Bits and Pieces

With my busy schedule, I haven't been able to up date my blog on a daily basis, so here is my take on the major issues of the day.

It appears the Tory attack ad might violate copyright laws. While I think tv clips should be fair game for political ads, I do believe the party should follow the law until such time as it is changed. Barley producers on the Canadian Wheat Board will get a plebiscite with three different possible options, so should be interesting to see how this turns out. I would support a dual marketing system whereby farmers who want to sell outside the Wheat Board can do so, so long as they never ever use the Board again. Otherwise you are either in or your out, no flipping back in forth between the board and an open market. This would allow those who want choice to have it without destroying the Wheat Board in the process. Ottawa apparently plans to sell many public buildings. As bad as the idea may sound, it actually makes sense since owning a building is not as easy as some think, rather it requires specialization in that area. Very few private companies actually own the buildings they work in and I suspect they lease them because it is cheaper to do so. Still I think it should be done on a case by case basis, not a blind target as the minister set. This idea had been raised by Scott Brison as public works minister two years ago, but for whatever reason never came up again. Question period is back in action and off course the big topic is the environment and rightly so. It appears that the Tories are under fire for appointing Mississauga-Streetsville Conservative candidate Raminder Gill as a citizenship judge without going through the proper process so as to make way for Wajid Khan's defection. I guess one more reason to be relieved Wajid Khan is no longer a Liberal.

The big story of the week is the letter Stephen Harper sent out to Alliance members back in 2002 about Kyoto being a money sucking socialist scheme. Besides the over the top rhetoric, which I think is a major thing that turns many Canadians off right wing politics, this brings about the question about whether Stephen Harper accepts the science behind global warming. While one's views may change, I think the opposition needs to hammer him on this and if he cannot give a decent answer, as I don't suspect he will, then bring it up in the attack ads in the next election. While I would prefer we could keep a more civilized political discourse, if the Tories want to throw mud at us, then we need to attack back. When you go to a bar, you don't go looking for a fight, but if someone punches you first, you fight back. The science behind global warming may not be 100% certain as nothing is ever 100% certain, but it is very conclusive and the fact Harper is still a skeptic and only pretends to support it when he sees his poll numbers falling should be of great concern.

Finally there were the income trusts hearings. I personally think that a longer transition period for existing trusts should have been granted, that being said the last thing the market needs is uncertainty so better to stick with the decision even if it was done sloppily. Besides I think Harper's broken promise suggests to me more incomptence then a lie since anyone closely watching the market would have seen this coming, but I suspect Harper actually believed this could be avoided as he understands economics well, but seems to have very little understanding of how the actual business world works.

Tory Attack Ads

I would like to express my disappointment with the decision of the Tories to release their attack ads even before an election was scheduled. I realize attack ads are a legitimate part of elections and if it was during an election period, I wouldn't complain, however 5 weeks of listening to attacks is annoying enough for many, listening to them for a few months is just too much. If you are interested in listening to party smears watch question period, but for those of us not interested, leave us alone until the election. I am glad to see Stephane Dion was quick to respond. Part of the reason the Tories won in 2006 but lost in 2004 is in 2006 they were prepared for the attack ads and responded accordingly whereas in 2004 they weren't. Hopefully we will be ready too. In addition the fact they are turning to attack ads already suggests they have little positive to offer Canadians. If they are doing such a good job, they would have no need to attack their opponents.

Harper's one year anniversary

A year ago on this day, the Liberals were defeated and the Conservatives were elected with one of the smallest minorities possible. This was in essence giving the Conservatives a cautious endorsement. It showed that Canadians were willing to give Stephen Harper a chance, but still many were quite nervous about what he would be like as prime-minister. A year later, the party is languishing in the polls now being tied or trailing the Liberals. While it is too early to write Stephen Harper's political obituary, the last year has generally seen momentum in favour of the Liberals and against the Tories. Now off course this could change.

As for my view on Stephen Harper's government, I give the government a C as its overall grade. They haven't done anything awful or absolutely devastated the country, but nor have the done anything to improve and make Canada better. Most of their policies, while not overly harmful do appear simplistic and shortsighted. In addition it is still difficult to know what a Stephen Harper majority would look like. He has certainly on foreign policy, crime issues, and funding programs for vulnerable Canadians shown signs of being a hard core conservative, but yet all the areas he has gone after are mostly minor ones that aren't likely to cost the Tories a lot of votes and he has yet to go after any major area that could be seriously damaging. Their environmental policy has no doubt been a disaster, but I am glad the party has finally come around, even if rather late. On foreign policy, I feel Harper made a mistake to align us more closely with the United States. I would like to see Canada-US relations improve, but with the Democrats now in control of congress and the public turning against neo-conservatism it is likely the next president will either be a Democrat or a more moderate Republican therefore we would be best to wait until 2008. On economic issues, the party has really done very little to improve our economy, but not much to harm it either. The GST cut was a dumb move, while taxing income trusts was the right decision, although I think a longer transition period should have been considered. The programs cut by the Tories in some cases made sense and others were ill-advised. On the Canadian Wheat Board, I support a dual marketing system, but the Tories have handled it in about the worse possible way and are pretty much ensuring it will fail. I also prefer Dion's teamwork approach over Harper's one man style approach. Now to be fair, there is very little talent in the Conservative benches which is not uncommon with parties who have been in opposition for a long-time. Only parties that are seen as the government in waiting well before the election are able to attract strong talent from outside politics and clearly this was not the case with the Conservatives. Being decisive is good, but not so much that you are unable to thoroughly think through each policy. I prefer a happy medium between a dither and decisive. This ensures policies are well thought out while at the same time there is a consistent and coherent plan.

As for what the year ahead faces, certainly most Canadians will go to the polls when you consider the two largest provinces are likely or will have provincial elections, but it is tough to say whether the government will fall or not. My guess is with the current poll numbers, they probably will fall, but we will have to wait and see. My advice to the Liberals would be to see the budget first and then vote accordingly, although I have a tough time believing the budget will be one the Liberals can support. Based on Harper's performance I believe he deserves to lose the next election, but still form a strong opposition as the government hasn't done a good job, but it hasn't done a horrible job either.

Dion's Shadow Cabinet

On the whole I must say I was very impressed with the choices Dion made for his shadow cabinet. Choosing Michael Ignatieff as deputy leader while keeping Ralph Goodale as House leader were both good choices. I also like the four committees he created and thought he struck a good balance in his choice for chairs and vice-chairs. For economic prosperity, he choose John McKay and Massimo Pacetti who are generally both on the right of the party while for Social Justice he choose Ken Dryden and Andy Scott who are generally on the left. Most of the critics are generally people who have a strong knowledge in their chosen area as well as the fact he choose people from each of the different camps. In some areas such as national defence, there really isn't anyone with a military background so I guess Denis Coderre was an okay pick, although I probably would have chosen someone who had once been defence minister or at least foreign affairs minister. At the very least someone with a large military base in their riding such as Keith Martin would have been a somewhat better choice.

For the environment, I think David McGuinty was a good pick since he chaired the national roundtables in the 90s, but also he knows John Baird probably better than anyone else so he will be the best able to withstand his attacks as well as find his weakenesses. Interestingly enough they both come from Ottawa and their ridings are right next to each other. For health, Bonnie Brown is generally a good pick, although I would have chosen Carolyn Bennett since she was once a doctor. Scott Brison was definitely a good pick for Industry since he seems to know a lot the business sector having been a successful businessman himself. I would have rather Joe Volpe didn't get a position, but really Dion had no choice but to give him one, so at least he got one that isn't known for scandals since if any scandal breaks out, he will be the last one with any credibility to attack the Tories. Omar Alghabra was a good choice for immigration, Stephen Owen for democratic reform, and Wayne Easter for agriculture (Ralph Goodale would have been my first, but Wayne Easter is the next best).

I noticed already many Tories are slamming the choices, but all I can say is it wouldn't matter what shadow cabinet Dion put together, the Tories would slam it. At the end of the day the question is who will Canadians choose. I believe the Liberals have an edge here for the simple reason many of them have served in government before whereas very few in the Tories had served in government prior to the last election. In fact the Tories are very thin on talent and one of the thinnest of any government I've ever seen, although in all fairness you will probably be short on talent if you are in opposition for a long time. I suspect that is why Harper is very much a one man show whereas Dion is quite comfortable delegating responsibilities out to other members of his team. I personally prefer a team approach over a one man style approach since we are a diverse nation and it is important input from others be given before decisions are made. As a result you get better decisions than having them decided by one person. Things may not happen as fast, but at least you get the right results, rather than being decisive, but with bad results.

Off course if Dion wins the election, the actual cabinet will be much different since the party will pick up new seats as well as Bob Rae, Martha Hall Findlay, and Gerard Kennedy are pretty much shoo-ins for a cabinet post. But at least this can give us a glimpse at what a Dion government would look like.

While it is early going, I am so far impressed with Dion as leader. I was honestly quite concerned that after the Liberal convention I would be a very reluctant supporter since I expected either Rae or Ignatieff to win. And even when Dion won, I still wanted to take a wait and see attitude. It is certainly too early to say he will be a great PM, but at least he can count on my vote in the next election, although after that, it really depends on his performance as PM.

Jean Lapierre resigns his seat

I cannot say I am overly disappointed as I was never really a fan of this guy in the first place. As a staunch federalist, I am always skeptical about bringing on a former separtist and I somehow doubt that had Stephane Dion been leader in 2004, Lapierre would currently be an MP. As for his replacement, I would try to choose a female candidate since with our improving numbers in Quebec, this riding is likely a safe one rather than a vulnerable one as it was last election. But if we don't find a female candidate, please choose someone other than Justin Trudeau. Almost every non-partisan over 35 I've talked to who has listened to the guy says he is the most annoying and lets remember those over 35 are more likely to vote than the younger voters who seem to be intrigued by him and it is the non-partisans who we need to win the next election. If we want a former Trudeau, then choose Sasha Trudeau, who despite the fact I disagree with him on a number of issues, he is at least very articulate. I am all for Justin Trudeau running, but have him run in a Bloc Quebecois held riding and make him work for his seat, don't hand it to him. Also I wouldn't mind if we got Martin Cauchon to return back to politics. Besides star candidates may generate a lot of media attention, but good constituency MPs are the ones who win you elections so lets go for the latter rather than the former.

Wajid Khan's defection to the Conservatives

Before giving my opinion on this specific case, I should note that I do support the right of MPs to switch parties so it would be hypocritical of me to condemn Wajid Khan while supporting Belinda Stronach's defection. I believe the right to cross the floor should continue to be permitted since people's opinions change as well as parties change. In addition our rigid party discipline puts some MPs in a tough position of deciding which party to go to or not. If we had less party discipline as Gerard Kennedy was proposing in his platform, there might be fewer defections. If the US had party discipline like Canada does, there is no way Lincoln Chaffee would still be a Republican or that many of the Blue Dog Democrats would last very long in the party. While some say it is a slap in voter's face, lets remember there is always another election so if voters are outraged they can vote against the MP.

In the case of Wajid Khan, it was ultimately the right decision. There is no advantage in us having an MP who wants Stephen Harper to win the next election so we are better to have him leave now than stay on during an election and cause problems. We must tolerate diversity of opinions, but at the same time, everybody on our team must be 100% committed to seeing the Liberals win the next election. Those who are not should not be running under the Liberal banner. I also think his views are probably more in line with the Conservatives anyways so since elections are about values, one should serve under the party whose values are closest to theirs. I also think Emerson's decision was more serious since it was only 2 weeks after the election and also it was clearly done for personal gain whereas Wajid Khan wasn't offered any cabinet posts as of yet. If there was any defection that shouldn't be allowed, it was the way Emerson went about it.

In terms of his decision to be a special advisor to Stephen Harper on Middle East policy, I am torn here. I am a strong believer in bi-partisanship and believe we would have better governments if parties put the interests of the country ahead of partisan politics. Many countries around the world such as Germany have coalitions of parties with different ideologies and cabinet ministers from the different parties so it can work, but it has to be something both sides want. Since Harper has shown little interest in bi-partisanship, I don't see how we can make it work until both sides agree that is what we want. In the case of Dion's ultimatum, I think it was ultimately a judgement call he had to make. If it was because he was intolerant of bi-partisanship it was the wrong move, but if he had reason to believe he was a Conservative spy in the Liberal caucus, it was quite reasonable. I tend to think Dion feared the latter, so I think his gut instinct was probably right.

As for what will happen here are my predictions;
Wajid Khan: The chances of him being re-elected in Mississauga-Streetsville are quite low although I don't think he will get decimated as badly as David Emerson will since this riding has elected Conservatives in the past (84 and 88 federally, while 95 and 99 provincially), so this is not as safe a Liberal riding is some think. Rather it is a Blue Liberal/Red Tory riding so as long as Harper is leader it will remain a safe Liberal riding. I also think we would be stupid to automatically assume we will win this riding without making an effort. Harper is trying hard to make gains amongst the ethnic communities who have traditionally gone solidly Liberal. If we take this group for granted, it could bite us hard, so we need to re-double our efforts to ensure we don't lose our support in the ethnic community, but also try and get support from coast to coast and all communities rather than relying too heavily on anyone community so if we ever falter in one, we have a fall back position.

Liberal Party: I cannot see this really hurting us that much. Belinda Stronach's defection was far more of a blow to the Conservatives than a lowly backbencher's defection to the Conservatives, yet this didn't stop the Conservatives from winning the election. We are still in much better shape than last January and whatever setback this causes temporarily, I think the Liberals will come out of this just fine.

Conservative Party: Although he might help them gain some traction amongst ethnic voters, I really never bought the idea of the ethnic community blindly voting for someone because of their ethnicity. I think most immigrants are more sophisticated than that and vote based on the issues that matter. Therefore I don't think this will result in big gains amongst the immigrants. I also don't think it will be as damaging to the Tories as the Emerson defection which was clearly political opportunism at its worst.

I wish Wajid Khan best of luck in his new role, but I look foward to seeing a Liberal retake Mississauga-Streetsville in the next general election, hopefully in the very near future. My plan is to help Gerard Kennedy (or Martha Hall Findlay if Kennedy runs out West) so unless one of them runs in Mississauga-Streetsville, which I would fully support, I probably will be helping out elsehwere, although I will certainly encourage everyone I know in the riding to vote Liberal.

Cabinet Shuffle

Today Stephen Harper made his much awaited cabinet shuffle. On the whole it was not bad as last February since he avoided any serious mistakes. Still it could have been better. Also with an election looming, I suspected he would try and choose ones who would be better choices for their portfolios or at least do a better job of selling it electorally.

The Big One: John Baird replaces Rona Ambrose as minister of environment, while Rona Ambrose goes to intergovernmental affairs. In the case of Rona Ambrose I think she has far more expertise in that area than the environment. On the other hand I don't think John Baird was a particularly good choice. I would have gone for either Lawrence Cannon or Josee Verner who are from Quebec where the environment is extremely important and are more progressive on it than Harper. My problem with Baird is he is too partisan, which I have no problem with as a whole, but I would rather than environment minister be someone who can bring people together not be an attack dog.

Best Choice: Rob Nicholson replaces Vic Toews as Justice minister while Vic Toews went to the Treasury Board. Considering how socially conservative Vic Toews is and how far right he is on justice issues, I am glad he was moved out of that portfolio. Rob Nicholson is a former Progressive Conservative so while I expect the party to maintain a right leaning view on justice issues, at least hopefully, he won't be a hardliner like Vic Toews.

Worst Choice: Making Jason Kenney secretary of state for multiculturalism and Canadian identity. While a good debater in the house, he is a hard core ideologue much like Vic Toews and Stockwell Day and should preferably be kept away from the cabinet table altogether. But at the very least kept away from any ministry that deals with social issues. Besides I find his values going against much of what I see as the Canadian identity. If anything he seems more American in his views than Canadians. Now he is entitled to those views, but I don't think one can claim they are representative of most Canadians. Besides I think Diane Ablonczy would have been a better choice than Jason Kenney.

Who I wished was dropped from cabinet: David Emerson should have been dropped from cabinet as he has achieved what he was brought into do; end the softwood lumber dispute, although he got a really really bad deal IMO. He is going to get beaten badly in the next election anyways so they should have cut their losses here.

Who should have been included in cabinet: I think James Moore should have been added as he is a young and one of the brighter lights in the party. He is also from the Greater Vancouver area where the Conservatives are weak and unlike Emerson he was democratically elected and is well liked.

In terms of changes, I suspect little will change as at the end of the day Stephen Harper still calls all the shots, so by and large this was window dressing. Only when I see a change in policy will I start praising the changes.

The other issue is Wajid Khan is rumoured to be defecting to the Conservatives tomorrow. At this point, it is only a rumour, so until I see it I won't comment on it.

2007 Predictions

First off Happy New Year to all my faithful readers and all the best in 2007. 2006 has been a great year for me, mainly because I got a permanent job here in Toronto, whereas up unitl now all my jobs have been temporary. Hopefully 2007 will bring similiar successes. This year will be my first full one in Toronto. I also do plan on during vacation going to Europe and doing a roadtrip within the Eurozone.

Anyways here are my political predictions. We will have several elections both provincially and federally this year, so lets see how close my predictions are to the actual outcomes.

Federally: The government falls over the budget, Stephane Dion becomes prime-minister with an even weaker minority government than Harper holds.

Saskatchewan: The Saskatchewan Party win a majority and Brad Wall becomes premier.

Manitoba: The NDP is re-elected with a reduced majority, so Gary Doer goes on to win a third term for the NDP, while the Progressive Conservatives regain most of the seats they lost in 2003 and come a lot closer to forming government.

Ontario: Dalton McGuinty is re-elected, but with a minority government this time around. Both the NDP and Progressive Conservatives gain seats and the PCs come within 10 seats of forming government.

Quebec: The Parti Quebecois wins the election therefore Andre Boisclair becomes premier, however Jean Charest wins the popular vote despite losing the election.

Prince Edward Island: Pat Binns is re-elected, but with a substantially reduced majority. Unlike previous elections which were sweeps, it is very close this time around.

Newfoundland & Labrador: Danny Williams is re-elected with the biggest landslide in Newfoundland history coming very close to a near sweep of the province.

Other predictions: Tony Blair steps down as Labour leader and is replaced by a more left leaning Labour leader. Stephen Harper resigns after losing the election and a Conservative convention is held in the fall. Once again the Alliance proves their grip on the party choosing a leader from the Alliance side of the merger.

I doubt all these predictions will turn out true, but perhaps the majority will. Guessing general elections though is a bit easier than predicting leadership conventions, since whoever gets the most seats wins and there is no run off ballots. If we had run off ballots like leadership conventions, the results would be far less predictable. After all if we used the same system we use electorally for party leaderships, Michael Ignatieff would have been Liberal leader and Jim Dinning would be Alberta's premier.