It seems to be the game of the day. If you were from outer space and landed in Toronto, you would think it was falling apart and about to join the ranks of countries like Greece and Iceland for debt default and recklass spending. You would thin that if you were listening to George Smitherman, Rocco Rossi or George Ford. They are all running for Mayor in our city.
Yet they are misleading us. You see, it is easier to run an election on fear than on ideas. Its easier to tear something down than build something. This has been ticking me off for some time, all this trash talk.
Finally I found a very good rebuttal to this trash talk. Look at this video. It says it all. Toronto taxes the lowest in GTA. Tax rates lower today than 2005. Toronto measures up among top cities in the world. Just watch it...
Showing posts with label election. Show all posts
Showing posts with label election. Show all posts
10.12.2010
Second Toronto Twitter disabled idiot button
I saw this tweet tonight on the voteto twitter page.
That follows this one i posted about last week.
Let me, a gay man, hold the purse strings to the City
10.07.2010
Let me, a gay man, hold the purse strings to the City
Do you need another reason not to vote for Rob Ford?
8.19.2010
Harper creates 550 jobs in Public Service
Did I hear him right? Harper is making a big announcement in New Brunswick. He is talking about adding to the federal public service. The creation of 500 Jobs. Harper, the government cutter is announcing he will move and create 550 pencil pushing jobs.
Was this an old Liberal press release that was pulled from the archives. Does Harper read what he is going to deliver? I mean Harper first runs up the biggest deficit in Canadian history and after years of calling for elimination of jobs, he is announcing 550 new public (read that again, 550 tax payer paid jobs). Will wonders ever cease?
Was this an old Liberal press release that was pulled from the archives. Does Harper read what he is going to deliver? I mean Harper first runs up the biggest deficit in Canadian history and after years of calling for elimination of jobs, he is announcing 550 new public (read that again, 550 tax payer paid jobs). Will wonders ever cease?
5.17.2010
Just what could the Campbell government do?
What will happen if the BC Liberals feel they are going in the tank next election? Will big business and the other wealthy Libcon financiers suggest a big time fire sale. Its no secret the big business in the province want to get rid of some nuisances as they see them to unfettered markets.
Here are a few things that could come under review for possible sale/garage sale pricing.
ICBC - There is already competition for the lucrative non-basic coverage. This is the most profitable piece to the vehicle insurance business. What's to stop Campbell and company from selling shares in ICBC or an auction to the highest bidder in a contest to compete with ICBC.
BC Lottery Corp. - Ontario has looked at selling off its lottery business, why not BC?
BC Place stadium would be a nice asset to sell if the government swallows the debt portion of the place.
St.Paul's Hospital - The Libs and Providence Health Care have been trying to find a way to move the hospital from the West end of Vancouver for years so they can sell the property to developers. Too bad for those that live in the West end but wouldn't they prefer a bunch more million dollar condos on Burrard street to an old hospital?
BC Hydro - The private sector has been vexed for years, missing out in tens of millions in energy dollar profits because BC Hydro produces and transmits its power to consumers.
The Agriculture Land Commission, weakened after Bill Bennett came to power and then more so under Campbell, could be tweaked some more to allow more growing of condos and big box stores.
That's the short list. There are many more opportunities for the Campbell Libcons. Imagine the possibilities if they they think they are going to royally tossed from office next election.
Here are a few things that could come under review for possible sale/garage sale pricing.
ICBC - There is already competition for the lucrative non-basic coverage. This is the most profitable piece to the vehicle insurance business. What's to stop Campbell and company from selling shares in ICBC or an auction to the highest bidder in a contest to compete with ICBC.
BC Lottery Corp. - Ontario has looked at selling off its lottery business, why not BC?
BC Place stadium would be a nice asset to sell if the government swallows the debt portion of the place.
St.Paul's Hospital - The Libs and Providence Health Care have been trying to find a way to move the hospital from the West end of Vancouver for years so they can sell the property to developers. Too bad for those that live in the West end but wouldn't they prefer a bunch more million dollar condos on Burrard street to an old hospital?
BC Hydro - The private sector has been vexed for years, missing out in tens of millions in energy dollar profits because BC Hydro produces and transmits its power to consumers.
The Agriculture Land Commission, weakened after Bill Bennett came to power and then more so under Campbell, could be tweaked some more to allow more growing of condos and big box stores.
That's the short list. There are many more opportunities for the Campbell Libcons. Imagine the possibilities if they they think they are going to royally tossed from office next election.
2.04.2010
Childcare funding, another promise
Child care is bandied about every election. The Liberals promise it, like they have since 1993. The Conservatives under Harper say they know a better way and send parents $100 for every child.
The trouble is these parties make child care a carrot for voters. The carrot was held out there by Brian Mulroney back in 1989 and became a central part of the Jean Chretien Liberals infamous "Red Book". Each of the following four elections the Liberals promised a National Day care plan. Harper said he was going to give money to parents, thus ending the chance of a "real" child care program.
Paul Martin implemented part of a program, thanks to a budget the NDP helped him with.
Electoral politics took over again and Martin decided to call an election. Martin introduced a budget that the NDP told them they would not support. The budget called for 50 billion dollars of tax cuts for big business. The previous Martin budget was also to include the tax cut, but in turn for the NDP support, Martin delayed the plan to cut corporate taxes.
Martin was well aware his budget would be defeated. He was counting on it. Martin and the Liberals felt they had nothing to lose. If the NDP supported the budget, they could continue in power and their corporate tax cuts would go ahead. The National Child care plan could then be implemented albeit much slower in its implementation. If the Liberals lost a budget vote, Martin could count on the carrots, a national day care program, a new deal with first nations.
People didn't even sniff at Martin's carrots. The old tried and true enticements did not work. Martin lost and the Liberals have voted for every single Conservative budget (some by pretending they weren't even there) Harper has brought in. Budgets that have stopped funding of child care, that have cut taxes to large corporations, and reduced the ability of the federal government to provide services.
The next election will see the Liberal party promising child care again and the big one will be, no new taxes. The Conservatives will promise no new taxes and likely promise not to cut anything.
No party elected in Canada can promise we will get anywhere without new revenue, and tax revenue is likely the only place to get it.
The trouble is these parties make child care a carrot for voters. The carrot was held out there by Brian Mulroney back in 1989 and became a central part of the Jean Chretien Liberals infamous "Red Book". Each of the following four elections the Liberals promised a National Day care plan. Harper said he was going to give money to parents, thus ending the chance of a "real" child care program.
Paul Martin implemented part of a program, thanks to a budget the NDP helped him with.
Electoral politics took over again and Martin decided to call an election. Martin introduced a budget that the NDP told them they would not support. The budget called for 50 billion dollars of tax cuts for big business. The previous Martin budget was also to include the tax cut, but in turn for the NDP support, Martin delayed the plan to cut corporate taxes.
Martin was well aware his budget would be defeated. He was counting on it. Martin and the Liberals felt they had nothing to lose. If the NDP supported the budget, they could continue in power and their corporate tax cuts would go ahead. The National Child care plan could then be implemented albeit much slower in its implementation. If the Liberals lost a budget vote, Martin could count on the carrots, a national day care program, a new deal with first nations.
People didn't even sniff at Martin's carrots. The old tried and true enticements did not work. Martin lost and the Liberals have voted for every single Conservative budget (some by pretending they weren't even there) Harper has brought in. Budgets that have stopped funding of child care, that have cut taxes to large corporations, and reduced the ability of the federal government to provide services.
The next election will see the Liberal party promising child care again and the big one will be, no new taxes. The Conservatives will promise no new taxes and likely promise not to cut anything.
No party elected in Canada can promise we will get anywhere without new revenue, and tax revenue is likely the only place to get it.
Glen Murray takes shot at Rae
"I’m not like Bob Rae," Murray said. "I cut taxes every year I was mayor." Liberal candidate in Toronto Centre. - Winnipeg Free Press
Yikes, not sure I would want to share an office with Murray if I were Bob Rae. But then Glen may not have to worry about that...
Yikes, not sure I would want to share an office with Murray if I were Bob Rae. But then Glen may not have to worry about that...
2.02.2010
Voting discrimination in Toronto Centre
Access to voting....
Today most of us take it for granted. Check out this stat...
That shocked the heck out of me and reminded me of Ohio in the 2004 presidential election campaign and my work in BC years ago.
In the Ohio campaign large black and poor neighbourhoods had fewer voting locations and fewer voting machines than nearby predominantly white middle and upper class neighbourhoods. This meant that the poorer black people had to wait in line to vote four or five times longer than people in the wealthier white area.
In BC many years ago, voting in the remote Chilcotin country was at the house of a white person. This place was located in a white settlement of about 300 people. Also expected to vote at this place was the population 1100 at a Indian reserve 8 kilometers away.
The effect of this shoddy system is that those living in St. Jamestown are being faced with wait times to vote 4 or 5 times longer. Its likely these people have much less "disposable" time to wait. Its likely they will see a line and say "why bother". It is true that the people on Bay Street could say why bother too if they saw a line up, but they don't have to contemplate that as they won't have to line up to vote.
This is another example of systemic discrimination of the poor in Our Ontario. Or should I say "Your Ontario".
Today most of us take it for granted. Check out this stat...
St. Jamestown has 8,866 voters and 3 polling stations. Three buildings on Bay Street have 910 voters, and 3 polling stations.
That shocked the heck out of me and reminded me of Ohio in the 2004 presidential election campaign and my work in BC years ago.
In the Ohio campaign large black and poor neighbourhoods had fewer voting locations and fewer voting machines than nearby predominantly white middle and upper class neighbourhoods. This meant that the poorer black people had to wait in line to vote four or five times longer than people in the wealthier white area.
In BC many years ago, voting in the remote Chilcotin country was at the house of a white person. This place was located in a white settlement of about 300 people. Also expected to vote at this place was the population 1100 at a Indian reserve 8 kilometers away.
The effect of this shoddy system is that those living in St. Jamestown are being faced with wait times to vote 4 or 5 times longer. Its likely these people have much less "disposable" time to wait. Its likely they will see a line and say "why bother". It is true that the people on Bay Street could say why bother too if they saw a line up, but they don't have to contemplate that as they won't have to line up to vote.
This is another example of systemic discrimination of the poor in Our Ontario. Or should I say "Your Ontario".
2.01.2010
Rotary Pres says Cathy Crowe in Toronto Centre
I know those reading will say, of course this blog is supporting Cathy Crowe for MPP in Toronto Centre. Yes that is the bent here, yet I have to say, if ever Ontario needed someone specific at Queen's Park, it's Cathy. For that matter, why the heck didn't the Liberals try to recruit her? Surely she carries more cred than the local Liberal Candidate, Glen Murray, who is promising a key in the pocket of every resident to safe affordable housing.
I like Glen's promise, he needs to make it facing off against the one person in Toronto who has been doing that for years. And John Andras thinks so too!
I like Glen's promise, he needs to make it facing off against the one person in Toronto who has been doing that for years. And John Andras thinks so too!
"I have worked with Cathy for over 15 years. She is one of the most tireless workers, most clear-headed thinkers and most effective advocates. Equally at home speaking at a drop-in or at the Rotary Club, Cathy can bridge diverse interests and find common ground on seemingly intractable problems. I can think of no-one better to represent Toronto Centre at Queens' Park."- John Andras, Past President, Rotary Club Toronto
10.22.2009
LPC bodychecked by Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has just sunk Liberal (LPC) fortunes in Quebec. Today they ruled against Bill 104 stating it was unconstitutional and gave the Quebec government one year to clean it up. The Bloc will use this as another reason to send them to Ottawa to look out for Quebec as yet another Canadian institution has assaulted the sovereignty of French nation of Quebec.
The Supreme Court decision was unanimous. That says that even the three Supreme Court Justices from Quebec have deemed the law unconstitutional. That is not going to go over well and it provides an opportune time for the BLOC to solidify what was a weakening lead over the LPC in Quebec.
Add to this story the recent book by former Philadelphia Flyer player Bob Sirois, who examines forty years of NHL draft picks and determines that francophone Quebecers are systematically ignored by an “anti-french virus”.
Have a look at the the Montreal Canadiens roster and it likely has more Russians than French Canadiens. That would have been unheard of 15 or 20 years ago.
These stories add up to the Bloc becoming rightiously indignant about the Quebec place in Canada. I can see an ad coming, Iggy and Harper gaining up and bodychecking some pee wee hockey player in a school league somewhere.
The Supreme Court decision was unanimous. That says that even the three Supreme Court Justices from Quebec have deemed the law unconstitutional. That is not going to go over well and it provides an opportune time for the BLOC to solidify what was a weakening lead over the LPC in Quebec.
Add to this story the recent book by former Philadelphia Flyer player Bob Sirois, who examines forty years of NHL draft picks and determines that francophone Quebecers are systematically ignored by an “anti-french virus”.
"Francophone Quebecers are wrongly disparaged as too small, too lax on defence and not suited to the robust “Canadian” style of play, Mr. Sirois writes in the book, published in French and titled Le Québec mis en échec (Quebec Bodychecked). “Myths, prejudices, stereotypes and favoritism make up an integral part of every draft session in the National Hockey League.” - Graeme Hamilton, National Post, October 19, 2009Sirous makes a good case for his findings while pointing out that the current General Manager of the Montreal Canadiens, Bob Gainey has drafted fewer and fewer french players since he came into the job. If Quebec's team can't or won't draft french players who will?
Have a look at the the Montreal Canadiens roster and it likely has more Russians than French Canadiens. That would have been unheard of 15 or 20 years ago.
These stories add up to the Bloc becoming rightiously indignant about the Quebec place in Canada. I can see an ad coming, Iggy and Harper gaining up and bodychecking some pee wee hockey player in a school league somewhere.
9.30.2009
New Democrats and LPCers need to look deep
Update - 5:30 pm Sep 30/09: Olivia Chow has not said she would be thinking she would run for the Mayor's job in Toronto. In fact she will be staying in Parliament! I stand corrected and very happy!
---------------------------
Politics creates some odd realities. The Liberals fed up with taking the brunt for supporting the Harper minority decided it was time someone else picked up that dirty job and the New Democrats have obliged. Jeff over at his "I'm an Ontarian after being a BCer" blog has a good analysis of the situation, albeit from an LPCer point of view. He takes few little shots at the New Democrats.
The truth of the stranger than reality show in Ottawa is that the New Democrats and Liberals do not want an election now. The New Democrats are taking the hit in the media and from Iggy for "propping up" the Harperites. Funny thing is, its truly to Iggy's short term benefit that we don't have an election, especially with Bob Rae breathing down his back. An election now would likely see the NDP lose some seats and the LPC gain a few and Harper gaining some, maybe enough for a majority.
With a another dismal LPC performance, Iggy will have to leave and Bob Rae will step in, bringing with him all of Jean's buddies. The demon of Paul Martin will be washed away and the LPC will actually stand some chance of regaining government.
The New Democrats future looks about the same or worse. I wish I could suggest it would be otherwise. Instead of being acknowledged by the media for preventing an election and trying to make Parliament work at least until spring, they are being characterised as having to hold their noses while voting with Harper.
I haven't met any Canadian other than a few party hacks that want an election or think we need one. With that public thought pervading the land, the New Democrats should get some credit for doing the dirty work. But this is politics and the New Democrats are being roasted as hypocrites (79 Liberal votes).
Further disconcerting is the lack of imagination in any of the political parties. We Can Do Better and Standing up for Average Working Families are lame and bereft of content. Where is the grand vision. All we get is, "they are wrong and we are right."
The New Democrats must do better this time out or Jack is finished. With rumours that Olivia Chow may leave one of only two New Democrat seats in Toronto to seek the Mayor's job, the New Democrats fortunes look bleak for making any advances in Canada's biggest city. If Chow runs for Mayor then I expect the left and centre vote will split and John Tory will become Mayor, thats a lovely thought to contemplate.
The LPC and the New Democrats have a big job to do this winter. Polling does not build grand visions, polls do not inspire people to support this idea or that one. They both need to be out there listening and talking with Canadians.
I have seen many of the ideas the New Democrats have proposed and I support them whole heartedly. What they have failed to do is capture the attention of voters and would be voters. Instead of being seen as a party that supports working families, they are seen as the party that hates business. The LPC on the other hand is seen as having destroyed its foundation.
If we want to stop a Conservative majority we New Democrats and LPCers must take a good look at what our respective parties are offering Canadians and will Canadians like it enough to support it.
---------------------------
Politics creates some odd realities. The Liberals fed up with taking the brunt for supporting the Harper minority decided it was time someone else picked up that dirty job and the New Democrats have obliged. Jeff over at his "I'm an Ontarian after being a BCer" blog has a good analysis of the situation, albeit from an LPCer point of view. He takes few little shots at the New Democrats.
The truth of the stranger than reality show in Ottawa is that the New Democrats and Liberals do not want an election now. The New Democrats are taking the hit in the media and from Iggy for "propping up" the Harperites. Funny thing is, its truly to Iggy's short term benefit that we don't have an election, especially with Bob Rae breathing down his back. An election now would likely see the NDP lose some seats and the LPC gain a few and Harper gaining some, maybe enough for a majority.
With a another dismal LPC performance, Iggy will have to leave and Bob Rae will step in, bringing with him all of Jean's buddies. The demon of Paul Martin will be washed away and the LPC will actually stand some chance of regaining government.
The New Democrats future looks about the same or worse. I wish I could suggest it would be otherwise. Instead of being acknowledged by the media for preventing an election and trying to make Parliament work at least until spring, they are being characterised as having to hold their noses while voting with Harper.
I haven't met any Canadian other than a few party hacks that want an election or think we need one. With that public thought pervading the land, the New Democrats should get some credit for doing the dirty work. But this is politics and the New Democrats are being roasted as hypocrites (79 Liberal votes).
Further disconcerting is the lack of imagination in any of the political parties. We Can Do Better and Standing up for Average Working Families are lame and bereft of content. Where is the grand vision. All we get is, "they are wrong and we are right."
The New Democrats must do better this time out or Jack is finished. With rumours that Olivia Chow may leave one of only two New Democrat seats in Toronto to seek the Mayor's job, the New Democrats fortunes look bleak for making any advances in Canada's biggest city. If Chow runs for Mayor then I expect the left and centre vote will split and John Tory will become Mayor, thats a lovely thought to contemplate.
The LPC and the New Democrats have a big job to do this winter. Polling does not build grand visions, polls do not inspire people to support this idea or that one. They both need to be out there listening and talking with Canadians.
I have seen many of the ideas the New Democrats have proposed and I support them whole heartedly. What they have failed to do is capture the attention of voters and would be voters. Instead of being seen as a party that supports working families, they are seen as the party that hates business. The LPC on the other hand is seen as having destroyed its foundation.
If we want to stop a Conservative majority we New Democrats and LPCers must take a good look at what our respective parties are offering Canadians and will Canadians like it enough to support it.
9.28.2009
Trouble in Quebec
Liberal MP Denis Coderre has resigned as the LPCer in charge for Quebec and as the Defense critic. Coderre did say he still has confidence in Iggy even if he Coderre has taken all the heat for the party in Quebec. Sounds like all is not as nice as the public statements make it seem too be.
Its always hard learning on the job especially when you are busy trying to look like you want an election despite being way way down in the polls. Lucky for the LPCers the NDP managed to get some EI money, no matter how short lived it may end up being, at least it saved Iggy from being the second Liberal leader from going down in flames in an election.
An election now could do nothing other than give Harper his majority without Quebec, now that would make for an interesting four years. That is especially true given Harper's announcement today that 90% of stimulus funding has found a home, even if most of it is in Conservative ridings. Wonder where the Conservatives learned that way of doing business.
Its always hard learning on the job especially when you are busy trying to look like you want an election despite being way way down in the polls. Lucky for the LPCers the NDP managed to get some EI money, no matter how short lived it may end up being, at least it saved Iggy from being the second Liberal leader from going down in flames in an election.
An election now could do nothing other than give Harper his majority without Quebec, now that would make for an interesting four years. That is especially true given Harper's announcement today that 90% of stimulus funding has found a home, even if most of it is in Conservative ridings. Wonder where the Conservatives learned that way of doing business.
9.24.2009
Put your Right foot in
Yes I know there has been lots of posts about Iggy doing the two step. You know, step over here, say this, step over there, say the opposite.
Its tough being the AIR Apparent. You have to say so many things to get elected. Its does however appear that the Liberal leader will keep the commitment made by the Tories in Ottawa and The LIBcons in Queens Park to harmonize the sales taxes. Its really not fair for Iggy to call it Harper's Sales tax in BC anymore. That is what he has been doing as the TAX is not going over well out there.
Here in Ontario, it different, people here have rolled over. So Iggy went to meet some business folks the other day and decided there are more votes here than in BC so he won't change the HST. That is going to cost him in BC.
As for Ontario, the longer we wait for an election the worse it looks for the Liberals. To add insult to more red faced LPCers, they may have handed the NDP a big repeat victory in Quebec with the Pontifical one himself, (that's Iggy) declaring he will anoint a woman to run in Outremont. I can hardly wait.
Its tough being the AIR Apparent. You have to say so many things to get elected. Its does however appear that the Liberal leader will keep the commitment made by the Tories in Ottawa and The LIBcons in Queens Park to harmonize the sales taxes. Its really not fair for Iggy to call it Harper's Sales tax in BC anymore. That is what he has been doing as the TAX is not going over well out there.
Here in Ontario, it different, people here have rolled over. So Iggy went to meet some business folks the other day and decided there are more votes here than in BC so he won't change the HST. That is going to cost him in BC.
As for Ontario, the longer we wait for an election the worse it looks for the Liberals. To add insult to more red faced LPCers, they may have handed the NDP a big repeat victory in Quebec with the Pontifical one himself, (that's Iggy) declaring he will anoint a woman to run in Outremont. I can hardly wait.
Till then try out this tune (note its always a "right foot")
You put your right foot in,
You put your right foot out,
You put your right foot in
And you shake it all about.
You do the Iggy shuffle
And you turn yourself around,
That's what it's all about.
- Kelly McParland: Liberals do the Iggy Shuffle on sales tax
9.22.2009
Thomas Mulcair is Outremont
Thomas Mulcair's butt is not waiting to be kicked by Iggy's chosen woman. I hope for the LPCer's sake they pick a ripe one. Mulcair is very good and 
will not be an easy one to knock off. I expect they (LPCers) will find it surprisingly difficult.
Adding to the difficulty will be the idea that the Liberals have again decided against a democratic selection of a candidate, continuing the age old practice of benevolent leadership.
The Member of Parliament for Outremont, as awful as that sounds today to the LPCer, is a New Democrat and likely will be no matter who Iggy hand picks for the riding, especially if Iggy hand picks someone. Mulcair is a new breed of New Democrat and not so easily dismissed.
update: I missed Scott's advice to Iggy here.
will not be an easy one to knock off. I expect they (LPCers) will find it surprisingly difficult.Adding to the difficulty will be the idea that the Liberals have again decided against a democratic selection of a candidate, continuing the age old practice of benevolent leadership.
The Member of Parliament for Outremont, as awful as that sounds today to the LPCer, is a New Democrat and likely will be no matter who Iggy hand picks for the riding, especially if Iggy hand picks someone. Mulcair is a new breed of New Democrat and not so easily dismissed.
update: I missed Scott's advice to Iggy here.
9.14.2009
Topp this LPCers
Brian Topp's posting in the Globe and Mail says it well here
Topp is a New Democrat, but put forward the NDP positions much better than I do below. Its a good read and one that should resonate well with Canadian voters who don't want an election 11 months on from the last one...
Topp is a New Democrat, but put forward the NDP positions much better than I do below. Its a good read and one that should resonate well with Canadian voters who don't want an election 11 months on from the last one...
h/t to Accidental Deliberations again! ...
Minority Govt's pass NDP Policy
Somebody is out of the sunlight and they don't like it.
Jack Layton has said he would wait and see what Harper is going to do before deciding if the NDP would vote with the Liberals in bringing down the government. Minority governments must work with the other parties if they wish to stay in power.
In 2005 Paul Martin very much wanted to stay in power and agreed to many of the NDP demands for concessions in the budget. Paul Martin in 2006 decided he wouldn't make any concessions and as a result the NDP voted against the budget. This is one of the methods the NDP though never in power has brought about significant change to public policy over the years. One need only look to the Trudeau government in 1972. Trudeau required NDP support to stay in power. That resulted in several policy moves that likely would not have occurred had Trudeau to rely on his on party to support them. The threat of the government falling allowed for more progressive budgets and legislation to proceed.
In 1974 Mr. Trudeau met with his caucus in Sudbury Ontario days before the non-confidence motion was presented. He suggested at the time the NDP were too scared of an election and thus wouldn't vote down his government. The NDP on the other hand felt that Trudeau had become arrogant and his parliamentary actions proved it. Really what was at issue was Trudeau's wish for an election. He got it and subsequently won a majority government in 1974.
Paul Martin desperately wanted to stay in power. He had barely squeaked back into government with the support of the NDP and as it turned out some independent MP's and the floor crossing from the Tories to the Libs that helped. Martin managed to do some very good things in his time as PM. He passed same-sex marriage, looked seriously at decriminalizing Marijuana possession, agreements with the Provinces to reduce wait times. All of which squeaked by in votes.
Martin then proceeded to deliver on Child Care and repairing relations with First Nations. Martin held a historic meeting in Kelowna, for which many including the NDP applauded him for. Martin failed to deliver however. Seeing his government hanging on every vote, he must have decided he needed election fodder, something to distinguish the Liberals from the Conservatives.
While Martin could have brought in legislation or a mini budget to implement the Kelowna Accord and the Childcare program, he did not. Instead he put it out as a carrot for voters. This was a serious mistake. The Liberals were already down in many places due to the sponsorship scandal and they paid dearly for it in the polls.
Its my contention, that if Martin had brought in Childcare and the Kelowna Accord it would have passed in Parliament and the result would have seen him re-elected, most likely to another minority but re-elected. The NDP voted against the government after it became clear Martin was not going to take immediate action on the Kelowna Accord nor the Childcare program.
It was a very risky strategy for Martin, hold the carrot way out there, hope he could paint Harper as mean, and squeak in on the promise to implement the Childcare program and the Kelowna Accord.
The rest is history as they say.
The election of Harper saw the Liberals whacked severely by the voters. The sponsorship scandal and a line from Harper that stated there were enough checks on his power by the courts and bureaucracy that people should feel safe voting for them. Whats happened as a result was a Liberal party battered from inside and out, no money and no leadership.
I can say charitably that they were between a rock and a hard place. Harper attached confidence in his government to just about everything. If a bill or budget failed it would bring down the government and the Liberals would have to fight an election with little funds and likely return of the Conservatives, perhaps even a majority Harper government. The Liberals sat on their hands, not voting sometimes or voting if they could hold their noses.
The Liberals have only themselves to blame however. Martin need not have lost a confidence motion to start with. The time to pay the piper over the sponsorship scandal was heavy on people's minds.
Yes the NDP could have supported Martin, Martin would still have required some independent MP's and its not totally clear he could count on them. Martin may have lost the confidence motion no matter which way the NDP voted.
Now here we are two elections later and the Liberals could have defeated the Harper government on any one of 79 occassions. They have allowed Harper to govern as if he has a majority. Throughout this time the NDP as is well noted voted against the Harper government. The NDP put many motions and bills before parliament but were rejected by Harper.
Now the Liberals have a new leader (their second since Martin lost), the party coffers are full and they want to go to an election. The trouble is they have no reason for their new found opposition. It will be fourth election in approximately five years. The chances of a majority government are slim, Canadians have become less scared of Harper after three years in the job. Generally polls have indicated the electors do not see a need for an election now.
Back to the NDP and Jack Layton. They have continued to try to make Parliament work. Proposed many Bills and Motions in the house and all were rejected by Harper. Now Harper faces a significant threat of losing power. Does he want to remain as PM? If he does he had better look at the issues the NDP have been talking about for the last year. Major EI reform, Pension secuirty, Credit card interest rates. True these are not sexy issues but they matter very much in the lives of Canadians.
I don't like Harper's politics and what he has been able to do to date. We can't undo that. He has managed to govern like a majority because of the state of the Liberal party. Now that the Liberal party has stepped up, there is a chance (however slight) for some movement from Harper. It is not something that should be ignored.
I doubt very much the Liberals would vote against the issues being put forward by the NDP. I expect the BLOC would also support the NDP positions if Harper brought them forward.
As awful as Harper is, there is likely no better opportunity to extract some progressive policy from him for a few more months in power. That of course is reliant on Harper's desire to stay in power.
Jack Layton has said he would wait and see what Harper is going to do before deciding if the NDP would vote with the Liberals in bringing down the government. Minority governments must work with the other parties if they wish to stay in power.
In 2005 Paul Martin very much wanted to stay in power and agreed to many of the NDP demands for concessions in the budget. Paul Martin in 2006 decided he wouldn't make any concessions and as a result the NDP voted against the budget. This is one of the methods the NDP though never in power has brought about significant change to public policy over the years. One need only look to the Trudeau government in 1972. Trudeau required NDP support to stay in power. That resulted in several policy moves that likely would not have occurred had Trudeau to rely on his on party to support them. The threat of the government falling allowed for more progressive budgets and legislation to proceed.
In 1974 Mr. Trudeau met with his caucus in Sudbury Ontario days before the non-confidence motion was presented. He suggested at the time the NDP were too scared of an election and thus wouldn't vote down his government. The NDP on the other hand felt that Trudeau had become arrogant and his parliamentary actions proved it. Really what was at issue was Trudeau's wish for an election. He got it and subsequently won a majority government in 1974.
Paul Martin desperately wanted to stay in power. He had barely squeaked back into government with the support of the NDP and as it turned out some independent MP's and the floor crossing from the Tories to the Libs that helped. Martin managed to do some very good things in his time as PM. He passed same-sex marriage, looked seriously at decriminalizing Marijuana possession, agreements with the Provinces to reduce wait times. All of which squeaked by in votes.
Martin then proceeded to deliver on Child Care and repairing relations with First Nations. Martin held a historic meeting in Kelowna, for which many including the NDP applauded him for. Martin failed to deliver however. Seeing his government hanging on every vote, he must have decided he needed election fodder, something to distinguish the Liberals from the Conservatives.
While Martin could have brought in legislation or a mini budget to implement the Kelowna Accord and the Childcare program, he did not. Instead he put it out as a carrot for voters. This was a serious mistake. The Liberals were already down in many places due to the sponsorship scandal and they paid dearly for it in the polls.
Its my contention, that if Martin had brought in Childcare and the Kelowna Accord it would have passed in Parliament and the result would have seen him re-elected, most likely to another minority but re-elected. The NDP voted against the government after it became clear Martin was not going to take immediate action on the Kelowna Accord nor the Childcare program.
It was a very risky strategy for Martin, hold the carrot way out there, hope he could paint Harper as mean, and squeak in on the promise to implement the Childcare program and the Kelowna Accord.
The rest is history as they say.
The election of Harper saw the Liberals whacked severely by the voters. The sponsorship scandal and a line from Harper that stated there were enough checks on his power by the courts and bureaucracy that people should feel safe voting for them. Whats happened as a result was a Liberal party battered from inside and out, no money and no leadership.
I can say charitably that they were between a rock and a hard place. Harper attached confidence in his government to just about everything. If a bill or budget failed it would bring down the government and the Liberals would have to fight an election with little funds and likely return of the Conservatives, perhaps even a majority Harper government. The Liberals sat on their hands, not voting sometimes or voting if they could hold their noses.
The Liberals have only themselves to blame however. Martin need not have lost a confidence motion to start with. The time to pay the piper over the sponsorship scandal was heavy on people's minds.
Yes the NDP could have supported Martin, Martin would still have required some independent MP's and its not totally clear he could count on them. Martin may have lost the confidence motion no matter which way the NDP voted.
Now here we are two elections later and the Liberals could have defeated the Harper government on any one of 79 occassions. They have allowed Harper to govern as if he has a majority. Throughout this time the NDP as is well noted voted against the Harper government. The NDP put many motions and bills before parliament but were rejected by Harper.
Now the Liberals have a new leader (their second since Martin lost), the party coffers are full and they want to go to an election. The trouble is they have no reason for their new found opposition. It will be fourth election in approximately five years. The chances of a majority government are slim, Canadians have become less scared of Harper after three years in the job. Generally polls have indicated the electors do not see a need for an election now.
Back to the NDP and Jack Layton. They have continued to try to make Parliament work. Proposed many Bills and Motions in the house and all were rejected by Harper. Now Harper faces a significant threat of losing power. Does he want to remain as PM? If he does he had better look at the issues the NDP have been talking about for the last year. Major EI reform, Pension secuirty, Credit card interest rates. True these are not sexy issues but they matter very much in the lives of Canadians.
I don't like Harper's politics and what he has been able to do to date. We can't undo that. He has managed to govern like a majority because of the state of the Liberal party. Now that the Liberal party has stepped up, there is a chance (however slight) for some movement from Harper. It is not something that should be ignored.
I doubt very much the Liberals would vote against the issues being put forward by the NDP. I expect the BLOC would also support the NDP positions if Harper brought them forward.
As awful as Harper is, there is likely no better opportunity to extract some progressive policy from him for a few more months in power. That of course is reliant on Harper's desire to stay in power.
9.04.2009
We had child care in 1942
Child care has been a promise of government for years. The federal government once provided childcare in Canada. It began in 1942 when it saw women were needed in factories to assist the war effort. It was not uncommon for women to tether their child in the yard before they went off to work. Other arrangements were made, such as leaving your child with a friend or family member.
see this clip from CBC Archives.
The State saw the value in providing this care then but lost sight of its value when the war ended. Women were let go from there jobs and replaced by the returning men. The women were then expected to stay home and look after these children.
Ontario after some protests from women that lost their husbands in the war, kept some day cares going. The federal government however got out of the business of daycare funding.
The return of the federal government to the provision of daycare funding has been demanded for years. The NDP and the CCF had been asking for it years. The Conservative government of Brian Mulroney promised a national daycare program in 1984. By 1992 it became clear the federal government was going to back out of the promise. (see CBC clip Broken Promises)
Against a strong public protest in 1992, the Liberals in the election of 1993 prominently proclaimed Childcare as high priority in the infamous Redbook Canadians had a reasonable expectation that the long wait was over. It never happened.
In each successive election the Liberal government promised to deliver on Day care. After the election victory, the funding was never found, the promise unfulfilled, but it done its work in seeing some people vote Liberal in a vain hope it would happen this time.
We came close to getting daycare in Paul Martin's government. Martin was looking for issues to separate his Liberal minority from that of the Conservatives led by Stephen Harper. Child care was a key piece of his agenda. They actually started to negotiate with some provinces. Unfortunately Martin wanted to use the carrot of childcare in the election. He did not introduce the need legislation to Parliament. It would have passed had he done so however his thought was that to defeat Harper, he needed to give people something to vote for. The carrot did not work as we all know.
Harper won the election and changed direction on childcare. Now parents get money directly which covers only a very small portion of the cost. The hope of affordable childcare has been lost certainly under Harper.
Now Ken Dryden, LPC MP from Toronto is promising it again. This time they mean it. That's what he and some Liberals are saying. Just as Ignatieff has had to state very strongly his party is going to vote non confidence in the Harper Government, they have to be strong on childcare.
Will the Liberals bring in national funding to childcare if elected. This time they will have too. I expect if the Liberals are in a minority, they will need the NDP support to stay there. Childcare will be high on the list of things required of a minority government.
see this clip from CBC Archives.
The State saw the value in providing this care then but lost sight of its value when the war ended. Women were let go from there jobs and replaced by the returning men. The women were then expected to stay home and look after these children.
Ontario after some protests from women that lost their husbands in the war, kept some day cares going. The federal government however got out of the business of daycare funding.
The return of the federal government to the provision of daycare funding has been demanded for years. The NDP and the CCF had been asking for it years. The Conservative government of Brian Mulroney promised a national daycare program in 1984. By 1992 it became clear the federal government was going to back out of the promise. (see CBC clip Broken Promises)
Against a strong public protest in 1992, the Liberals in the election of 1993 prominently proclaimed Childcare as high priority in the infamous Redbook Canadians had a reasonable expectation that the long wait was over. It never happened.
In each successive election the Liberal government promised to deliver on Day care. After the election victory, the funding was never found, the promise unfulfilled, but it done its work in seeing some people vote Liberal in a vain hope it would happen this time.
We came close to getting daycare in Paul Martin's government. Martin was looking for issues to separate his Liberal minority from that of the Conservatives led by Stephen Harper. Child care was a key piece of his agenda. They actually started to negotiate with some provinces. Unfortunately Martin wanted to use the carrot of childcare in the election. He did not introduce the need legislation to Parliament. It would have passed had he done so however his thought was that to defeat Harper, he needed to give people something to vote for. The carrot did not work as we all know.
Harper won the election and changed direction on childcare. Now parents get money directly which covers only a very small portion of the cost. The hope of affordable childcare has been lost certainly under Harper.
Now Ken Dryden, LPC MP from Toronto is promising it again. This time they mean it. That's what he and some Liberals are saying. Just as Ignatieff has had to state very strongly his party is going to vote non confidence in the Harper Government, they have to be strong on childcare.
Will the Liberals bring in national funding to childcare if elected. This time they will have too. I expect if the Liberals are in a minority, they will need the NDP support to stay there. Childcare will be high on the list of things required of a minority government.
9.03.2009
Layton lets Iggy stew
It looks like the Tories don't like kool aid. They will love campaigning on the budget especially the home renovation credit. That still has to be passed in the budget when MP's return. Can you imagine Harper out there slamming Ignatieff over that one.
Today Jack Layton comes to the microphone and will respond to recent developments. Layton has left Ignatieff out there all by himself for a couple of days now. I'm sure he hates being ignored. Today The LPC leader will be reminded of his record. Or perhaps Layton will be talking about his and the NDP.
Who was the federal leader that raised concerns for workers losing jobs and a need for expanded EI reform now, not four months later after you study it. Pension reform, protection against rip off cell phone contracts, credit interest rates? Those are things that bite down hard on Canadian wallets.
Who has consistently hammered both the current government and the Liberal government on the child soldier in Gitmo? Whose motion was it that called for the Government to allow American war resisters to remain in our country? Who was it that has been hammering away at getting money for affordable housing year after year and did force the Martin government to do just that and embarrass the Harper government into doing it as well.
Just as an added emphasis, you can bet that if Harper or Ignatieff were Prime Minister when Iraq war was started, Canadians would still be there. Afghanistan is a war effort well supported by Liberals and Conservatives. Only the NDP and BLOC have consistently said, we have to get out. You can bet that the LPC will extend our effort there just as Harper will if he is re-elected.
Those and many more issues were led by the NDP. You want an election, you will get it. The NDP will be campaigning as the real opposition and the party that can not be bought. Liberals will be reminded of their 79 (maybe 80 by the time they gather up the courage to say no) votes in support of Harper.
What changed that Ignatieff couldn't take anymore. He has issued at least seven ultimatums to date. He and the LPC brain trust have decided they want to play chicken. They have a reputation of capitulating to Harper, a million reasons for doing so, none of them reflective of what was good for Canada.
The NDP will largely ignore Ignatieff on the campaign. They will present a real alternative to the Harper government.
Today Jack Layton comes to the microphone and will respond to recent developments. Layton has left Ignatieff out there all by himself for a couple of days now. I'm sure he hates being ignored. Today The LPC leader will be reminded of his record. Or perhaps Layton will be talking about his and the NDP.
Who was the federal leader that raised concerns for workers losing jobs and a need for expanded EI reform now, not four months later after you study it. Pension reform, protection against rip off cell phone contracts, credit interest rates? Those are things that bite down hard on Canadian wallets.
Who has consistently hammered both the current government and the Liberal government on the child soldier in Gitmo? Whose motion was it that called for the Government to allow American war resisters to remain in our country? Who was it that has been hammering away at getting money for affordable housing year after year and did force the Martin government to do just that and embarrass the Harper government into doing it as well.
Just as an added emphasis, you can bet that if Harper or Ignatieff were Prime Minister when Iraq war was started, Canadians would still be there. Afghanistan is a war effort well supported by Liberals and Conservatives. Only the NDP and BLOC have consistently said, we have to get out. You can bet that the LPC will extend our effort there just as Harper will if he is re-elected.
Those and many more issues were led by the NDP. You want an election, you will get it. The NDP will be campaigning as the real opposition and the party that can not be bought. Liberals will be reminded of their 79 (maybe 80 by the time they gather up the courage to say no) votes in support of Harper.
What changed that Ignatieff couldn't take anymore. He has issued at least seven ultimatums to date. He and the LPC brain trust have decided they want to play chicken. They have a reputation of capitulating to Harper, a million reasons for doing so, none of them reflective of what was good for Canada.
The NDP will largely ignore Ignatieff on the campaign. They will present a real alternative to the Harper government.
9.12.2007
Ottawa Centre Election debate
There’s a debate for Ottawa Centre riding On QUEER ISSUES
Friday, Sep 14, 6-9pm
Andrew Haydon Hall (council chambers)
Ottawa City Hall, 110 Laurier
The majority of the time is given over to AUDIENCE QUESTIONS.
Confirmed candidates:
Liberal candidate Yasir Naqvi
NDP candidate Will Murray
PC candidate Trina Morissette
SPONSORED BY: CAPITAL XTRA, EGALE CANADA & CAPITAL PRIDE
See Ontario leaders comments on the GLBTTQ community from XTRA.CA
Friday, Sep 14, 6-9pm
Andrew Haydon Hall (council chambers)
Ottawa City Hall, 110 Laurier
The majority of the time is given over to AUDIENCE QUESTIONS.
Confirmed candidates:
Liberal candidate Yasir Naqvi
NDP candidate Will Murray
PC candidate Trina Morissette
SPONSORED BY: CAPITAL XTRA, EGALE CANADA & CAPITAL PRIDE
See Ontario leaders comments on the GLBTTQ community from XTRA.CA
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)