Family Feud: George Orwell meets Walt Kelly

Steve Kent was quick off the mark on Thursday to pledge his unswerving, unstinting and constant loyalty to the ABC cause.

Yes, the Family Feud is on.

CBC's David Cochrane reported this evening that the Premier was so unsettled by a recent blog post at Meeker on Media that he fired off an e-mail demanding government caucus members declare their support for the Feud and indicate which candidate they would be supporting.

The post, based on comments by Loyola Hearn's communications director, suggested there were leaks inside the Tory caucus heading to Hearn and that not all Provincial Conservatives were comfortable going to war against their kith and kin.  The post also indicated that the Premier and his team were organizing a trademark astroturf campaign.

Hearing Kent of the Williams Conservatives commit to defeat the "Harper Conservatives" in the context of the Premier's e-mail only serves to confirm the background to the Meeker post and other commentaries.

First, the e-mail is a clear signal that not only are there Provincial Conservatives who are not happy with the Family Feud, the premier himself is so conscious of it - and worried about it -  that he is looking for declarations of loyalty.

Second, Kent's use of the talking point "Harper Conservatives" invites the obvious conclusion that the Family Feud merely pits the Harper Conservatives against the Williams Conservatives, a phrase that only slightly morphs the "Williams Government" phrase so popular in official government news releases.

Third, having Kent pledging to campaign throughout his district against the federal Conservatives is only fitting for what is - essentially - an internal spat among people on the same end of the political spectrum. Only a decade ago, Kent was being courted by and apparently considered running for the old Reform/Alliance Party.

One could almost hear Kent's talking points as a bizarre mix of 1984 and Pogo: 

Mount Pearl has always been at war with Eastasia. 

We have found the enemy and they is us.

-srbp-

The Big Blue Shaft

After this week's Provincial Conservative convention in Corner Brook, there can be no doubt who approved the Blue Shaft for the opposition caucus budget.

"...So prepare yourselves Yvonne and Lorraine, 'cause the honeymoon is over."

Bond Papers readers won't be surprised by this.  As pointed out in September, the Family Feud caused dissension in the ranks and no one had to eavesdrop on Timmies customers to pick up the disgruntled views of Provincial Conservatives.  Some were fried at the idea of turning on their federal cousins, brothers and sisters. Others thought the Feud would only strengthen the provincial opposition.

Premier Danny Williams put those fears to rest by calling off the Feud the day after the election at the same time as three of his senior caucus mates gave the Shaft to the opposition.

It didn't take long for the conciliatory tone and the shift in Williams' targeting to resonate with Conservatives in the province:

"I'm glad we're turning a corner there," O'Brien said. "It would be nice for him to finally just say it: a Conservative is a Conservative is a Conservative, a Tory is a Tory is a Tory, [and] not constantly distinguish between the two.

"The provincial party and the federal party have slightly different names, but it's the same people, the same family."

Uh huh.

The same family. 

Like some of us didn't know that already.

Williams event went so far as to claim that the Williams Family Feud  caused the Liberal victories in the recent federal election;  he attributed the Liberal rise to a deep blue wave of Provincial Conservatives.

Not exactly.

West of Goobies, the only impact the Feud had was to suppress Conservative votes in the province.

East of Goobies, the Feud suppressed Conservative votes in Avalon to the point where Scott Andrews took the seat with a tiny increase in the Liberal vote. In St. John's East, Provincial Conservatives turned out en masse to back New Democrat Jack Harris, Williams' former law partner.

Harris enjoyed public declarations of support from the Provincial Conservative caucus, as did St. John's South-Mount pearl Liberal candidate Siobhan Coady.  So pronounced were the Provincial Conservatives' declarations of support for specific candidates in the two St. John's ridings one could easily imagine a list had been drawn up and handed down.

However, in St. John's South-Mount Pearl, Coady wasn't the beneficiary of any influx of Blue voters. In a result that could almost be seen as local Conservatives thumbing their nose at the Feud's preference, New Democrat Ryan Cleary picked up twice as many new votes as did his Liberal rival.  Coady still won the seat but the race was nip and tuck through most of the evening as returns poured in.  If those votes were Conservatives, twice as many voted for Cleary than Coady and more even stayed home than Coady polled in new votes compared to her previous outing in 2006.

-srbp-

Backuppable Tom to run for federal Connies?

The Family Feud could get infinitely more entertaining if local political rumours hold true.

Former Provincial Conservative Premier Tom Rideout is looking at running for the federal Conservatives according to CBC's David Cochrane.  When Rideout quit Danny Williams' cabinet a couple of months ago, Bond Papers had Rideout looking at a run against incumbent Liberal member of parliament Scott Simms in central Newfoundland.

The specific riding isn't as important as the idea of the guy who ran through the 1989 provincial general election like the love child of Speverend Rooner and Mrs. Malaprop running for the federal Conservatives in the fall federal election.

Rideout's departure from provincial politics was never just about a million dollars of roadwork, despite what some people would have you believe. There's quite obviously some considerable animosity between Rideout and Williams, likely dating back to Rideout's leadership win in 1989.

Rideout - who served in key roles in the Williams administration - is in a position to know where more than a few bodies are buried in the Provincial Conservative backyard.  He'd also likely attract a fair bit of support from long-time Provincial Conservative voters and backroom workers who are dissatisfied with the internal party strife resulting from the ongoing Anything But Conservative campaign, as the Family Feud is officially known.

The scrappy veteran campaigner would also be inclined to smack back at any attacks from his former Provincial Conservative caucus and cabinet mates.

Even if Rideout worked behind the scenes or as a spokesperson for the federal Conservatives in the province, the Family Feud could turn out to be the surprise hit of the fall political season. The Family Feud likely won't shift too many votes, but it would be political theatre of the kind the province hasn't seen in years.

-srbp-

The first poll: some thoughts

Courtesy of a loyal Bond Papers reader comes this translation of the NTV poll results, compared to the 2006 general election. 

 

	2006	Sept 08
Liberal	42.8	42.4
Conservative	42.7	31.8
NDP	13.6	19.6

 

Based on very preliminary analysis of this poll result coupled with a study of long term voting trends, these numbers suggest that the four Liberal seats from 2006 would see an increase the margin for the Liberal candidate compared to the 2006 results.

The three seats currently held by the Conservatives would appear tight.  Given that two of the incumbents are not running, the Conservative position gets tougher.  By the same token, this statistical analysis obviously doesn't factor the actual candidate mix into the results.  Who the candidate is compared to the others does matter.

The main impact of the Family Feud appears to have been a softening of the Conservative vote.  The extent of that softening isn't completely clear.  The Feud can deliver cabinet ministers and hard core party workers in some cases but it won't clinch it for the party that seems to be favoured by the Feud supporters.

In Avalon, it is currently shaping up to be a two-way fight between the Conservative Fabian Manning and Liberal Scott Andrews.  Dropping a new prison in Harbour Grace, as Stephen Harper is expected to do this weekend, would be a significant boost for Manning.

In the St. John's seats, the race would be tight, based solely on the numbers.  Factor in Jack Harris in St. John's East, take out the advantage for the Conservatives from incumbency and the softening of the Conservatives because of the Family Feud and Harris would look to have an upswing.

The challenge for Liberal Walter Noel would be to make himself relevant, compared to the current public perception of Harris as the sole beneficiary of the Family Feud.

Likewise, in St. John's South Mount Pearl,  the political challenge for the Liberals and New Democrats will be to take maximum advantage of the softening of the Conservative vote and to turn the election into a two-way fight.  Siobhan Coady is widely perceived as the front runner.  Expect the New Democrats to start turning their guns on her directly in an effort to make it a two-way racket.  That can work to Coady's advantage if she can actually capitalize on it.

Campaigns are not foregone conclusions.  Polling numbers and past voting patterns are only indicators. They are clues. There is nothing deterministic about them.  Much depends, as in every election, about how the candidates and the campaigns perform on the ground.

-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-

"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-

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-

The NL election summary

1.  Since 1949, Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have typically voted in the majority anything but Conservative in federal elections.  Biggest thing to remember, but every single one of the media types and most of the local pundits just got lost in the Family Feud hype.  It spilled over into national reporting which was - for the most part - facile.

2.  The biggest impact of the Family Feud in 2008 was to bleed the federal Conservatives of candidates, money and volunteers.  It also suppressed the Conservative vote since Provincial Conservatives typically vote for their federal cousins.

Take a look at the results.  Turn outs are down.  The people who didn't vote are mostly Blue people.

The Conservatives got a taste of the Feud in 2004 when the Provincial Conservatives didn't turn out in any numbers for their friends.  There was no organized campaign, but there was a chill.

3.  St. John's East.  Jack Harris profited from picking up some of the Blue vote but his real surge came from the near total collapse of the Liberal vote. That wasn't ABC.  That was ABW.

4.  Avalon.  A couple of big changes in the last two weeks helped to really make the difference. 

First, Scott Andrews toned down the shrill rhetoric and started to sound like a member of parliament. He started to sound like someone to vote for instead of a guy picking up votes against someone else.  That seems to have had its biggest impact in the part of the riding north of the Trans Canada Highway which, for the most part, has tended to vote Red in federal elections.

Andrews was working hard anyway but as he started to sound more like the guy most of us know, it looks like he shifted votes.

Second, the Provincial Conservatives deployed some of their cabinet ministers and workers to twist arms. Whether that pulled votes to Andrews or suppressed Blue votes, the result was the same.

5.  St. John's South-Mount Pearl.  Midway through the election, poll results showed the Liberals and New Democrats holding onto their vote shares from the past two elections. The Blue votes sat in the undecided category.

At the polls, the Blues came out in a split between Orange and Red, with both picking up nearly equal shares.  Incumbency has its advantages if they can be understood and used effectively.

6.  Random-Burin-St. Georges.  Not a seat that figured in most people's "Watch" list since it's usually gone Red, but the story here is one of an experienced campaigner who worked hard to get the nomination and then to win the seat.  Judy Foote is a former provincial cabinet minister and someone to watch for in the months ahead.  She's tough and savvy and the two Liberal newbies would do well to watch closely what Judy does.

7.  The future.  The lesson of this election is that a divided Blue team leaves the field open. If the Conservatives can heal the rift, then the next federal election could turn out quite differently. Given the seat counts, Provincial Conservatives could have wielded gigantic  - maybe even unprecedented  - influence if they'd turned out for their friends and looked to turn more seats Blue.  They have a machine and they could have used it for niceness, at least for Conservatives.

Instead, they opted to cut throats. 

That might be too much for their brethren to forgive.  Then again, the game theorists in Ottawa might realize that even confined to a single province, the Blue Machine is a better friend than enemy, at least for other Blue people.

If the rift heals, then the next election could have vastly different results.

Jack Harris will have a time facing the likes of Beth Marshall in St. John's East.   Siobhan Coady will face someone like Tom Osborne who comes backed with a family clan that dominates the metro St. John's Conservative scene.

In Avalon, we might expect Fabian Manning to try a comeback.  He'll get some kind of reward for his loyalty.  Depending on what it is, he could be spending the next few months working hard to win back the seat he held until tonight.

The votes might be counted in seven sits, but this fight ain't over yet.

-srbp-

What's up now, Doc?

A policy windsock, that's what.

Supposedly the chief Family Feud campaigner, Danny Williams, and the entire Provincial Conservative caucus understood that if no Conservative seats in Newfoundland and Labrador meant that there would be no member of parliament would take up the cabinet job of being the province's regional representative in the event the Conservatives were re-elected.

Of course, Williams understood:

But Williams is not worried about the lack of representation. He said the three previous government MPs failed to advance major issues such as custodial management of the fishery and a loan guarantee for the Lower Churchill River hydroelectric project in Labrador.

He said the province will now have seven strong Opposition MPs at the federal level.

People who supported the Family Feud - including Provincial Conservatives like St. John's mayor Doc O'Keefe - understood that as well.

So how come Doc is now trying to orchestrate a campaign to undo the situation that he and his party leader created in the first place?

If Doc feels some obligation to stick his municipal nose into federal/provincial relations now that the election is over, he had an obligation to his honker into the campaign a few weeks ago pointing out the gigantic problem - apparently as he finds it now - inherent in the campaign against the federal Conservatives run by their Provincial Conservative confreres.

Instead of that, O'Keefe and his Provincial Conservative mates on council were doing their own little bit of partisan campaigning against the Liberal Party.

No one should be surprised by this at all, given O'Keefe's record on council for shifting positions more often than most of us change underwear.

Nor, for that matter, should anyone be surprised that the Premier himself appears to be taking an entirely new position on the issue of cabinet representation from the one he held a few days ago:

Premier Williams says it is the Prime Minister's perogative to make cabinet appointments. However he notes, Prime Minister Stephen Harper has a couple of options. He says the Prime Minister could appoint Senator Ethel Cochrane to the Senate or he could fill the vacancy in the Senate and then appoint that person to cabinet.

For his part, the Prime Minister has already said he will appoint a regional minister from among the elected members of his caucus. in other words: no senate appointments.

That makes eminent sense, given that this is exactly what defence minister Peter MacKay said plainly during the campaign and the Prime Minister has spoken about senate reform as a priority for his new administration.

Now five years into the current provincial administration, one gets the sense that major items of public policy are made up on the fly. Positions are shifted based on something other than a sound and detailed analysis.

If memory serves, this is a point made before here at Bond Papers and elsewhere.

This tendency for policy to follow the whim of the moment is ultimately what undermines the effectiveness of the provincial government. People don't know which statement is the real statement.

Is the Prime Minister a man not to be trusted, as Danny Williams said up until Tuesday's vote or is the war over, as he said on the day immediately after the vote?

Is it now possible for the Premier to do business on Wednesday with a kitten-eating lizard from outer space who had to be stopped on Tuesday?

It doesn't take much imagination to realize there is a,problem with consistency here. That problem - and it isn't new - causes people to tune out. They stop listening. If they aren't listening, then the Premier has a gigantic problem.

It's a problem entirely of his own making however.

What's more the rest of us have to hope we all don't pay a price for the windsock follies. The Premier worked the Feud to make sure he was the only spokesperson for the province.

He got what he wanted.

So we must all wonder why he and his political associates are suddenly uncomfortable with their victory.

Hang on a second.

Check the wind.

It might not be such a problem after all.

Oops.

It shifted direction again.

Problem back.

Ooooh. Hang on.

No problem, again.

You get the picture.

-srbp-

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-

 

De-spinning the New Family Feud newser

Q:  When did Premier Danny Williams announce that Newfoundland and Labrador was a have province and  - by definition – wouldn’t be receiving Equalization any more?

03 November 2008.  Bond Papers de-spun the scrum two days later.

Q: When did the provincial government decide to opt for the O’Brien formula and start receiving Equalization again?

Well, that isn’t clear, but on November 3 the Premier told reporters that the provincial government was looking hard at it.  He said a decision didn’t have to be made until March 2009.  The Premier confirmed in his Tuesday night scrum that the province had already decided to opt to start receiving Equalization again this fiscal year, something that hadn’t been reported publicly thus far.

Q:  When did the provincial government learn that the feds were planning to cap growth in the Equalization program to keep the costs under control?

03 November 2008, if not earlier:

In today's meeting, Flaherty will reveal the Conservatives' plan to place a limit on what Ottawa sends to poorer provinces under one of its key revenue-sharing measures, the $13.6 billion equalization program.

Q:  Which provinces are affected by the cap?

Any that receive Equalization.  Ontario will be capped just the same as all the rest, including Newfoundland and Labrador, if Newfoundland and Labrador opts to start receiving Equalization again. That’s the money the Premier mentioned in his scrum. Quebec will reportedly lose approximately the same amount.

Q.  What does the Equalization formula now provide as reported by VOCM legislative reporter Cheryl Gullage?

100% exclusion of non-renewable resources from Equalization calculations.

Q.  What was the ABC campaign – better known as the Family Feud  - all about?

The federal Conservatives promised to exclude 100% of non-renewable resource revenues from Equalization calculations but they didn’t put that in place initially.  Williams went on the war path over the issue promising to work for Stephen Harper’s defeat.

Q.  How big will the provincial government’s deficit be next year?

Even before now, it was pretty clear the provincial government would be short upwards of $1.5 billion in cash based on reduced commodity prices if spending remained where it was in 2008. A cash surplus this year  - of maybe 500 to 700 million - may have helped defray that somewhat but a deficit of $500 million on a cash basis – the largest in the province’s history – was a likely figure given some spending cuts and some borrowing.

Q.  So what’s the fuss?

The Pattern of blaming someone else. It’s a stock provincial government approach.

In this case, the provincial government is in a financial bind largely due to its overspending of the past two or three years based on unreliable income.  They were warned repeatedly by the province’s auditor general. The government made spending commitments – including 20% wage increases for public sector workers  - that it may not be able to afford.

Spending cuts will have to come to keep the deficit from ballooning to unmanageable proportions.

Far better politically to blame that on someone else for provincial government problems. The facts of the situation likely won’t matter since they likely won’t be reported in the conventional media, at least if the past is any guide.

Beyond that, five years of conditioning the public might pay off.  Some initial comments – like from provincial labour leader Lana  Payne – would suggest that some knees are already jerking across the province even before the full story showed up anywhere.

Speedy Gonzales Update:  The Premier turned up on CTV apparently to make sure everyone got the story the Feud was back on:

Williams made the comments on CTV Newsnet Tuesday evening. He says the federal budget will cost his province $1.5 billion in equalization over three years because of changes in the formula used to make the payments.

"In an economy the size of Newfoundland and Labrador, at a time when they are spending a lot of money on stimulus, it seems like an attempt to basically cripple this province," Williams said. "In a time of economic downturn, I'm at a loss at why (Harper) would do it.

Words matter.

The economy of Newfoundland and Labrador is running at something on the order of $25 billion annually.  The $1.5 billion noted here – over three years – is a drop in the bucket compared to the $75 billion the provincial economy would produce in the same time frame.

A change to Equalization doesn’t cut anything from the economy per se;  it just affects provincial government spending. 

And a half billion dollars is a lot of money to a government staring at a record deficit even assuming they had somehow completely forgotten they were told about the cap last November.

Yep.

The Pattern repeats.

The Morning After Update:  Just how confusing could the Premier’s middle-of-the-night rant be?  Read CBC’s version which is short on details but long on the nasty, vindictive – and inexplicably angry  - language the Premier apparently used.

The iPod People update:  Listen to the really short clip on the CBC website. It includes the Premier’s comment that the Equalization changes will affect Newfoundland and Labrador.  Apparently, they’ll have a “pretty crippling effect in the sense we’ll survive it.”

“Pretty crippling effect in the sense we’ll survive it.”

That’s exactly what he said.

Go figure.

 

-srbp-

Wishin' and hopin' and spewin' and sprayin'

Undoubtedly, Scott Andrews campaign took great heart this past week for stories running on CBC and in the Telegram about Fabian Manning and his expense accounts in the House of Assembly.

The race looks tight, according to an NTV/Telelink poll and those two stories might well look like the kind of ammunition needed to push Andrews into the lead.

They might.

But then again, they might not.

Here's why.

Firstly, the race in Avalon appears tight according to the NTV/Telelink poll.  Given the relatively high undecided  - 40% of respondents - it might look like pulling Andrews in front is within grasp. 

However, the undecideds are likely made up of a huge number of Fabe fans who are right now either uncomfortable in saying who they will vote for or who genuinely are hung up about whether or not to vote.

Those people are necessarily winnable for the Andrews cause.

But they have to be won.

And that leads us to the second point:  Andrews hasn't done anything to woo the undecideds. 

Thus far, Andrews has run a flame-thrower of a campaign built almost entirely on attacks straight at Manning.  Andrews has sucked the ABC tit harder than a cabinet minister looking for a new job in the upcoming shuffle.  He's not getting any milk out though because the Family Feud nipple spews only bile.  It's all negative, all the time.

The Family Feud gives nothing to which a voter can attach.

Take a listen to the Morning Show's candidate forum last Thursday and you'll see the point. [Part 1 and Part 2] 

Andrews spent way too much time slicing into Manning personally in a high pitched and grating way.  Who the heck could stand to listen to that for more than a few seconds?

The answer is no one and in the case of Morning Show listeners no one other than the handful of partisan loyalists and the masochists who just take anything political they can get regardless of what it is.

The rest of us would rather have been chained naked at Cape Spear with seagulls plucking out our eyeballs all the while enduring Slim Whitman's greatest hits at top volume rather than sit through one more second of Thursday's racket.

Take a look at Andrews' campaign website.  Look as hard as you want  and you will be hard pressed to find one single reason why anyone should vote for Andrews and the Liberal Party. There are plenty.  Andrews just isn't intent, apparently, on letting on what they are.

Third, if you look at the Manning stories, you have a hard time finding something to get really annoyed at.  In a case where the benchmarks were set by Tom Rideout and Walter Noel, Fabian Manning's handful of travel claims is hardly worth talking about. On top of that he paid back the secret bonus cash.

You don't have to like what Fabian did, but he is by far nowhere near the worst of the bunch, even if you take aside those facing criminal charges. Hey, it's not like even one of Andrews' staunchest supporters hasn't been known to change his mind completely on House of Assembly spending once the local Family head has pronounced on the matter.

How the heck will a Manning supporter react?

Even if Andrews wants to get indignant about Manning's spending, the story is still framed as what not to do.  The Connie vote is suppressed enough;  you can't suppress it more without risking post-traumatic stress disorder up and down the shore.  What's missing is the stuff to pull voters in Andrews' direction.

So far he and his team haven't shown any signs of figuring that out.

Now, their hammering might work.

The odds are against it.  No amount of wishing and hoping based on spewing and spraying has worked very well yet anywhere else.

-srbp-

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-

Full moon and a call to arms

Justice minister Jerome Kennedy took time to call the Sunday evening talk show at the voice of the cabinet minister to lambaste Stephen Harper and the federal Conservatives.  He insisted, among other things, that the Family Feud was embraced by all Provincial Conservatives including him.

Fair enough.

It is a family feud, after all and Kennedy is part of one branch of the family doing the feuding.

In the course of his lengthy rant, Kennedy hit on a litany of supposed injustices done to Newfoundland and Labrador by Uncle Ottawa over the years.  Included among the old chestnuts was a reference to something that supposedly took place in 1931. 

Kennedy didn't elaborate.

The whole thing sounded like a call to the barricades.

But 1931?

How about Blaine-Bond, anyone?

If the Airing of Grievances is going back to 1931  - 18 years before Newfoundland and Labrador was a Canadian province - it's likely only a matter of time before the minister of justice finds some Great Injustice in a time before Canada even really existed.

And when was the last time d'Iberville's campaign in Newfoundland used for political purposes around these parts?

Generally, there had been little friction between French and English fishermen in the 1600s. There was growing friction, however, in that century between France and England, and the hostility between the two countries often spilled into Newfoundland. The winter campaign of Pierre Le Moyne d'Iberville in 1696-1697, which resulted in the destruction of almost all of the English settlements in Newfoundland, was simply the most sensational demonstration of this fact. Eventually, because of military and strategic successes elsewhere in North America and around the world, the French agreed to recognize British sovereignty over Newfoundland.

There's an interesting connection in that story, by the way.  D'Iberville raided along the coast of Newfoundland until he reached Carbonear - in the district Kennedy represents - only to find the residents had taken refuge on a nearby island which they had fortified sufficiently to defend against D'Iberville's attacks.

-srbp-

"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-

Process Stories, or real insiders don’t gab

A piece this week in the Hill Times this week conjures up images of a West Wing episode. The night of Jed Bartlet’s re-election, some guy turns up on the major networks purporting to be a Democratic Party insider. The guy claims he advised Bartlet on issues during the campaign that turned out to be crucial to victory.

Only thing is the guy wasn’t really an insider.  Rather he was a pollster Bruno Gianelli hired to do some polling in one part of one state.  The guy knew nothing but he talked a good game and the networks ate up his story.

The Hill Times story quotes an unidentified ‘Liberal insider” as saying:

"They can't win. If you go province-by-province and riding-by-riding, what does it give you? I know the spin will be that the cross-country tour elevated Iggy, and the long-gun and census stuff pulled Harper down, so now we're tied. But when the crunch comes and people are going to vote, I don't think—whether they had to fill in a long-form census or not—I don't think it's going to be a serious factor…".

Someone actually so far inside any political party as to know what the leadership team is actually thinking:

1. wouldn’t discuss it publicly, and,
2. wouldn’t talk the sort of pure crap contained in this article.

You can tell the “insider” is full of crap by this simple paragraph:

In Newfoundland, for example, if Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Danny Williams "goes whole hog" and puts his support behind the federal Conservatives in the next election campaign, the Tories could win five of the province's seven seats, the insider said. Liberal MP Siobhan Coady's St. John's South-Mount Pearl riding and Scott Andrews' riding in Avalon are the most at risk.

Right off the bat, this anonymous character predicts the Tories would gain five seats in Newfoundland and Labrador, but only names two that might change hands.  Where are the other three?

Any person who actually knew what happened on the ground in Newfoundland and Labrador  - as opposed to the bullshit - wouldn’t claim for one second that Danny Williams could turn the tide and suddenly have everyone vote for a party Williams himself savaged not so long ago. 

The simple reason is that Danny Williams didn’t do it the last time.

All Danny Williams did in 2008 was strangle the Conservative vote.

Well, for the most part he strangled it.  In St. John’s East, Tories turned out en masse for Danny’s old law partner, Jack Harris.  The Liberal vote there collapsed as well, giving Harris a giant majority. Don’t count on that one changing hands back to the Conservatives.

In St. John’s South-Mount Pearl, a sizeable number of Conservative voters actually rejected Danny’s instructions and turned out to vote for the New Democrat.  That’s right.  Even though Danny Williams’ cabinet ministers turned out for Liberal Siobhan Coady, a sizeable number of rank and file Conservatives in the riding actually made a choice for the New Democrat.  In other ridings they just stayed home.

But in SJSMP, they voted for the New Democrat as a protest over Conservative ministers actively campaigning for their hated enemy, les rouges.  Call it a hold over from the 1949 Confederation racket if you want, but Conservative townies tend to vote for the New Democrats rather than Liberals if the can’t vote for their own guy.

Put a stronger Conservative candidate in play and this riding might change its colours.  Then again, it might not.  If you apply the current poll configuration to old votes, the riding tended to vote Liberal more than Conservative more recently.  What usually made the difference in the old configuration was the solid blue voting along what is now known as the Irish loop.  Even losing coming out of St. John’s and Mount Pearl, the Conservative would go over the top as the Southern Shore went solidly Conservative.

One of the other key differences might be the New Democrat candidate. If the NDP run a candidate with a strong enough profile and the right messaging, he could split the blue vote. Yes, that seems counterintuitive for people who think of voting only in left-right terms – like the “insider” apparently -  but the distinction could be important in the next federal election.

Another factor to watch would be the impact of migration on the vote. The old Conservative stronghold in Avalon has moved to the metro St. John’s region.  Where they live now could have a huge impact on the vote in St. John’s South-Mount Pearl as well as neighbouring Avalon.

In 2008, the fight turned out to be a straight fight between the Liberals and the Conservatives.  You’d have to do a poll by poll breakdown to see where the Conservatives lost votes and where they picked up.  The New Democrats were a distant third, but they did increase their vote sizeably. They won’t have the Conservative Family Feud to count on this time and those extra 2400 votes the NDP gained last time might swing to one of the other parties.

None of that takes into account the value of incumbency.

Nor does it take into account the fact that in 2004 and 2006 – when Williams and his party actively supported Conservatives across the province – the best the Conservatives could do is win the same two seats they usually win. In 2008, though, Williams wiped out the Conservative vote and In St. John’s East in particular he may have locked that one in New Democrat hands for a while.  Conservative insiders –real insiders – are likely thinking that with friends like that…well, you know where that goes.

So that none of that looks even remotely like a scenario where the Old Man is going to hand his old enemy Steve five easy seats. And it gets even harder to see the “insider” scenario if you realise the farther one gets from St. John’s, the harder it is to elect a federal Conservative in Newfoundland and Labrador, even with the enthusiastic help of a guy whose strongest supporters are still found among townies.

Of course, the “insider’’ assessment only works on any level if you continue to think that Danny Williams remains as popular as he ever was, even within his own party.  As the insider aptly shows by his or her appearance of knowing things, appearances can be deceiving. 

The 2008 Family Feud did its most damage within the Conservative Party itself.  Even having Danny Williams call off the feud  or claim that he leads a Reform-based Conservative Party might not be enough to win back the enthusiastic support of Conservatives who voted Blue long before Williams was a gleam in his own eye. Those are the people he screwed with in 2008 and those people didn’t like it one bit.

Williams himself also hinted recently at internal political problems with his party.  And let’s not forget that earlier this year, someone dropped a dime on his little plan to scoot south secretly to have heart surgery.

To be fair, though, the one part of the scenario the Liberal “insider” didn’t mention is another one:  what might happen in one of the ridings if Danny Williams himself decided to take a shot at federal politics.

That wouldn’t change the federal Conservatives’ chances a great deal in Newfoundland and Labrador, but it would make the nomination fight in one riding a lot more interesting than it might otherwise be.

Wonder which riding it might be?

St. John’s East is already safely in the hands of his old friend and law partner. Odds are the Old Man wouldn’t run there.

But he does own a sizeable house in Avalon, the seat once held by his political nemesis, John Efford.

Hmmm.

The Old Man jumping to federal politics.

Maybe the Hill times wasn’t speaking with a Liberal after all.

Their assessment sounds more like what one would get from a member of the Old Man’s crew.

- srbp -

Provincial Conservatives plan ABC astroturf

Bond Papers readers are no doubt shocked at the very thought, but it seems to be true.

They may even be struck speechless at the very idea.

The Provincial Conservatives are organizing astroturf as part of the Family Feud. That's according to some information Geoff Meeker obtained courtesy of Loyola Hearn's office, whose spokesman conveyed it this way:

“We were contacted late last week by a member of the provincial PC caucus, who told us that they were contacted by someone in the premier’s office, asking all ministers and MHAs to find at least four people in their ridings who they can call upon to put their names to letters to the editor, or to put calls in to Open Line shows, to give the appearance that the ABC campaign is away more ‘grass roots’ than perhaps what it is. These calls are happening during business hours from someone in the premier’s office, though I won’t get into who.”

The piece contains another claim destined to leave people truly dumbfounded:  the astroturf campaign is already underway.

Not like people haven't been writing blog posts and calling open line shows expressing their sedimental solidarity with the New Democrats, talking up the positive features of the Family Feud and condemning Stephen Harper at every opportunity.

-srbp-

St. John's East: a quick look at the results

Jack Harris was the beneficiary of a double whammy on Tuesday.

First of all, Danny Williams' former law partner profited from the near total collapse of the Conservative vote as a result of the Family feud.

Well known Provincial Conservative Ed Buckingham's appearance at Jack's campaign launch foretold a considerable movement of Blue to Orange.

It was no accident.

Provincial cabinet ministers supported Harris publicly.  Even without turning out at Jack's headquarters, they could easily mobilise their own teams to drive votes to the polls for Harris.

Second of all, Harris profited from the  collapse of the Liberal vote, attributable almost entirely to Walter Noel's candidacy. While less dramatic than the Conservative drop, the Liberal candidate shed over 9000 votes all of which appear to have moved to the New Democrats on their own.

In some media interviews Harris pointed to an increased voter turnout in the riding, as if that showed some ground swell of support for his candidacy beyond the Family Feud effect.

Horse hockey.

The increase in turnout from 2006 was 875, a mere 2% jump.

The tale of the electoral tape in St. John's East is easy to see. Add the NDP 2006 number to the difference in votes for the Liberals and Conservatives.  You'll find yourself close as can be to Harris' vote count.

Early commentary suggested that Harris' win and the strong showing of former Independent editor Ryan Cleary in St. John's South-Mount Pearl marked some radical new age for the province's New Democrats:

“I think one of the stories of this election is the real dawning of a new day for the NDP in this province,” said [Memorial University political science professor Christopher] Dunn. “It really has firm urban roots here now.”

In fact, the NDP’s Ryan Cleary was neck in neck with Liberal Siobhan Coady in St. John’s South-Mount Pearl for most of the night, before Coady pulled away taking the seat by 1,047 votes, a mere three per cent difference in the popular vote between the two.

“It also shows the NDP is becoming very serious about its choice of candidates. When they run candidates with high profiles, they do very well,” continued Dunn who called Harris a “force to be reckoned with.”

That's not the case if one assesses where the vote came from.

In both St. John's East and St. John's South-Mount Pearl, the surge in New Democrat votes came predominantly from Provincial Conservatives.  Of Harris' total vote, about half came from the Provincial Conservatives. Another political alignment will rob the NDP of that support just as easily as it was delivered.

One point doesn't make a trend, but another kind will burst a few bubbles.

Pop!

-srbp-

The Big Blue Suck

Danny Williams told Provincial Conservatives on the weekend something to the effect that the federal Liberals in the province were bouyed up by Provincial Conservatives.

He said something about Liberal's claiming there was a Red Tide - which no one has been talking about - being the result of some Blue bubble or other.

Nothing could be further from the truth, as he likes to say.

For your edification, amusement and general annoyance, here are the vote results for the ridings held before this last election by the same Liberals who won them again.

Note that the only significant variation - almost the only variation at all, in fact - was in the near complete collapse of the Conservative vote.

And that's all thanks to the Family Feud.

Bonavista-Gander-Grand Falls-Windsor?  Scott Simms increased his vote share as he has done in each election since 2004, but the Blue guys sank.

Ditto Humber-St. Barbe-Baie Verte where the family Feud just killed off Connies.  It didn't migrate appreciably to anyone else.

And then there's Labrador.  You needn't worry about the smaller parties. 

Just look at the Blue Line.

Almost too small to even notice.

In many parts of the province, the only noise in the election was a big sucking sound for the Blue team.

NB Connies argue over pork

New Brunswick Conservative member of parliament Greg Thompson – who isn’t planning on running for re-election – says that Conservative cabinet minister Keith Ashfield is sitting on pork announcements for New Brunswick in an effort to influence the provincial election in September.

Canwest is reporting:

"(Ashfield) stated very clearly, with his own lips to me, 'We're not going to be carrying the province on our backs to the next election.' And, of course, I took exception to that and I'm just wondering who he's attempting to punish," said Thompson, who says he is not running in the next federal election.

Thompson said he suspects Ashfield is defending his chief of staff Fred Nott, who suggested in an e-mail to hold off on approving funding in Thompson's riding until after Sept. 27, the date of the provincial election.

Hmmm.

A fight within the Conservative party?

A family feud as it were.

Sounds vaguely familiar.

Come to think of it, New Brunswick provincial Conservative leader David Alward might want to be careful about having what UNB political scientist David Desserud called “some of that Danny Williams magic” rub off.  Desserud made the comment after Alward took a taxpayer funded partisan campaign hop across to see the Old Man recently. 

Alward might well have been thinking how nice it would be to get the rumoured version of the Danny Williams effect.  But truth be told, the the real Danny Williams Effect can be a bit more like something you pick up on a planet in Star Trek: The Original Series.  You know:  the stuff that makes your hands all itchy and then Sulu comes at you with an epee right before some whack-job belts out another chorus of ‘I’ll take you home again Kathleen.”

Maybe poor Dave got the actual Danny political mojo instead of what he hoped for.

And then: poof!

Instant family feud.

Ouch.

That has got to hurt.

-srbp-