The Blue Shaft

Narrow partisan considerations reared their ugly head in a meeting of the legislature's management committee.

An independent study commissioned by the House of Assembly management commission recommends an increase in budgets for the Provincial Conservative, Liberal and New Democratic causes in the House of Assembly.

MR. SPEAKER: Okay. Provide base funding for the Government Members’ Caucus of $100,000 annually.

The Chair is ready for discussion.

Ms Burke.

MS BURKE: That is one recommendation that I support.

Joan Burke, education minister and government house leader may have enthusiastically voted money for her political friends but in the end, the Provincial Conservative members of the legislature's internal management commission support every single recommendation, except one. 

That one allocated $162,000 to the Official Opposition office to ensure a well-funded opposition that would have appropriate resources to carry out its important legislative function in a modern democracy.  The study reviewed legislature budgets across Canada and in several foreign parliaments.

The report included a set of general principles on democratic legislatures and caucus funding. They included, among others:

3. The legislature must be strong vis-à-vis the executive in order for democratic government to be effective.

...

5. In adversarial systems, the Opposition and other parties play important roles and need institutionalized protections.

...

One cannot imagine a more straightforward set of principles.  In order to drive home their point on the importance of a legislature with a properly funded opposition, the authors included an observation on events in several provinces where opposition benches were depleted after an election:

The crucial thing is that there has to be informed opposition, and that takes resources. However, one other consideration is germane here. That is that in first-past-the-post (single member plurality) systems such as those that exist in Canada, there is a danger of opposition shut-outs or quasi shut-outs as the electoral system exaggerates the winner’s share of seats. This has been seen in general elections in the provinces of Newfoundland and Labrador, PEI, New Brunswick, Alberta and British Columbia. There needs to be a kind of “Opposition Bill of Rights” to deal with such anomalies, since Westminster systems
depend on adversarialism.

The Provincial Conservative members took a decidedly different view. Innovation minister Trevor Taylor put it this way:

MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Chairman, I don’t need to reiterate everything that Ms Burke just said, but I think if you just look at it from a perspective, a base allocation, one would think that a base allocation would be a base for all caucuses. Why the principles of Metrics EFG would differentiate is hard for me to follow, to be honest about it. [Emphasis added]

That last statement could not be more painfully obvious or true.

The extent to which the Provincial Conservative members also picked at petty issues is evident in the transcript of the session.  Education minister Joan Burke seemed concerned either to micromanage issues - as with Memorial University - or to ensure that no one got a few dollars more in his or her budget than she had available in hers:

MS BURKE: I have a question on that, and I think it may be just a clarification.

It says that the assistant to the Opposition House Leader is $49,000 and the assistant to the Government House Leader is $43,000. So, is this simply a case where there is a step progression but it would be the same job?

Okay, I just wanted to clarify that because in the report it kind of stands out as to why and I thought that would have been the explanation.

MR. SPEAKER: Yes. My understanding is that the assistant to the Leader of the Opposition has gone through the step progression to reflect that salary, and the assistant to the Government House Leader will do the incremental steps to get up to that particular salary as well.

MS BURKE: In essence what we are saying is, instead of it being, say, $49,000 there, that would depend, I guess – that is only an indication of where an individual would be on a step. If that position changed tomorrow, that $49,000 could potentially be, I do not know, $38,000 or $39,000.

Outside the meeting the Provincial Conservatives defended their actions as being about responsible management of public spending. 

-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-

St. John's South-Mount Pearl: a quick look at the results

The Family Feud had a pretty clear impact on the vote result in St. John's South-Mount Pearl.

The difference between the Conservative vote in 2006 and the Conservative vote in 2008 is the increase in Liberal and New Democrat vote, a smattering of votes for the other candidates and a large group (almost 3,000) that apparently didn't vote.

These would be almost entirely Provincial Conservatives who were constrained in their choices by activities within their own normal political camp.

The New Democrats were primary beneficiary of the Feud with an increased vote of 5810.  Some 2927 didn't vote, apparently.  The Liberal vote share increased by 2635.

Overall turnout was slightly above that of 2004 - when there was another spat within the Conservative party - but the total count of eligible voters increased as well from 2004 to 2008.

Liberal and New Democratic vote share did not change appreciably from 2004 to 2006.  The increase in Conservative vote in 2006, compared to 2004, can be attributed to a suppression that resulted from internal problems between the Provincial and federal Conservatives.  In 2006, the Provincial Conservatives supported their federal brethren openly.

-srbp-

The real ABC goal

Bond Paper's post election summary:

"...the Blue Machine is a better friend than enemy, at least for other Blue people."

Danny Williams' post-election summary:

“If there had been a good rapport … they possibly could have 150 seats. That would put them in striking distance of a majority,” he said.

Ahem.

-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-

The greatest piece of nonsense in a generation

Memorial University political science professor Michael Temelini likes to refer to the 2005 Atlantic Accord as an example of what can happen in a minority parliament.

The greatest piece of public policy in a generation he calls it.

That's not hyperbole.

That's just nonsense.

The 2005 agreement simply transferred $2.0 billion in federal cash to provincial coffers.  It hasn't produced a penny of new money since then.  It won't produce any more since the provincial government ceases to qualify for Equalization this year and won't qualify to renew the deal.

What Temelini either forgets or doesn't know is that offshore oil sits - constitutionally  - in federal jurisdiction. 

Under the real Atlantic Accord - signed in 1985 - the provincial government basically gets de facto control of the offshore, and more importantly sets and collects 100% of revenues as if the resource was on land.  The federal government collects typical federal revenues like income taxes, GST and corporate taxes.

All the royalties go to the provincial government.

And that's where they stay until the provincial government spends them.

Not a penny goes to Ottawa.

Never has.

At least not since 1985.

The enabling legislation for the real Atlantic Accord passed through parliament in 1987.  The provincial enabling legislation passed around the same time.

The agreement was signed between two majority governments.

But here's the thing.

Legally, constitutionally, the federal government wasn't obliged to do anything at all, let alone sign the 1985 deal.

The 1985 Atlantic Accord was one of the greatest pieces of Canadian public policy in a generation.

It is the sole foundation on which the provincial government's oil revenues rest.

Take that away and the 2005 deal is nothing at all

-srbp-

Incompetence or corruption?

Either way, you can call it a plague.

There's no other word that comes easily to mind to describe the insidious, weasel-politicking that goes on in far too many organizations across the province. 

The federation of agriculture is not the first group and it sadly won't be the last one to have a board whose members, at some point, think it more important to cave in to perceived political pressure rather than do the right thing.

The sorry truth is that boot-licking and arse-kissing are old political staples in Newfoundland and Labrador.  Politicians don't even need to ask to have their best wellies tongue-shined to perfection.

Take a look at the extracts from a letter from the agriculture federation board to Merv Wiseman, currently the Conservative candidate in St. John's South-Mount Pearl.

What we have in the case of the agriculture federation and Merv Wiseman is not something as simple as a poorly worded letter conveying a board decision about the dates of Wiseman's leave of absence.  That's what the federation tried to say when this issue erupted.

Rather we have clear evidence that the federation board wished to avoid causing any difficulty with the current administration by directing the president to stay away from the meeting.  This could have been handled more diplomatically.  This certainly might not have even been an issue, given that Wiseman will hardly be in any shape to go back to his usual job with the federation tomorrow.

From the context of the letter, the meaning is unmistakable.

And it is wrong.

This sort of situation is not something unique to the current administration;  the same sort of anti-democratic decisions have been taken by groups in the past.  It's just that with the current crowd,  in an environment where going against the government is called treason - and people actually stand up for their right to use such savage language -  the weak-minded and morally bankrupt out there take that as a sign that all those who are potentially not in the favour of the government must be silenced.

Some of them think they will get brownie points for attacking the regime's enemies. 

Take a look at two of the final paragraphs and you can see that the board understood full well the gravity of the decision it made and the reasons for it.

Notice that last bit:  it says - in effect - that if Wiseman wants to put the best interests of the industry first he will concur with the board's decision to stay away from the next meeting.

What sanctimonious tripe.

To her credit, the provincial minister responsible for agriculture has already distanced herself from the federation and this letter.  She couldn't do anything else and still retain a semblance of dignity.

But for the record, she ought to make it plain that it is never in the best interests of the province for any board of any organization anywhere to take the decision that the federation did.

We are all cheapened by such a fundamentally anti-democratic sentiment.

Wiseman ought not to attend the meeting because he is on a leave of absence.

The board told him not to attend because of the ongoing controversy between the current provincial administration and its federal counterpart.

The former is legitimate.

The latter is indefensible.  The board ought to resign immediately, en masse.  It has shown itself to be incompetent at best or political corrupt at worst.

 

-srbp-

International roundup of financial crisis developments

1.  The United Kingdom will loan Iceland 100 million pounds sterling to assist its Landesbanki repay British creditors of the nationalised Icelandic bank.

This is not surprising given the number of local councils that did their banking through Icesave, the Landsbanki subsidiary:

But there was increasing concern about the amount of British public and charitable-sector money deposited in Iceland's stricken banks. As much as £1bn of local council money is thought to be at stake, with British charities estimating their exposure at around £60m. "There are more than 50 charities that have deposits there," said Stephen Bubb, chief executive of the Association of Chief Executives of Voluntary Organisations.

2.  Meanwhile in Scotland, Scottish nationalists are putting a brave face on the financial crisis. According to some reports, the first minister has been ducking questions about whether an independent Scotland could have funded a 32 billion pound bailout of Scottish banks.  He's also been faced with questions about the so-called Arc of Prosperity which Scottish nationalists have used as proof that an independent Scotland could do well on its own.  Of the four countries in the arc,  Iceland is teetering on the verge of bankruptcy, Denmark and Ireland are in recession and Norway is experiencing its own difficulties.

As Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling stepped in to save Scotland's two biggest banks, the Scottish Government tried to avoid questions over how an independent Scotland would have coped with the international crisis. A spokesman for Alex Salmond, the First Minister, said he would "not speculate on a theoretical future event" and refused to say whether he believed an independent Scotland could have bailed out its banks to the tune of £32 billion.

However, he insisted the SNP would still try to push through a referendum bill in 2010, even though if people voted Yes to independence, Scotland's two main banks would be owned by a "foreign" UK government.

At the same time, the Scottish local government is looking at ways of avoiding a recession in Scotland.

3.  Dutch local governments are also affected by the Landsbanki problems.  Twelve local councils have a total of 59 million euros with Landsbanki while the province of Zeeland has five million euros in the bankrupt American firm Lehman Brothers.

4.  France, Germany and Russia have announced separate bailout plans worth almost $1.3 trillion.

5.  Ireland and Australia are guaranteeing bank deposits.  The Irish government guarantee applies only to Irish banks, not subsidiaries of foreign banks.

6.  Ireland is about to introduce a tough national budget that will raise hospital charges and cut tax relief.

All hospital charges are to increase significantly - by 10 per cent in many cases, including charges to be treated in accident and emergency, or to have a private bed in a public hospital.

Despite the fee rises, the Health Service Executive will be forced to make serious cuts in existing services to stay within budget - which will be €400 million more than last year, but still not enough to meet extra wage bills and other costs.

-srbp-

The old Connies make a come back

Hiding candidates from the media and shoving reporters who try and ask a question.

Yeah, not like we haven't seen that before.

Will CTV look for assault charges to be laid?

"The non-consensual application of force by one person to another is an assault."

-srbp-

Aussie Dippers

It may be the website for The Australian, but a Canadian IP address will turn up a Canadian ad.

There's a CIBC one.

And one for the New Democratic Party and Jack Layton.

There's a pretty creative use of the Internet and it would be interesting to know how many Canadian voters actually saw the Dipper's Aussie ad.

-srbp-

At the last minute, Harris ducks

In the last hours of the campaign, New Democrat candidate Jack Harris was hit with a simple, straightforward question.

Rather than answer it just as straightforwardly, he ducked it with a comment that his Conservative opponent was raising it at the last minute.

Maybe Jack needs to trying answering the question about what he plans to do with his considerable provincial pension.

After all, it can't be a good thing when Walter Noel is backing you with some comment about why people shouldn't worry about a politician's other sources of income.

Hmmm.

Makes you wonder on a subject no one should wonder about.

-srbp-

The Fruitloop Factory

There's no allowing for the myriad reason why people feel the need to make stuff up, nor that they would use this false stuff for their own political ends.

Nope.

All we can wonder about is how people actually wind up believe sheer crap and run around repeating it like it was...

true.

Stuff that can be easily shown to be...wait for it...completely false.

Like say the stuff about Barak Obama.

-srbp-

Iceland eyes IMF

As they prepared to head to Moscow to negotiation a four billion euro bailout, Icelandic officials gave signs on Sunday the country was looking at the International Monetary Fund as a potential source of help during the country's economic collapse. [Reuters-Iceland]

"My conclusion is that if we appeal to the IMF, other central banks and other nations would follow that track," Industry Minister Ossur Skarphedinsson told the Morgunbladid newspaper in a report published on its website on Sunday.

In related news, the Norwegian bank regulator moved on Sunday to take control of the Iceland bank Kaupthing's Norwegian arm. [Reuters - Norway]

-srbp-

Vote Dipper to stop the seal hunt

Why else would IFAW care about an election race in Canada?

 

-srbp-

Fishing for votes

Outgoing Connie fish minister Loyola Hearn is extending the damn fool fishery - an annual cod plunder disguised as tradition - just in time to try and snag a few more votes.

The only way for cod stocks to recover to commercial level is to keep these kinds of people off the water.

-srbp-

Harper hides

Okay, so the guy who will only speak to reporters in highly controlled conditions, is now canceling all media availabilities for the remainder of the campaign.

And this surprises who, exactly?

Meanwhile, in other news, reporters are burning their notebooks and any electronic record of their gushing over Harper's sudden appearance at breakfast early in the campaign. [Link to a National Self-Lampoon version.  Yes, it's the Lampoon but for some reason other media outlets fell for the bullshit even though they are genetically predisposed to ingest pre-digest pap and regurgitate it on command.]

Like that wasn't contrived either.

Sheesh.

During this campaign we have seen once again the ability of news media types to completely ignore the fact they are being manipulated despite ample evidence of the intention to manipulate.

Does anyone  - you'd have to be old enough - recall the whole roll of the dice piece from the Globe right before the whole Meech end game?  Same idea.

-srbp-

"Confederation is in danger": Cleary

Ryan Cleary, New Democratic Party, St. John's South-Mount Pearl, on his election blog:

“Confederation is in danger,” I said.

“Jack Layton, Jack Harris and myself can bring it back to safe ground.”

Ryan Cleary, editor of The Independent, May 2008:

I don’t want to seem ungrateful, but now that we’re rolling in the cash it may be time to consider breaking away from the country of Canada. If we’re teetering on the edge of economic independence anyway, why not go all the way and raise the Pink, White and Green outside Confederation Building?

Ummmm.

Which one are we supposed to believe is how Ryan really feels?

-srbp-

"Worse than first thought": Aussie foreign minister

From The Australian:

THE government's cabinet budget committee will meet later today to take any action deemed necessary from key meetings of the International Monetary Fund and Group of 20 finance ministers in New York today.

Foreign Minister Stephen Smith said there was a growing realisation that the international financial crisis was worse than originally thought.

-srbp-

CTV/ATV hatchet job

ATV and CTV are getting ripped for their hatchet job of Stephane Dion, and rightly so.

Geoff Meeker's media blog at the Telegram is a case in point.

May we expect a retraction any time soon from ATV and CTV?

Don't bet on it.

CTV's Craig Oliver is not only unfazed by the whole business, he trumpets it as a supposed example of how the country supposedly won't tolerate a leader who is not comfortable in both official languages.

The veteran journalists who commented at Geoff's post would disagree with Oliver's contention that the question would be "indelibly clear" "[t]o anyone with any comfort zone in English...".

The one point from Oliver's excuse pile that most would agree with is that the episode damaged Dion, even if only for a short while.

The next question top raise is why the whole episode occurred in the first place.  A network that features a dubious piece of analysis by Conrad Winn on its website in to different areas - the election and "world" space - should not be surprised if people started questioning its partisan affiliation. 

 

-srbp-

Dear Conrad...

Get a grip.

Obama was leading McCain before the meltdown.

McCain's miserable performance in the wake of the economic crisis has only worsened his position.

Some recent polls have Obama as much as 11 points in front of McCain nationally. Even Fox News analysts would have to reach to claim Obama is "fighting" to hold on to a "slim" lead.

That's nothing to shake a stick at.

It starts to get worse for McCain when one notices the shifts occurring in key demographic segments to Obama and away from McCain/Palin.

As for the Bill Ayers thing, the most spectacular point is that the McCain/Palin attack on that point has had almost no discernable impact on the latest Obama surge.

Perhaps your analysis is -  in a word -  simplistic.

Ditto the Canadian stuff.

In the past week or so we have seen the Conservative support in Quebec tumble as a direct response to Conservative messaging gaffes. No minor issues;  major gaffes.  The Conservatives who were poised to increase the Quebec riding count will now struggle to hold on to what they have.  Some numbers suggest their riding count will be halved.

Numbers have shifted dramatically in key Ontario ridings and even in British Columbia there has been a noticeable shift in voter intentions.

This hardly favours the Conservatives "one way or the other".

Far from being a case where voter intentions were solidly formed long ago in an election that may see "a "watershed" that changes fundamental voting patterns and party dominance for years to come", the current Canadian federal election is an example of how even front-runners can prove unpalatable to the majority of electors based on elector experienced with them.

Evidently there's something sitting close to Conrad's compass that is skewing his perspective.

-srbp-