canadian flag last year was a good idea. (Just ask the Premier's favourite pollster on that one.)
Of course, it's scarcely surprising that Williams would misrepresent a letter from Stephen Harper. Last year, Williams wanted people to believe Harper said yes to the province's proposal on offshore revenues when in fact Harper said a big "no".
Twice.
If Stephen Harper had been elected year before last, Danny would still be waiting for his offshore cheque.
If Stephen Harper had been elected last spring, by Harper's own words, we'd still be trying to figure out the Equalization changes Harper said would address Williams' issues.
Danny would still be waiting for his cheque.
But then again, Danny isn't taking sides. [Tom Rideout, Loyola Sullivan and most of cabinet is. But not Danny. Rideout, the deputy premier and another relic of the Peckford regime is telling people a Conservative majority would be best for the province. Backupable Tom obviously forgets the endless rackets with Ottawa under Mulroney.]
I just hope he has someone working overtime to calculate how much the province will be losing in federal transfers under Stephen Harper's plan to change Equalization.
Meanwhile, this headline seems to have been written by someone who is under the impression CBC has already been sold to Fox.
There's no quote in the story to confirm Williams said the PM's response "falls flat."
He said it fell short. It's just hard to see where exactly.
And on the Gander weather office and federal presence piece, "falls short" means gives more than we asked for.
There's just no pleasing some people.
He praises Stephen Harper, even though much of Harper's letter is a promise to talk.
He says nice things about Jack Layton, who actually offered Danny everything he asked for.
When the prime minister's letter comes through, Danny dismisses it as being "disappointing".
That despite the fact it addresses every concern and in considerable detail in some cases. It provides firm opportunities of funding for the Lower Churchill, and actually would increase federal presence in the province in a way that is attainable (unlike Harper's B/s military promises).
It's worth reading the actual letter, compare it to the other two and then try and figure out what Danny is up to. Apparently, it isn't trying to influence the local election results.
Yep. And pulling down the Canadian flag last year was a good idea. (Just ask the Premier's favourite pollster on that one.)
Of course, it's scarcely surprising that Williams would misrepresent a letter from Stephen Harper. Last year, Williams wanted people to believe Harper said yes to the province's proposal on offshore revenues when in fact Harper said a big "no".
Twice.
If Stephen Harper had been elected year before last, Danny would still be waiting for his offshore cheque.
If Stephen Harper had been elected last spring, by Harper's own words, we'd still be trying to figure out the Equalization changes Harper said would address Williams' issues.
Danny would still be waiting for his cheque.
But then again, Danny isn't taking sides. [Tom Rideout, Loyola Sullivan and most of cabinet is. But not Danny. Rideout, the deputy premier and another relic of the Peckford regime is telling people a Conservative majority would be best for the province. Backupable Tom obviously forgets the endless rackets with Ottawa under Mulroney.]
I just hope he has someone working overtime to calculate how much the province will be losing in federal transfers under Stephen Harper's plan to change Equalization.
Meanwhile, this headline seems to have been written by someone who is under the impression CBC has already been sold to Fox.
There's no quote in the story to confirm Williams said the PM's response "falls flat."
He said it fell short. It's just hard to see where exactly.And on the Gander weather office and federal presence piece, "falls short" means gives more than we asked for.
There's just no pleasing some people.
Get a load of the Connies...
calling Crap Talk on vocm.com and complaining that the Prime Minister's commitment to move the Canadian Ice Service in Gander (75 jobs) and spending $3.0 million to improve weather forecasting in the province, commitment to cost-share paving of the major highway in Labrador and continued commitment to extending Canada's offshore jurisdiction as being not good enough.
The caller on now, who may be from anywhere in the province, says the Gander offer isn't good enough because it isn't for the 16 jobs she signed a petition for.
Brian: "There's no pleasing some people."
Ex-Leper: "That's just what Jesus said Sir..."
I await the hate mail from people who never liked Life of Brian.
The caller on now, who may be from anywhere in the province, says the Gander offer isn't good enough because it isn't for the 16 jobs she signed a petition for.
Brian: "There's no pleasing some people."
Ex-Leper: "That's just what Jesus said Sir..."
I await the hate mail from people who never liked Life of Brian.
Santa Paul answers Danny
Last but by no means least is Paul Martin's response to Danny Williams' pre-Christmas letter to Santa.
Some of the questions were answered by the deputy prime minister in a separate letter.
It has the greatest level of detail of the three letters and the most specific responses in most categories.
Martin also commits to improving weather forecasting in the province and moving the Canadian Ice Service to Gander. That works out to be a commitment to move over four times the number of jobs to Gander as lost in the relocation of weather forecasting.
On the Hibernia shares, the Prime Minister states that sale of the shares is not a federal government priority at this time.
On the Lower Churchill, the PM reaffirms his commitment to assistance, but not in the way the Premier wants. That is, the PM doesn't commit to a federal loan guarantee that would allow the province to build the entire project on its own. The estimated cost of $3-5 billion would count against the province's debt load in that scenario.
Danny's response?
Go figure.
But hey, don't take my word for it.
Put aside any partisan biases and evaluate the letters on their individual merits.
Some of the questions were answered by the deputy prime minister in a separate letter.
It has the greatest level of detail of the three letters and the most specific responses in most categories.
Martin also commits to improving weather forecasting in the province and moving the Canadian Ice Service to Gander. That works out to be a commitment to move over four times the number of jobs to Gander as lost in the relocation of weather forecasting.
On the Hibernia shares, the Prime Minister states that sale of the shares is not a federal government priority at this time.
On the Lower Churchill, the PM reaffirms his commitment to assistance, but not in the way the Premier wants. That is, the PM doesn't commit to a federal loan guarantee that would allow the province to build the entire project on its own. The estimated cost of $3-5 billion would count against the province's debt load in that scenario.
Danny's response?
Adding more jobs to Gander is not as responsive as giving the premier exactly what he asked for even if what he asked for is less.
The responses from Mr. Martin are clearly not as definitive as some of those from Mr. Harper and Mr. Layton. This is disappointing from the provincial government'’s perspective;...
Go figure.
But hey, don't take my word for it.
Put aside any partisan biases and evaluate the letters on their individual merits.
From the Land of Old, Bad Ideas...
comes this announcement from Jim Bennett, the only declared candidate for the provincial Liberal leadership.
His idea is to have the government buy shares in Fishery Products International, in effect to nationalize the company in whole or in part.
There is little to commend Bennett's idea to any serious consideration, despite the support Bennett already has for it.
The Marxist-Leninist Daily, online organ of the Communist Party of Canada (Marxist-Leninist) for example, already advocated nationalizing the company some time ago. So too, did Bill Callahan, a Liberal cabinet minister in the last Smallwood administration and one of Bennett's backers.
Nationalizing is the oldest of bad ideas that we have repeated over and over again, without success. The only places that tried it more often with less success than us used to fly the hammer and sickle and dream of the proletarian revolution.
One can only wait for the eye-glass factory or linerboard scheme or the Sprung Greenhouse to return.
Our province has seen enough of this sorts of politics, about $12 billion in provincial debt-enough.
Better to send these ideas back to the ash heap of history rather than hold them up as a plausible idea.
If this is the Bennett has to offer, Liberals can only hope someone else can raise the $10, 000 to get into the race.
Otherwise, the Liberal Party is doomed to the same obscurity as the other party espousing nationalization of industries long after that proved to be an utter failure as a policy.
His idea is to have the government buy shares in Fishery Products International, in effect to nationalize the company in whole or in part.
There is little to commend Bennett's idea to any serious consideration, despite the support Bennett already has for it.
The Marxist-Leninist Daily, online organ of the Communist Party of Canada (Marxist-Leninist) for example, already advocated nationalizing the company some time ago. So too, did Bill Callahan, a Liberal cabinet minister in the last Smallwood administration and one of Bennett's backers.
Nationalizing is the oldest of bad ideas that we have repeated over and over again, without success. The only places that tried it more often with less success than us used to fly the hammer and sickle and dream of the proletarian revolution.
One can only wait for the eye-glass factory or linerboard scheme or the Sprung Greenhouse to return.
Our province has seen enough of this sorts of politics, about $12 billion in provincial debt-enough.
Better to send these ideas back to the ash heap of history rather than hold them up as a plausible idea.
If this is the Bennett has to offer, Liberals can only hope someone else can raise the $10, 000 to get into the race.
Otherwise, the Liberal Party is doomed to the same obscurity as the other party espousing nationalization of industries long after that proved to be an utter failure as a policy.
If it walks like a duck, and looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...
Odds are it is Connie incumbent candidate Loyola Hearn who is returning to his old habit of ducking interviews.
He had the chance to participate in a radio panel with his fellow candidates this morning but made it plain he wasn't available.
Period.
Ever.
He was busy.
How busy? Real busy.
Washing his hair.
Yep. There's accountability for you.
and it looks like a whole bunch of people are going to vote this guy back again.
So he can talk about things like custodial management and accomplish not a whit.
He had the chance to participate in a radio panel with his fellow candidates this morning but made it plain he wasn't available.
Period.
Ever.
He was busy.
How busy? Real busy.
Washing his hair.
Yep. There's accountability for you.
and it looks like a whole bunch of people are going to vote this guy back again.
So he can talk about things like custodial management and accomplish not a whit.
Dr. Thomas goes to Ottawa?
democraticspace.com is showing Rondo Thomas running ahead of his Liberal rival in the Ontario riding of Ajax-Pickering.
Thomas' website makes him look like a run-of-the-mill Conservative. There's not much beyond the party platform, crafted to appeal to middle-of-the-road, cliche using Canadians like me.
Then there's Rick Mercer's take on the guy complete with a link to some video of Rondo in full flight in his declared war against anyone not sharing his brand of Christian views.
Get a sense of what Rondo will mean to parliament here and on the Bond papers from early December. Chunks of the country are taking a turn toward the North American right, complete with our very own bible-thumpers.
If Rondo gets elected, we'll have to see if he turns out to be a run-of-the-mill Conservative after all.
Thomas' website makes him look like a run-of-the-mill Conservative. There's not much beyond the party platform, crafted to appeal to middle-of-the-road, cliche using Canadians like me.
Then there's Rick Mercer's take on the guy complete with a link to some video of Rondo in full flight in his declared war against anyone not sharing his brand of Christian views.
Get a sense of what Rondo will mean to parliament here and on the Bond papers from early December. Chunks of the country are taking a turn toward the North American right, complete with our very own bible-thumpers.
If Rondo gets elected, we'll have to see if he turns out to be a run-of-the-mill Conservative after all.
16 January 2006
An agenda of hope
Under a Conservative Harper government, will Canadians learn to
1. Hope that the Connie finance minister is better at math than the guys who worked on the Connie campaign?
2. Hope that Steve Harper is the second coming of a Progressive Conservative prime minister of the country rather than the rebirth of a provincial premier?
3. Hope that Stockwell Day doesn't become either the foreign affairs or health minister?
4. Hope that the Conservatives aren't the party of hidden special interest groups? Check out their Jack Layton ad (Jack Talk) for a good laugh at pot calling the kettle names.
5. Hope that $2.30 cents a day actually adds up to choice in child care?
6. Hope that Dave Frum doesn't get a job writing speeches for the Connies only to give him more fodder for another tell-all book?
7. Hope that the CBC isn't sold to Fox?
8. Hope that political parties will stop tossing around the word Nazi like it means nothing?
9. Hope that Stephen Harper says the same thing in every place in the country? As opposed to "It's different in North Bay, and I will deliver a different speech in North Bay," he said. "I try to match my speeches to the crowd."
1. Hope that the Connie finance minister is better at math than the guys who worked on the Connie campaign?
2. Hope that Steve Harper is the second coming of a Progressive Conservative prime minister of the country rather than the rebirth of a provincial premier?
3. Hope that Stockwell Day doesn't become either the foreign affairs or health minister?
4. Hope that the Conservatives aren't the party of hidden special interest groups? Check out their Jack Layton ad (Jack Talk) for a good laugh at pot calling the kettle names.
5. Hope that $2.30 cents a day actually adds up to choice in child care?
6. Hope that Dave Frum doesn't get a job writing speeches for the Connies only to give him more fodder for another tell-all book?
7. Hope that the CBC isn't sold to Fox?
8. Hope that political parties will stop tossing around the word Nazi like it means nothing?
9. Hope that Stephen Harper says the same thing in every place in the country? As opposed to "It's different in North Bay, and I will deliver a different speech in North Bay," he said. "I try to match my speeches to the crowd."
Santa Jack answers Danny's letter
Jack Layton's response to Danny Williams is in.
Find it at gov.nl.ca under news releases or follow this convenient link provided free of charge by Bond Papers.
In a nutshell, and as the last time, Jack Layton is the only leader who in writing is giving Danny everything he is asking for. We should soon see an endorsement of Jack Layton by the provincial government. I am not holding my breath.
For people who stock in these things, Jack is the man. Note the evident lack of attacks in the Layton letter compared to Harper's missive. Harper spent about as much time slagging Liberals as he does actually answering the questions.
The closest Harper came is to say "we'll talk".
My favourite bits to compare, aside from the custodial management thingy, are the sections on federal presence.
[Aside: As for my own view, federal presence in the way it has been presented by so many is a bit of a non-issue in light of something like say re-organizing the fishery. it's a subcomponent of a lot of issues, but having federal jobs here for the sake of having them just isn't my favourite way to spend my tax dollars. It wasn't when Tobin shifted hordes of provincial public servants from St. John's to other communities. That's still my view on the federal ones as well.]
Harper's commitment, after moaning about the losses and acknowledging there is an imbalance in distribution? "an effort must be made to ensure that there is a fair distribution of the federal government presence across the country." In short: we'll give it the old college try.
Right after that he promises to put the handful of jobs back in Gander forecasting weather. After all, that's all anyone actually asked for specifically.
A little later in the letter, Harper also mentions his defence initiatives (which will be damned near impossible to pull off) as a further attempt to deal with this.
Jack's reply? Very similar, except for this: "We are committed to reviewing federal government policies that have led to this situation with a view to ensuring fairness and full access to federal government delivery of programs and services in this province."
Layton's letter contains language that is less equivocal than the Harper one on just about all fronts.
Expect that, as the last time, people will tell you the Harper letter says things it doesn't say. Jack's letter will be ignored even though he said "yes" to everything.
Find it at gov.nl.ca under news releases or follow this convenient link provided free of charge by Bond Papers.
In a nutshell, and as the last time, Jack Layton is the only leader who in writing is giving Danny everything he is asking for. We should soon see an endorsement of Jack Layton by the provincial government. I am not holding my breath.
For people who stock in these things, Jack is the man. Note the evident lack of attacks in the Layton letter compared to Harper's missive. Harper spent about as much time slagging Liberals as he does actually answering the questions.
The closest Harper came is to say "we'll talk".
My favourite bits to compare, aside from the custodial management thingy, are the sections on federal presence.
[Aside: As for my own view, federal presence in the way it has been presented by so many is a bit of a non-issue in light of something like say re-organizing the fishery. it's a subcomponent of a lot of issues, but having federal jobs here for the sake of having them just isn't my favourite way to spend my tax dollars. It wasn't when Tobin shifted hordes of provincial public servants from St. John's to other communities. That's still my view on the federal ones as well.]
Harper's commitment, after moaning about the losses and acknowledging there is an imbalance in distribution? "an effort must be made to ensure that there is a fair distribution of the federal government presence across the country." In short: we'll give it the old college try.
Right after that he promises to put the handful of jobs back in Gander forecasting weather. After all, that's all anyone actually asked for specifically.
A little later in the letter, Harper also mentions his defence initiatives (which will be damned near impossible to pull off) as a further attempt to deal with this.
Jack's reply? Very similar, except for this: "We are committed to reviewing federal government policies that have led to this situation with a view to ensuring fairness and full access to federal government delivery of programs and services in this province."
Layton's letter contains language that is less equivocal than the Harper one on just about all fronts.
Expect that, as the last time, people will tell you the Harper letter says things it doesn't say. Jack's letter will be ignored even though he said "yes" to everything.
National seat projections
Paul Wells has pumped both the most recent Ekos and Strategic Counsel numbers through the Hill and Knowlton and come up with two results that show either a small Conservative majority or a chunkier one.
The most recent SES numbers produce a seat projection like this:
CPC 145
LPC 80
NDP 29
Bloc 53
Oth 1
Interestingly this set of numbers shows the central Newfoundland riding changing to the Conservatives.
One of the results Paul uses has a seat in the province going New Democrat. I don't think so.
All this goes to illustrate a few points:
1. The polls are shifting which means public opinion is shifting somewhat.
2. Variation you are seeing comes from differences in sampling and in sampling period.
3. In some areas, such as Atlantic Canada and parts of Ontario, the samples are too small to get an accurate reading. (margins of error are unacceptably high)
4. The seat projections depend heavily on the methodology. I suspect the Hill and Knowlton one is using the last election in which, locally, the Dippers had a stronger candidate in one riding than they do now. As a result, they'll shift the seat to the NDP when there isn't any sign this time of the NDP being in contention in that seat.
Ah well, we'll know in a week.
The most recent SES numbers produce a seat projection like this:
CPC 145
LPC 80
NDP 29
Bloc 53
Oth 1
Interestingly this set of numbers shows the central Newfoundland riding changing to the Conservatives.
One of the results Paul uses has a seat in the province going New Democrat. I don't think so.
All this goes to illustrate a few points:
1. The polls are shifting which means public opinion is shifting somewhat.
2. Variation you are seeing comes from differences in sampling and in sampling period.
3. In some areas, such as Atlantic Canada and parts of Ontario, the samples are too small to get an accurate reading. (margins of error are unacceptably high)
4. The seat projections depend heavily on the methodology. I suspect the Hill and Knowlton one is using the last election in which, locally, the Dippers had a stronger candidate in one riding than they do now. As a result, they'll shift the seat to the NDP when there isn't any sign this time of the NDP being in contention in that seat.
Ah well, we'll know in a week.
Local race projections
Check out democraticspace.com see the vote projections based on current polling.
This guy has no particular axes to grind and while you can quibble, his methodology seems sound.
This guy has no particular axes to grind and while you can quibble, his methodology seems sound.
Interesting crap from Connies or Dippers
Someone is telling Craig Westcott of The Express tnhat Siobhan Coady will come in third in the St. John's South-Mount Pearl race.
That's odd since, if her campaigning is tanking as badly as Westcott described, people wouldn't need to get out and push it down as obviously as with the "third place" story. It's obviously a crock since publicly available polling shows a voting pattern very similar to the normal vote distributions, at least according to elections Canada. Con in front (45%) , Lib in second (35%) and the Dipper in third (18%).
The only place a story like that would come from is either of Coady's opponents. Hearn, who was seen campaigning recently door-to-door in one area of the riding, likely for the first time in his career, could be wanting to puff himself up a bit.
The story could also come from Peg Norman, who's campaign might be trying to pull a reverse Layton. That is she might be trying to claim that Coady is running behind to pull Liberal votes from people afraid of Harper and Hearn. Wow. If that's the case, talk about the lobster effect.
Someone is telling Westcott a story.
Unfortunately, he keeps repeating it.
[Note: take a look at democraticspace.com. That projection conforms to recent local polling, at least for the two St. John's seats.]
That's odd since, if her campaigning is tanking as badly as Westcott described, people wouldn't need to get out and push it down as obviously as with the "third place" story. It's obviously a crock since publicly available polling shows a voting pattern very similar to the normal vote distributions, at least according to elections Canada. Con in front (45%) , Lib in second (35%) and the Dipper in third (18%).
The only place a story like that would come from is either of Coady's opponents. Hearn, who was seen campaigning recently door-to-door in one area of the riding, likely for the first time in his career, could be wanting to puff himself up a bit.
The story could also come from Peg Norman, who's campaign might be trying to pull a reverse Layton. That is she might be trying to claim that Coady is running behind to pull Liberal votes from people afraid of Harper and Hearn. Wow. If that's the case, talk about the lobster effect.
Someone is telling Westcott a story.
Unfortunately, he keeps repeating it.
[Note: take a look at democraticspace.com. That projection conforms to recent local polling, at least for the two St. John's seats.]
Connies: "our fear mongering's bigger"
Take a trip to see "balloon fear", one of the newest Connie ads.
It's a fearmongering piece about gun violence that includes the completely false claim that the homicide rate in Canada is up. It's actually down by 7% and has gone down just about every year since the early 1990s if memory serves.
The circus music is appropriate: the election has quickly descended into a fun-house mirror world in which reality (what Connies will really do) is deliberately distorted in order to mislead and frighten.
Word is the Connie team is busily looking around for a Canadian Willie Horton.
Who knows, the next Connie spot might feature Carla Homolka and Paul Bernardo.
It's a fearmongering piece about gun violence that includes the completely false claim that the homicide rate in Canada is up. It's actually down by 7% and has gone down just about every year since the early 1990s if memory serves.
The circus music is appropriate: the election has quickly descended into a fun-house mirror world in which reality (what Connies will really do) is deliberately distorted in order to mislead and frighten.
Word is the Connie team is busily looking around for a Canadian Willie Horton.
Who knows, the next Connie spot might feature Carla Homolka and Paul Bernardo.
15 January 2006
Connie custodial management commitment evaporates: more facts
When the federal Conservatives voted to bring down the government last spring, they were also voting to hold up work underpinning Canada's claim to control subsea minerals and the water column to the edge of the continental shelf off Newfoundland and Labrador.
Loyola Hearn and Norm Doyle have voted three years in a row against work needed for Canada's claim to the subsea and waters beyond 200 miles.
Work on extending Canada's economic zone began in 2003 and funding each year since has been dedicated to conducted the underwater mapping which will be a crucial part of Canada's claim. Canada has until 2013 to complete its claim.
All that is just to confirm:
The Conservative Party platform commitment is to continue existing Government of Canada policy.
For those interested in tracking the changing Conservative commitment, check the Bond Papers archives for posts with the word "backpedal" or variations in the title.
Loyola Hearn and Norm Doyle have voted three years in a row against work needed for Canada's claim to the subsea and waters beyond 200 miles.
Work on extending Canada's economic zone began in 2003 and funding each year since has been dedicated to conducted the underwater mapping which will be a crucial part of Canada's claim. Canada has until 2013 to complete its claim.
All that is just to confirm:
The Conservative Party platform commitment is to continue existing Government of Canada policy.
For those interested in tracking the changing Conservative commitment, check the Bond Papers archives for posts with the word "backpedal" or variations in the title.
The 100 door challenge
Check out Mark's 100 door challenge over at nottawa.blogspot.com.
The SES polls (which we are ALL guilty of citing to suit our daily needs) show that there was no upward movement in the Tory polls in the early days of policy announcements. Harper's momentum starts, quite clearly, a few days after Christmas, long after the "policy a day" type stuff was put to bed.
That little sample speaks volumes for the overall campaign, and Mark's point.
The SES polls (which we are ALL guilty of citing to suit our daily needs) show that there was no upward movement in the Tory polls in the early days of policy announcements. Harper's momentum starts, quite clearly, a few days after Christmas, long after the "policy a day" type stuff was put to bed.
My challenge to any of you who buy into this reasoning - go knock on 100 doors in any riding and come back and tell me if you hear about the GST as often as you do about Chuck Guite. Try it for yourself and then get back to me.I'll go Mark one better. Do an analysis of only one Connie blog. Or letters to the editor and posts to a CBC blog forum by the same guy.
Harper himself hasn't had to mention scandal, it has had enough legs on its own to permeate media coverage without his piling on.
But please - try the door-to-door thing, and tell me what you hear. Or, do a scan of all the Tory blog postings out there and tell me how many references to Harper's policies there are compared to how many references to "scandal".
That little sample speaks volumes for the overall campaign, and Mark's point.
Unfit to govern - Connies didn't give him everything to assess: economist
This should give everyone pause for thought:
Read a little further in the Canadian Press article, available from canoe.ca and you find this statement from the guy who originally endorse the Connie platform as fiscally sound:
OTTAWA (CP) - A prominent economist commissioned by the Conservatives to assess the financial soundness of their election platform says major items were omitted from the version he was given.
Paul Darby, deputy chief economist of the Conference Board of Canada, originally concluded that Stephen Harper's Conservative platform 'is affordable in each fiscal year from 2005-2006 through 2010-2011.'
"Those are two items that are not in what I was presented to analyze," he said. "I don't think, frankly, that those are in the platform, they're just under discussion.
"Those items were not costed, which leads me to believe that they're something that they're having under consideration that they're not committed to." [Emphasis added]
14 January 2006
Globe: change for change sake, despite fear over country
Odd that the Globe editors today opt for change in the coming election despite acknowledging the country is better off today than when Liberals took power in 1993.
Odd they endorse change given this paragraph in the election editorial today:
The vote is what counts; the policy comes after, and only after the Consdervatives have four years to do as they wish from a comofrtable majority position.
Once safely seated at 24 Sussex, likely with a strong majority by current polling numbers, the Conservatives will discover the country's finacial picture is now much bleaker than originally forecast.
An outside firm will audit the books and - predictably - declare the Liberals to be manipulaters - do the work.
Expect to see someone like Mr. Gourley of PriceClubWaterHouseCoopers, well known to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians for his mockery of accounting integrity two years ago, brought forward to twist and distort the numbers to make the situation look much worse than it appeared. To produce the report the government asked for saying what it wanted said.
And suddenly there will be no base in Goose bay. No troops for Trenton.
No money for child care.
Suddenly the focus will shift to the $30 billion in reallocations.
Call them program cuts, to be more accurate.
And the tax cuts will carry forward since they benefit the wealthy, in any event. The ghost of Mike harris and the mess of Ontario after his tenure is long forgotten, as is the mess left by the last Conservative government under Brian Mulroney.
The Globe editorialists try to erase their logical contradictions by trusting in the voters. That would be fine if party policy, such as the Conservative one, was not a moveable feast of pork and verbiage. A voter might well chose today based on one thing only to find that in truth, the policy actually had changed to something else. Stephen Harper cannot be held to account since he has said dofferent things at different times, all within the same election.
It's one thing to campaign from the left and govern from the right when you are basically somewhere in the middle anyways.
But when you campaign from the far left and you are really from the far right, perhaps the results won't be so pleasant.
Maybe, just maybe, the people who wish so desperately for a change, people who can recall the folly of Bob Rae and Mike Harris, these same people should be careful what they wish for.
Odd they endorse change given this paragraph in the election editorial today:
It is hard to endorse him [Stephen Harper] and his party unreservedly. We worry about his seeming indifference to the need for a strong central government in a country so replete with runaway centrifugal forces. We worry about him teaming up with the Bloc Québécois to weaken the federal government's tax-raising capacity and its advocacy of national programs. We worry that he might have to strike retrograde compromises with social conservatives in the party's midst. We worry that he may prove heavy-handed in wielding the considerable powers of a prime minister.To that might be added the very real fear that the Conservative Plan is actually not a plan at all. It is merely the tissue paper cover over the real plan that will only be seen once the conservatives are in power. Consider the number of twists and turns we have seen in the conservative "Plan" already, all designed to tweak the wording to match with what the right number of voters are looking for.
The vote is what counts; the policy comes after, and only after the Consdervatives have four years to do as they wish from a comofrtable majority position.
Once safely seated at 24 Sussex, likely with a strong majority by current polling numbers, the Conservatives will discover the country's finacial picture is now much bleaker than originally forecast.
An outside firm will audit the books and - predictably - declare the Liberals to be manipulaters - do the work.
Expect to see someone like Mr. Gourley of PriceClubWaterHouseCoopers, well known to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians for his mockery of accounting integrity two years ago, brought forward to twist and distort the numbers to make the situation look much worse than it appeared. To produce the report the government asked for saying what it wanted said.
And suddenly there will be no base in Goose bay. No troops for Trenton.
No money for child care.
Suddenly the focus will shift to the $30 billion in reallocations.
Call them program cuts, to be more accurate.
And the tax cuts will carry forward since they benefit the wealthy, in any event. The ghost of Mike harris and the mess of Ontario after his tenure is long forgotten, as is the mess left by the last Conservative government under Brian Mulroney.
The Globe editorialists try to erase their logical contradictions by trusting in the voters. That would be fine if party policy, such as the Conservative one, was not a moveable feast of pork and verbiage. A voter might well chose today based on one thing only to find that in truth, the policy actually had changed to something else. Stephen Harper cannot be held to account since he has said dofferent things at different times, all within the same election.
It's one thing to campaign from the left and govern from the right when you are basically somewhere in the middle anyways.
But when you campaign from the far left and you are really from the far right, perhaps the results won't be so pleasant.
Maybe, just maybe, the people who wish so desperately for a change, people who can recall the folly of Bob Rae and Mike Harris, these same people should be careful what they wish for.
13 January 2006
Harper would cut $30 billion in programs and services
Go to the Conservative's fiscal plan.
Flip to the second last page.
Note the figures:
$6.8 billion in "re-allocation" and another $22.5 billion for "moderating spending" in government departments, agencies, and on grants and contributions.
That's almost $30 billion in program cuts that don't appear to be explained anywhere in the Conservative Plan.
Take a look at the Conservative Plan document itself and you might find a hint in the vague wording.
Economic development organizations like the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency will maintain their current funding levels.
Hmmm.
Maintain current levels.
That sounds like "freeze at current levels".
No increases.
With inflation, that means that in five years time, ACOA would actually have less money to spend on diversifying the economy in Atlantic Canada than it has now.
That's a program cut.
That's also a significant kick to the many successful efforts at economic development that have taken place since ACOA was created under Brian Mulroney.
But hey, Steve's gotta find $30 freakin' billion to cut from somewhere.
Flip to the second last page.
Note the figures:
$6.8 billion in "re-allocation" and another $22.5 billion for "moderating spending" in government departments, agencies, and on grants and contributions.
That's almost $30 billion in program cuts that don't appear to be explained anywhere in the Conservative Plan.
Take a look at the Conservative Plan document itself and you might find a hint in the vague wording.
Economic development organizations like the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency will maintain their current funding levels.
Hmmm.
Maintain current levels.
That sounds like "freeze at current levels".
No increases.
With inflation, that means that in five years time, ACOA would actually have less money to spend on diversifying the economy in Atlantic Canada than it has now.
That's a program cut.
That's also a significant kick to the many successful efforts at economic development that have taken place since ACOA was created under Brian Mulroney.
But hey, Steve's gotta find $30 freakin' billion to cut from somewhere.
Unfit to govern: Confusion in Connie Camp Continues
As if shagging up the costs of the plan wasn't bad enough.
As if the constantly changing the Party position on custodial management wasn't embarrassing.
Someone in the Connie bunker finally checked some facts on Canada's overseas spy agency.
The comment buried in a news release issued a week ago talked about "expanding" something called the Canadian Foreign Intelligence Agency.
The Bond Papers picked it up, reported it and a week later Canadian Press had more details:
There currently is no overseas spy agency to "expand".
Today's Conservative Plan refers to "creating" an overseas spy agency.
To paraphrase Bob Fife: if you don't know that Canada doesn't have an overseas spy agency when you make an announcement about expanding it, then that raises questions about your fitness to govern.
As if the constantly changing the Party position on custodial management wasn't embarrassing.
Someone in the Connie bunker finally checked some facts on Canada's overseas spy agency.
The comment buried in a news release issued a week ago talked about "expanding" something called the Canadian Foreign Intelligence Agency.
The Bond Papers picked it up, reported it and a week later Canadian Press had more details:
There currently is no overseas spy agency to "expand".
Today's Conservative Plan refers to "creating" an overseas spy agency.
To paraphrase Bob Fife: if you don't know that Canada doesn't have an overseas spy agency when you make an announcement about expanding it, then that raises questions about your fitness to govern.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)