Speaking of unrealized potential

The Halifax Chronicle Herald editorialists might want to check the polls before they write editorials.

The Provincial Conservative Family Feud with their federal cousins "has the potential to catch on" outside Newfoundland and Labrador?

Oh.

Heh. Heh.

Potential.

But then there's this sort of stuff:

He doesn’t just want to play the role of petulant premier. So he has widened his focus. Instead of simply hammering away at Newfoundland and Labrador’s concerns – a strategy that has limited appeal beyond the island – Mr. Williams has elevated himself into a de facto leader of the opposition by mounting a concerted attack on Stephen Harper on all fronts.

Evidently, the Herald's editorial crew hasn't been paying attention to anything at all in this province, let alone polls.

-srbp-

Paul Lane – bigger ambitions?

Is Mount Pearl city councillor Paul Lane  - described by the Telegram recently as a long-time Conservative  - going to seek the Conservative nod in the next federal election?

Might be.

He turned up on Crap Talk Thursday speaking as a concerned citizen.

His topic:

Lighthouses.

Clearly, this is a big issue in Mount Pearl.  They are afraid of losing their lighthouse on the wharf right next to the Rolls Royce marine engine repair facility.

All sarcasm aside – Mount Pearl is land-locked -  when a politico turns up talking about something not related to his current political office, odds are good he is laying the groundwork for a run at another office.

Since there is no provincial election coming up with an available seat, the only logical conclusion would be that he is looking for the Connie nod against Siobhan Coady in St. John’s South-Mount Pearl.

Now that might be interesting if – as it now seems –  the Old Man will not be waging a jihad against his fellow Conservatives next time. That means all the local Tories who voted for Ryan Cleary purely as a protest over the Family Feud can go safely back to voting for their federal cousins.

That could be interesting in that the race would then be between Coady and Lane with Ryan bringing up the rear.   Ditto in a race where another staunch Conservative, like say Tommy Osborne, decided to get some pensionable federal time.

And for those who doubt the wisdom of the mighty political oracle known as Bond, just remember that everyone laughed at the prediction that Steve Kent would switch to the provincial Tories having previously supported both the federal and provincial Liberals and – if memory serves – the federal proto-Connies at one point.

-srbp-

Pattern behaviour

Faced with the prospect he can't deliver his consistently stated goal of ensuring no Conservatives are elected in Newfoundland and Labrador, Danny Williams shifted the goals of his Family Feud and completely reinvented what it was all about.

He did it a few weeks ago.

He repeated the completely rejigged goal of his ABC campaign and CBC is reporting the shift.

No one should be surprised.

It's part of the pattern.

-srbp-

Family Feud: another angle

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

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

 

-srbp-

Avalon: a quick look at the results

If there ever was a campaign which showed the power of negative campaigning, it's Avalon.

From a time well before the writ dropped, incumbent Conservative Fabian Manning received countless vicious personal attacks.

That includes a reference to Manning as a "traitor" by no less than Premier Danny Williams. That savage rhetoric continued throughout the campaign from many quarters, including from a strong supporter of the Andrews and Harris campaigns.

Liberal Scott Andrews, the only serious competitor piled on relentlessly, lightening up only for the last week or two.

That didn't mean the attacks stopped since the Family Feud deployed at least three cabinet ministers to the area north of the Trans-Canada Highway to work their persuasive magic on local Provincial Conservatives.

Through all that, Manning did phenomenally better than his colleagues in the St. John's ridings. In St. John's East, the Conservatives captured only 20% of the vote from 2006.  In St. John's South-Mount Pearl, 26% of the vote held.

In Avalon, Manning held on to about 60% of his vote from 2006.  Still and all, he lost 7590 votes.

Interestingly enough, the drop in voter turn out and the increased vote for Green, Liberal and New Democrat candidates totals 7582.  That's not likely a coincidence.

What's noticeable in Avalon is that the lost votes didn't migrate to another party. They appear to have just stayed home in large numbers.

Scott Andrews increased the Liberal vote by 4%, or 548 votes. 

The largest jump in votes for any candidate was in the New Democrat column which saw a 70% jump (2343 votes). If those votes came from disgruntled Provincial Conservatives, the attractiveness of New Democrats would largely be defined by one quality:  they aren't Liberals. The same quality likely had a strong influence on Blue voter choice in the St. John's ridings for those who came out to vote.

-srbp-

Family Feud Surreality Check, Part Deux

Wayne Bennett is a candidate for the Newfoundland and Labrador First Party.

He is running against incumbent Gerry Byrne, a Liberal.

Mr. Bennett is also a director of the Humber Valley Provincial Conservative association.

He is campaigning on the argument that in the existing system, according to the weekly in the riding:

MPs elected to the governing party hide behind that party's decisions. ...Meanwhile, he says, MPs elected to political parties not holding the reins of government don't have the power to make demands for Newfoundland.

Mr. Bennett talks about the importance of electing five NL Firsters to allow for some tough bargaining in a minority parliament.

A few things come to mind:

First, Mr. Bennett should know that there are seven seats in Newfoundland and Labrador, not five as he kept mentioning during his interview.

Second, the province includes Labrador, so that "and Labrador" thingy in the party name is important.

Third, minority parliaments have been a rarity in Canadian federal politics in recent times.  A plan built for a double rarity - minority parliament and one where five votes going as a block have some value - is pretty much useless.

Fourth, the Blochead concept is pretty much defunct.  The gommels elected for the past 18 years from Quebec - essentially working like the Creditistes of old - haven't accomplished much more, even in minority parliaments, than fatten up their individual pension plans.

Fifth, there are only two NL First candidates in the current election.  That pretty much shoots the whole campaign theory to heck. "But I'm courting four more candidates,"  Mr. Bennett told the Northern Pen.

Sixth, if the problem with the current system is that members of parliament elected to represent their constituents fall under the control of an organized political party and that party's leader and act in the party and leader's interests instead of that of their constituents, then a guy who is running who also sits on a Provincial Conservative district association is pretty much already committed to a partisan course, rather than the course desired by the constituents.

No?

-srbp-

Family Feud Surreality Check

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

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

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

From the this is now file:

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

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

and the that was then file:

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

Maybe someone should invoke names to conjure with:

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

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

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

 

-srbp-

Some loveable turncoats

‘In Newfoundland politics,”  wrote Bill Rowe, “you haven’t lost your political virginity unless you’ve knifed your own party in the back and crossed the floor of the House of Assembly at least once.”

At the time he wrote that – 1984 – Rowe was a lawyer, columnist, radio show host and the author of the splendidly titled Clapp’s Rock and The Temptation of Victor Gallanti. he was also the former leader of the provincial Liberals, a job he lost in the wake of a political scandal involving leaked police reports.

In 1985, Rowe tried to run for Brian Peckford’s Conservatives.  He lost the nomination fight.

In 1993, he carried the Liberal banner in the provincial general election and got a solid drubbing by the local Conservative candidate.

Fast forward a decade.  Conservative Danny Williams tried to lure Rowe back into politics as a Conservative.  Rowe held out for an appointment to a job as Williams’ personal ambassador to Hy’s.  He took up the job in 2004 and held it for a few months before packing it in to return to St. John’s.

Rowe is now touring the country, incidentally, flogging what is purported to be an insider’s account of things he was outside the room for during that brief sojourn on the Rideau.  According to reports, the mainlanders are lapping it up. The softcover book has hit the Globe and Mail’s hardcover best-seller list.

You could not make this stuff up if you tried.

One of his regular talk show callers these past few years has been a decent fellow named George Murphy.  He has garnered some local notoriety for his ability to forecast retail gasoline prices with some accuracy.  Murphy is a staunch supporter of the government’s gas price-fixing scheme, among other things.

Murphy’s gained some extra notoriety lately by being the latest local politician to carry on the fine tradition of crossing the floor to the other side.  Murphy very loudly and very publicly renounced the Liberal party and headed for the New Democrats. Murphy was cross that the Liberals did not hire him for a job, picking instead Craig Westcott, a journalist of some considerable experience who did a bit of work for the provincial Conservatives and whose only foray as a candidate was for the Harper Conservatives in opposition to Danny Williams’ Family Feud in 2008.

So far only one local journalist -  Telegram editor Brian Jones - has accurately captured the essence of former Liberal Murphy’s current position, that of New Democratic candidate in a by-election likely to be called next week for a seat formerly held by the Conservatives:

…Murphy didn’t like it that a Tory became a Grit, so he bolted. Murphy, a former Liberal, is now an NDPer.

He is seeking support from NDP members to win the party’s candidacy in the upcoming byelection in the district of Conception Bay East-Bell Island.

But by Murphy’s own logic, NDP rank-and-filers should be aghast. A former Liberal is tainting their pure gene pool, as it were.

Perhaps Murphy knows something the rest of us don’t — that changing parties is unacceptable for some people, i.e., Westcott, but entirely acceptable for others, i.e., himself.

Maybe I’m missing something, but I’ve read that Telegram story three times and I’m still left thinking, let me get this straight…

You could not make this stuff up if you tried.

- srbp -

A tight race in Avalon? Dream on, baby

NTV and Telelink released a poll on Tuesday on the race in the federal riding of Avalon.

NTV touted it as showing a tight race, with the Conservative incumbent and Liberal challenger separated by only the margin of error for the poll.

Take a look at the undecided in the poll and you can forget about tight races.

39.9%

Yes, 40 percent of the people surveyed said they were undecided. That's 15 percentage points higher than Fabian Manning got and he's in the lead;  his nearest challenger - Liberal Scott Andrews - racked up something around 21%.

Then look at the satisfaction number for the incumbent, Fabian Manning.  Fifty-one percent said they were satisfied with his performance as member of parliament.

Then recall that Fabian Manning has been on the receiving end of a huge amount of attention as the only incumbent Conservative running in this election. The entire rhetorical weight of the Family Feud sat on his shoulders at one time and even though the Premier has backed off somewhat, there's evidently no love loss between the two.

And everyone knows that.

With all the anything but Conservative messaging out there, anyone who has made a clear choice shouldn't feel the least problem in telling the world that they intend to vote Liberal, New Democrat or even that they won't vote.

The large undecided vote in Avalon is most likely comprised of a large group of Manning voters who are simply uncomfortable with saying publicly what they could reasonably perceive as being an unpopular choice.  In some instances, they might even think that expressing their choice that might invite even more pressure against their guy than he's already felt.

Here's another clue:  when asked about the impact of the ABC campaign on their choice, people who selected a non-Conservative choice (i.e. the Liberals and New Democrats) overwhelmingly indicated (66%) that ABC had no impact on their choice.

That leads your humble e-scribbler to conclude that those Grit and Dipper votes were pretty much shored up any way.

Now it is entirely possible that the 40% undecided contains a huge number of people who just won't vote. That still likely works more in Manning's favour than against him.

As a last point, note that Telelink doesn't probe undecideds to determine any leanings or why they are undecided.  That means any detailed analysis  - including this post - is difficult and any comments are conjecture.

Still, you'd have to believe an awful lot of things to believe that the race in Avalon is actually tight.

-srbp-

Stalled!

And how long will it take some people to notice the flat lines?

That Family Feud thing is really having an effect on the election campaign.

-srbp-

Now will someone start reporting it correctly?

The ABC campaign is a Family Feud.

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

That's it.

That's all of it.

-srbp-

"Solidarity, Reg", patronage appointment version

Somehow this slipped your humble e-scribbler's notice.

Provincial New Democratic Party leader Lorraine Michael knew back in September what most New Democrats would understand:  a conservative is a conservative is a conservative.  That's what she said back in September when the who Family Feud thingy was on the go during the federal election.

Well, for all those who think that labour is aligned with the New Democrats, think again.  Outgoing labour federation boss Reg Anstey stood four-square behind the Provincial Conservatives in September.

That's not the first time Reg showed his solidarity with the current administration.

Remember the Rally for Danny?  There was Reg.

How about attacking the Liberals and New Democrats last spring for daring to suggest pattern bargaining in the public service should go the way of the dodo?  Reg was there to slice into the government's political opponents.

He took his leave of the labour federation in the first week of November, telling reporters he didn't know what he was going to do with himself now that he'd retired.

Less than two weeks later he had a sinecure on the offshore regulatory board, courtesy of the Provincial Conservative cabinet.

Loyalty clearly has its rewards.

-srbp-

The problem with being known, ABC version

1.  MUN political science professor Alex Marland, a former comms director in the Williams administration, pointed out to voice of the cabinet minister that the majority of Canadians aren't paying any attention to the Family Feud.

2.  Meanwhile, the Premier is still waiting for answers from the Liberals and Conservatives to his begging letter to Ottawa. Williams wanted a response by September 26 to his eight page list of cash demands from the federal government.  So far, Jack Layton is the only federal leader to reply.  Elizabeth May of the Green Party didn't get a letter.

Maybe there's a problem with being known.

-srbp-

Family Feud

The federal Conservatives and the provincial Conservatives are still hacking away at each other.

This time it's iambic pentameter at 10 paces with cuts to arts funding.

The other day it was provincial Conservative dauphin Jerome Kennedy and funding for a new prison in the province, likely to be built in his own district if the feds cough up the cash.

The only thing missing is Richard Dawson.

All highly entertaining but beyond that, it's nothing more than a sign a federal election is around the corner.

-srbp-

The Polar Opposites Express

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

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

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

-srbp-

Mealy Mountains National Park in limbo

A victim of the family feud otherwise called ABC?

Mired in competing interests with the provincial government and other interests looking for ways to make sure mines in the area could develop? That would be kinda short sighted given the economic benefits of a national park.

Land claims hold ups?

A feasibility study was conducted in 2001.

it's 2008.

Why the hang up?

-srbp-

Welcome to the endgame

The Telegram account of the Friday meeting between premier and Prime Minister carries a headline about a temporary ceasefire.

They're right.

Williams declared a ceasefire or a toning down of his personal vendetta likely in reaction to pressure from his own caucus.

Then again, Williams did follow his usual pattern of changing the definition of what it takes to satisfy him, too. Recall that in 2004 his negotiations consisted of pointing repeatedly that he wasn't happy and that it was up to the other side to make him happy. When the other party presented him with something that satisfied his demand for happiness, Williams merely shifted ground claiming that the offer didn't make him happy enough or that while that used to make him happy, it is no longer what works.

To wit, the loan guarantee on the Lower Churchill.

A loan guarantee from Ottawa to help with the project is something Williams used to talk about a lot. It was one of the promises - this one a supposed one - that Harper was supposed to keep unless the might of Danny would be called down on the Harper crown.

Now?

A loan guarantee is just that, and it's only a guarantee if we default. That's a good project. That's an annuity. That's a license to print money. That's why we're going to do it alone and that's why we want to have a big piece of the action. Forgive me, we're going to do it in partnership with others. So a loan guarantee is not a big deal. It will enable us to pick up money a little bit cheaper. We'll get a little lower on our interest rate. That's what the benefit is, but that's not $9 billion in cash and don't think for one minute it is. I know you know the difference. That's not a big deal.

There are a few reasons for this shift in direction, beyond the fact that it is just Williams' pattern. As pointed out previously:

1. The loan guarantee would come with a price tag, namely a federal equity stake - an ownership stake - in the so-called "go it alone" project. The downsides of that should be obvious to anyone who has paid attention to Williams for the past four years.
2. There never was a loan guarantee offer in the first place. Again, no one reading Bond papers regularly is surprised by this, but it bears repeating. The whole idea of a federal loan guarantee is a Williams invention. it's easy to dismiss something you made up in the first place.
3. Williams doesn't need the money any more. The Lower Churchill will be backstopped by Hebron - that's one of the reasons for the quickie deal and the real intended use of the Hebron cash all along - as well as the unnamed partners in the "go it alone" version of the Lower Churchill. In the quote above Williams corrects himself and refers to doing the project "in partnership with others." Make note of that correction. Who those others are is a mystery and likely will remain a mystery for years to come.
4. We are in the endgame of a fight that was never really much of a fight. It would seem that this prime minister, as with the last one, finally drew the line. At that point - as in January 2005 - Williams knew that the bluster and bluff that characterizes his public style has run its course. Exactly the same thing happened when Paul Martin told Williams bluntly that he had reached the end. A final offer was on the table. The Hebron partners likely did something very similar, although in their case, they held the negotiating whip hand as the version of the deal announced earlier in the fall suggests. in this case, Williams started off by acknowledging that the positions are firmly entrenched. Both parties agree to disagree on the "principles" - i.e. the final position is on the table - and the only question now is about compensation.

Some enterprising reporter should dig out the scrum from 28 January 2005 and find the one sentence where Williams talks about the remaining - or did he say "only" - question being the "quantum".

That's the only question left in the family feud between Danny and Steve.

-srbp-

Update: Stephen Harper sounds like he made it clear the final position is on the table on issues Danny Williams was squabbling over. As the Toronto Star reports, Harper said on Friday:

"Politics is the art of the possible. You can't have 100 per cent of everything you want from someone else or some other government. Danny Williams made his point forcefully; it's time to move on to other issues."

The deafening silence

Federal finance leprechaun Jim Flaherty has been signaling the need to cap the Equalization system this year.

"It's a federal program; we will put a limit on the growth of it," Mr. Flaherty said. "This is not something that is discretionary. We must do this, otherwise the integrity of the program will be under attack."

Flaherty says that in the face of a possible federal deficit for the first time in ages (i.e. the last time the Conservatives ran the place), it won't be possible to have a 15% annual increase in the funds allocated to the federal transfer.

Based on government data, federal transfers to other levels of government have surged 57% in the past five years, to $46.1-billion in the most recent fiscal year from $29.3-billion in 2003-04.

"In this time of fiscal uncertainty, we cannot sustain that rate of growth," Mr. Flaherty said this week.

Flaherty is likely to lay out the whole thing for his provincial counterparts at a meeting in Toronto on Monday. 

Newly minted provincial finance minister Jerome Kennedy will be at the meeting.

Okay.

For the past five years, the current Provincial Conservative administration has been hammering away at the need for increasing federal transfer payments to Newfoundland and Labrador.

For the past two, the entire Family Feud between the Provincial Conservatives and the their federal cousins centred on an effort to get Equalization payments in addition to oil and gas revenues, even if, under ordinary circumstances, Newfoundland and Labrador wouldn't qualify for the Equalization top-up.  In fact, this idea of getting effectively 200% of oil revenues  (all the cash plus Equalization hand-outs) is the original demand Danny Williams made to Paul Martin. 

That's why it is so bizarre that the provincial government talked about anything but Flaherty's remarks over the past couple of days.

Trivia was the order of the day at the cabinet shuffle and what wasn't trivia was pretty much stock stuff. Take a look at the raw scrum tape - via CBC - and you'll see the lightweight routine.

There's a reference to being fine on the current budget, without understanding that means increasing public debt if the budget targets are met.

There's some slagging of the oil sands and a claim that there won't be any delay on Hebron. No one apparently noticed that the Hebron project hasn't been sanctioned yet.  How exactly can you forecast "no delay" in a project that has no timeline yet?

The ultimate superficial commentary came on the matter of representation.  In Ottawa, there's not a problem since it's like the local cabinet where everyone looks after everything everywhere. Later on, the Premier refers to Susan Sullivan and filling in the hole in the dough, giving proper cabinet representation for a region of the province not previously represented in the Conservative cabinet.  Sarah Palin couldn't have reasoned it anymore consistently, right down to insisting - in a manner of speaking - that a little fellow from up the shore could see Labrador from his house.

But nothing of the substantive issues facing the province, beyond a comment that there might theoretically be some difficulty in forecasting oil prices.

As for the consistent set of demands from the current cabinet for more cash hand-outs from Ottawa and Jim Flaherty's comments, there was nary a peep either from the cabinet or from reporters.

The silence was deafening.

Well, except for the CBC audio picking up messages coming to the Blackberries in the room.

The end result is that one wonders what, exactly will be the policy direction taken by cabinet "on a go forward basis".  Until now, the cabinet has been fairly consistent in its remands for reparations from Ottawa, in its insistence that it can go-it-alone provided Ottawa ponies up the cash. The same ministers sit in place today, with a very minor number of exceptions, as sat in place in October 2003.

Yet, there is an evident change in perspective.

It can't be driven by the prospect of going off the Equalization system.  That was forecast in 2004, even without the subsequent transfer deal with Paul Martin.

There's something else behind it.

You can tell by what isn't being said.

-srbp-

Anything But Clear: poll

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

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

The poll, conducted by Telelink for NTV, then asked the voters who were aware of ABC - that's 919 respondents for those keeping track - if they though it was appropriate for the Premier to be engaged in it in the first place.

45.6% said yes, 34.5% said no, 19.9% were unsure. The margin of error is +/-3.3 percentage points 19 times out of 20.

Whip out those calculators, ladies and gentlemen, and do some math.  Sensitive people may avert their eyes at this point.

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

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

That's all.

But it gets worse, at least for the ABCers:

Telelink had more difficulty than usual getting people to answer the survey, and those who did -- 55% -- were undecided. Meanwhile, 19.1% said they would vote Liberal, 14.3% said they would vote Conservative and 8.8% said they would vote NDP.

Now it's almost impossible to understand if that means 55% of 1200, 55% of 919 or 55% of some other small number who answered the question but any way you put that together, it should make some people in the province very nervous about the outcome of the election in some of the seats.

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

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

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

Sometimes.

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

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

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

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

-srbp-

Family Feud, world of wonder version

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bob is now Danny Williams' parliamentary assistant.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

-srbp-