Conservative MP advocates jailing journalists

For those suggesting the Conservatives have rid the party of all the nutbars, check this out. It looks like the Conservatives still have their fair share of nutbars. While this was an off the cuff remark, it should be noted that Colin Mayes is one of the original Reformers. This also reveals their general contempt for the Charter, Freedom of the Press, and the media as a whole. I am for one sick and tired of those on both the left and right claiming they cannot advance their policies because of the media. The media's job is to report and yes they are biased, but from all sides. We have the CBC and Toronto Star on the left, Globe and Mail and CTV in the centre, while the National Post and Sun Media on the right, so if you read from a wide variety of sources as I do, you can get all viewpoints. Hopefully these nutbars have little influence, although considering Stephen Harper was once a Reformer himself, I am still skeptical.

Mr. Harper, this is your chance to prove me wrong that you aren't an extremist. Make clear you don't support these ridiculous statements.

Stephen Harper and the Media

Its been a while since I have made an entry, but now that the election is over, my entries will be less frequent. Anyways recently there are stories about Stephen Harper keeping cabinet meetings secret and refusing to talk with the media. It is clear Harper has a strong disdain for the media (and I suspect most politicians don't like them as no one likes their policies under close scrutiny) but guess what that is part of the job. He doesn't have to always be in front of the media like Martin was, but he needs to stop trying to avoid it like a plague and needs to let the public know when he is holding a cabinet meeting unless it is a emergency that requires secrecy for national security. As someone who is just entering the labour force, I have learned all jobs have aspects one won't like and if one cannot stand those aspects they shouldn't apply for the job. For Stephen Harper he needs to drop the muzzle on his cabinet and quit his secrecy, or quit as prime-minister. I don't like being in front of cameras myself, but I wouldn't apply for a job that required this.

Anyways, while Harper is still learning the ropes and some may say we should cut him some slack, so far I don't think he is off to a very good start. If he changes his attitude and behavior, I will be the first to admit it, but if this style of governing continues after a year, I will not be happy. Regardless of his policies, I never really thought he was the right person to lead the country, so he has the next 18 months to 2 years to prove me wrong.

Paul Martin to officially step down as leader

It is now official that Paul Martin will not continue as leader of the Liberal Party past March 19, 2006. This means there is no possibility of him leading the party into the next election. Although I have defended him through much of the past election, I believe it is time for him to move on. Canadians usually take time to forgive a leader they punish so if he stayed on as leader, it would have only hurt the party. It is only in the last few years that people have started to think more fondly of Brian Mulroney so it will probably take time for Martin's image to recover. However, I believe history will record him as one of the best finance ministers ever. How he will be noted for his short-term as prime-minister is still debatable. Some may argue he was caught in bad circumstances, therefore he really never had a chance to do anything. Others will argue his term as prime-minister was a failure. I don't think he did an outstanding job as prime-minister, but he was caught in a very bad situation. While he had a majority government, he was rocked by the sponsorship scandal and therefore spent more time fighting the allegations of corruption than actually focussing on his vision. In hindsight he may be should have done what Chretien did and just said so what and then focused on his vision. Once he was reduced to a minority government, his only chance at recovering was if his poll numbers recovered enough that the opposition parties would have no interest in having an election, however this never happened. The Conservatives saw their best chance at coming to power (which they achieved), the Bloc Quebecois was hoping to have their best showing ever (which they thankfully failed to achieve) and the NDP saw an opportunity to have one of their best if not best showing ever (they fell short of Ed Broadbent's record of 43 seats, but still greatly improved their vote and seat count in relation to the most recent elections). With the opposition ready to take down the government at any moment, he spent more time worrying about how to prevent his government from falling than actually governing.

Anyways, in closing I wish Paul Martin and his wife Sheila Martin all the best in their future years. Although Bill Graham likely won't lead the party into the next election, should the government fall early, he will. I've always been impressed with him as a parliamentarian and therefore fully support him should the government fall early.

Bob Rae for Liberal Leader?

I would like to start off by welcoming Bob Rae's decision to seek the Liberal leadership race. Although I don't agree with all his views, I believe a race with a wide range of views and a diversity of candidates is what is needed to re-build the Liberal Party. This is partly why they were successful in 1968, while I believe Martin's crowning as Liberal leader may have actually hurt the party. I also don't believe people who started out in different parties should be disqualified from running. Stephen Harper, Jim Harris, Gilles Duceppe, and Jack Layton all began their careers in different parties. Stephen Harper was a Liberal until 1981 when he moved to Alberta and then switched to the PCs in anger over Trudeau's National Energy Program. Jack Layton also started off as a Liberal, but switched to the NDP in 1970 over Trudeau's war measures act. Likewise some successful leaders like Ralph Klein and even Winston Churchill (who was originally a Conservative then a Liberal then a Conservative gain) were once members of different parties.

However, I believe Bob Rae would be a bad choice for Liberal leader. Even though he has moderated somewhat, I would still have a tough time voting for him. But more importantly, this would almost certainly ensure the Tories are re-elected when you consider how unpopular he is in Ontario. As Jason Cherniak mentions in one of his earlier blogs, not only would rural Ontario stay Conservative, the 905 belt which went largely Liberal would likely fall to the Conservatives. He would still keep most of Toronto (which is going to go Liberal no matter what) and Northern Ontario (where the Liberals already hold 7 of the 10 seats and the NDP 2 seats while the one Conservative seat would stay Tory). One should never forget the importance of Ontario in determining the winner of the election. Chretien's three back to back majorities were largely due to his sweeps of Ontario, in 2004 Harper would have been PM if Ontario was removed while the Liberals would have won a majority had they kept all the seats they won in Ontario in 2000. Likewise had the 17 seats that switched from the Liberals to Conservatives in Ontario stayed Liberal (even if the results elsewhere were the same), the Liberals would still be in power. As unfair as it may sound, if a leader is unpopular in Ontario, they cannot be PM.

The second issue which is a bigger issue I believe is the idea the Liberals need to move to the left in order to win. Many point out that the Conservatives rise to power was due to uniting the right so if we could only unite the left, the Liberals could win a massive majority. I believe this is a rather simplistic view that ignores all the complexities. In 2000, the combined right was 38%, while Harper only got 36%, despite the fact the 2000 campaign was a well-run campaign and the Liberals were quite popular then, whereas by 2006 they weren't and they ran a terrible campaign. Also never mind that the Tories got 25% in Quebec vs. the PC/Alliance total of only 11% in Quebec in 2000 so if you take Quebec out of the picture, the right was even less successful. Besides the fact I could never support a left wing party, here is why I believe it won't work. In Atlantic Canada, all four provinces are governed by Progressive Conservative premiers so most who vote PC provincially but Liberal federally are probably Red Tories who feel the Conservatives are too right wing, but if the Liberals move far enough to the left these people would eventually become even more uncomfortable voting Liberal than Tory. Bernard Lord, Pat Binns, Rodney Macdonald, and Danny Williams are closer to the centre than Stephen Harper, but they are still on the right side of the spectrum. In Ontario, the 905 belt went massively for Mike Harris in the 90s and even if those people eventually turned on the common sense revolution, that was because they thought Harris went too far too fast, not because they have suddenly swung to the left. Here in BC, we have a two party system; centre-right BC Liberals/Social Credit historically and BC NDP and whenever the centre-right is united they have always won. Using the current federal boundaries, if the provincial results were applied to them, 5 of the 9 Liberal seats (5/8 since the Emerson defection) would have gone BC Liberal (West Vancouver-Sunshine Coast-Sea to Sky Country, North Vancouver, Vancouver-Quadra, Vancouver South, and Richmond) and in all these cases by massive margins. These are not left wing areas by any stretch of the imagination; they only went Liberal due to the strong economy, Paul Martin's strong fiscal credentials and discomfort with the Tories being perceived as too right wing. If we move to the left we would definitely lose the two North Shore ridings and Richmond and while we would probably hold Vancouver-Quadra and Vancouver South, these could become vulnerable in the long-run. Likewise the NDP historically has almost always got around 15%, even when Trudeau was PM who was arguable the most left wing PM Canada has ever had. In 1958 much of the CCF vote went PC not Liberal while in the 90s much of the traditional NDP vote went Reform/Alliance as opposed to the Liberals and the Liberals who normally went NDP likely did so out of anger at the unpopular NDP governments in Ontario and British Columbia who have since been turfed from office, thankfully. The only reason it worked for Trudeau, was two fold: we had a younger population in the 60s and 70s, thus a more left wing population than today and Trudeau was very charismatic, something none of the potential Liberal leaders are. Also Trudeau usually swept Quebec, whereas does anyone realistically believe the Liberals can even win 30 seats in Quebec next election let alone 60-70. I don't either think the Liberals should move to the right, despite my personal preferences for going further to the right. Chretien was successful since he appealed to both centre-right and centre-left voters. If we want to win again, we need to appeal to both these groups, not just one of them.

On a parting note, while I hope Bob Rae doesn't win the Liberal leadership race, I still hope he runs as MP. My choice would be Parkdale-High Park, which is currently an NDP held riding. Having him and Ujjal Dosanjh representing the left and Scott Brison and Belinda Stronach representing the right, we can claim to be a truly big tent party.

South Dakota Outlaws Abortion

Well it looks like my fears of the religious right taking away a women's right to choose have come to fruition. South Dakota just recently passed legislation basically outlawing abortion I believe this should be of great concern to all who value a women's right to choose. With the Supreme Court already having 4 conservative judges and likely to increase when Bush makes his next appointment, there is no guarantee this draconian and outdated law won't get struck down when it reaches the Supreme Court. If it passes the Supreme Court expect other states to make similiar laws. The religious right's growth has been quite frightening in the United States and the fact some Conservative MPs admire these extremists is quite disturbing. While I am not worried in the immediate future of Canada passing such law, those from the religious right need to reminded once again, we don't support their backward's views. They try to touch the abortion issue, I like many other open-minded Canadians will work hard to defeat any government that touches it and not just ensure their party gets thrown out of office, but annihiliated at the polls. What was once the nation of forward-thinking, liberty, and the inspiration to the rest of the World, seems to be moving backwards as the religious right gains control at all levels of government and all branches. Hopefully Americans will stand up to this nonsense this fall and defeat all the religious right Republicans. If not, its reputation as a forward looking nation will be severely diminished. While this is a domestic decision and they can do what they want, they can be assured this move to the far right will only lead to greater negativity in Canadian's opinions of their country.

McCartney and the Seal Hunt

First off I should mention I am a big Beatles fan and of the Beatles, Paul McCartney is my favorite one, so regardless of what I think of his political opinions, I will still continue to listen to his music. As it turns out McCartney is coming to Canada on behalf of the US Humane Society to oppose Canada's Seal hunt. I generally don't like foreigners interferring in our domestic affairs although on issues of the environment, foreign policy, and human rights, I believe they have the right to as we all share the same planet and what one country does affects others. On economic policy they should butt out though.

My opinion of the seal hunt is I don't like it and would rather it didn't occur, but I do understand that many of these communities are quite poor and this is very important to some people's livelihood. This puts me in a tough position as I don't want to see people lose their jobs and become more desperate, but after seeing the pictures of the seals being clubbed to the death, I just cannot in good conscience say I support this. It may be the most humane way to kill them, but I only believing in killing animals for food, keeping populations under control, and safety. In the case of Aboriginal seal hunters who wish to continue their traditional lifestyles, they should be able to do so. But since for commercial seal hunters, none of the seals are used for food, I do have my qualms. Never mind the United States has banned seal products since 1972, the EU has severely restricted it and some countries like Britain and Italy have banned them. Most go to Norway, China, Japan, and Russia where there is a niche market for seal furs. I will admit I wear leather shoes and have leather seats in my car, however most leather comes from cattle who are also slaughtered for meat so they are simply making use of all parts of the animal, which I support. I wouldn't have a problem if the seals were killed for meat and their skin was used for fur. But this is not the case at the moment.

I watched the McCartneys and Danny Williams on Larry King Live. I thought Danny Williams did a really good job of presenting his side of the case and was no doubt the clear winner of the debates, even if I disagree with some of his positions. Paul McCartney also did a reasonably good job, while Heather Mills was rude and always interrupting and seemed unwilling to listen to the other side.

Here is what I think the Canadian government should do. And I should note all parties with seats in the House of Commons currently support the seal hunt, so this is my personal opinion and not that of any party. The seal hunt for personal use only should be allowed to continue while the commercial seal hunt should be phased out over the next ten years. During this time, the government should work to help develop alternative industries for the sealers and if necessary even paying them compensation for lost income would be fine by me despite my generally dislike of handouts. Seals are animals with feelings so we should not harm them unless necessary while at the same time I don't want to make life more difficult for people already struggling to get by. Never mind the seals hunted are not full adults, rather they are between 12 days to 3 months old so they cannot fend for themselves, whereas at least an adult seal has a chance of fighting back or escaping.