Campaign Update #1
We are not even through the first week and already lots has happened so far, so below is my summary by each party.
Conservatives
Lots of attention their ad on www.notaleader.ca that showed a puffin deficating on Stephane Dion. This ad was definitely over the top and certainly looks bad on the Tories. Whether Harper approved or didn't, I think this does say a fair bit about some of the people they attract. That being said, Harper did do the right thing by apologizing and likewise Dion did the right wing by accepting it. As for their two main policy planks released, the one about cutting the diesel tax in half is much like the GST cut. Sounds good, but isn't really all that good. We need to cut our dependence on fossil fuels and this is the wrong way to go. We do need lower taxes overall, but this should be done by cutting income and corporate taxes. As for ending combat in Afghanistan in 2011, I am glad to see Harper has come around to the Liberal position. The Liberals can use this to point out how they were right after all. Still, I think whether one agrees with the Afghanistan mission or not (and I don't), no one can argue that Canada has carried way more than its fair share relative to other NATO allies. In other news, Danny Williams is stepping up his ABC campaign (Anything but Conservative). While I can understand why as a former Progressive Conservative himself he may find Harper too right wing for his views, he is the premier and he cannot determine the outcome of the next election, so he has to at least be able to work with whoever wins. I think Dalton McGuinty's approach of going after the government when they adopt policies that he feels are bad for Ontario is the right approach as opposed to doing it just out of a personal vandetta, which is what it looks like in the case of Danny Williams.
Liberals
Definitely a slow start out of the gate, but considering the situation the party is in I think they are doing alright, although their polling numbers could certainly be better. At the same time despite what some say, the Tories are not on the cusp of a majority. Based on the results from last time around, they need around 42-44%, not 40% to get a majority. Now this off course assumes the shift is even across the country and the Liberals only bleed votes to the Tories not anyone else. In reality, only a riding by riding poll could really say how close or not close they are. The Liberals new ad portraying Stephane Dion as an ordinary Canadian seems like a good idea as this seems to have helped Harper, so maybe it could help Dion. Also, I like the fact they are taking the high road and not using the gutter tactics the Tories are using or what the Liberals used in the two elections. Still, I fear they may have no choice but to go negative if they want to win, which is regretable that elections are more about how bad one's opponent is than how good one is on their own merit. Dion's proposed gun ban is a logical sensible policy as it would exempt all firearms that can be legitimately used for hunting or sporting purposes. In the past, I have been reluctant to support tighter gun laws as Canada's gun laws are already very strict and they do have legitimate purposes for hunting and target shooting. However, this is definitely one I could support. Although I do think cracking down on gun smuggling at the border is where the biggest problem is. I would suggest doing more checks for weapons at the border and giving longer jail sentences for those illegally importing firearms as well as barring all non-citizens without the legal right to reside in Canada from entering Canada for five years if caught smuggling in firearms. His move on the childcare tax benefit was brillant and totally discredited one of the Tory attack ads still up on their webpage incidentally. I also agree with his plan to restore the court challenges program as access to justice should not depend on one's size of their wallet. Many Tory supporters argue the program only supported left wing causes, however even if this were true, this should be corrected by reforming the program not scrapping it. I do agree those who decide which cases to fund should be non-political people from the legal community such as lawyers and retired judges as this would eliminate the idea it was a liberal slush fund.
Bloc Quebecois
If there is one party that seems to not only be polling poorly, but also making mistakes, this is it. Going after a Conservative candidate for her religious views clearly stepped over the line. Attacking someone because of their views on certain issues, even if they are religiously motivated is fair game, but attacking someone for what religion they belong to is not as we have religious freedom in Canada. More importantly many people who have strong religious views believe in practicing them personally, but not imposing them on others. As long as one can keep their faith separate from their political decisions, I could really care less what faith they belong to. To make matters worse today, one former PQ minister attacked the Bloc Quebecois as being an NDP clone. Considering that separtism is declining (note it was already in decline prior to adscam so it has simply returned to pre-adscam levels) the Bloc Quebecois has to have some reason to exist and trying to block Harper from getting a majority seems to be the only raison d'etre. Unfortunately, the Bloc coalition was far from ideologically coherent. While strong in the East end of Montreal, which is working class neighbourhood with a large number of social activists and union members, they were also strong prior to 2006 in the Appalaches-Chaudiere region (just south of Quebec City) which is where the Union Nationale and Credistes were historically strong and now the ADQ, thus a conservative nationalist area. Without the issue of separtism, keeping these two groups together really wasn't possible. That being said as much as I would hate to see the Tories win more seats, I would welcome the decline of the Bloc and seeing Quebec move away from its separtist/federalist to the left vs. right like the rest of Canada.
NDP
As usual overshadowed by the other parties, although it appears their efforts in trying to stop the Green Party from participating in the debates hurt them and in many ways more than the Tories as according to an Angus-Reid poll, their supporters overwhelmingly supported Elizabeth May being included whereas Tory ones were evenly split.
Green Party
The big issue was about them being excluded from the debates. Unlike most Liberals and Canadians, I do agree they should be excluded but for totally different reasons than Stephen Harper or Layton argue. That being said, I would rather than consortium set out clear guidelines for next election on what one needs to get to qualify for the debate. My proposal would be any party who has an elected member or gets over 5% of the vote, which the Greens did neither in 2006 although they probably will get over 5% this time around. This would prevent leaders like Layton and Harper from bullying the consortiums to exclude someone without looking stupid. That being said, strategically it seems odd the Liberals favoured including the Greens but the Tories opposed. After all, the Tories are the most dissimiliar to the Greens of all parties. In terms of votes, the Greens are far less likely to siphon off votes from the Tories than the Liberals. If anything this will only make the centre and left more crowded thus helping the Tories. Even though Elizabeth May claims many Red Tories and ex Reformers are supporting the Greens, my guess is these are probably people dissatisfied with Harper who weren't going to vote Tory anyways. In addition, unlike some, I don't believe more parties is necessarily a good thing. Ideally, I would like there to be three parties since it gives more choice than having just two, but at least allows for stability which usually doesn't exist when one has many parties. In many multi-party European countries, the party with the most votes frequently gets less than 30% thus leading to less stability and also meaning each party represents a different niche market rather than a large chunk of the population. Ideally, we would have one party on the right, one in the centre, and one on the left. Instead as Suzuki himself pointed out, it is better to promote environmental policies within the greater scheme of things rather than on its own. I would agree with this and I would make far more sense to have an environmentalist wing within each party rather than its own party. In Britain and the US, all major parties have environmentalists caucuses or wings and this is more likely to bring about change, than from a party that will never form government. Off course with Harper's tight control and dictatorial tendencies, we won't see one form within the Conservative ranks here.
Conservatives
Lots of attention their ad on www.notaleader.ca that showed a puffin deficating on Stephane Dion. This ad was definitely over the top and certainly looks bad on the Tories. Whether Harper approved or didn't, I think this does say a fair bit about some of the people they attract. That being said, Harper did do the right thing by apologizing and likewise Dion did the right wing by accepting it. As for their two main policy planks released, the one about cutting the diesel tax in half is much like the GST cut. Sounds good, but isn't really all that good. We need to cut our dependence on fossil fuels and this is the wrong way to go. We do need lower taxes overall, but this should be done by cutting income and corporate taxes. As for ending combat in Afghanistan in 2011, I am glad to see Harper has come around to the Liberal position. The Liberals can use this to point out how they were right after all. Still, I think whether one agrees with the Afghanistan mission or not (and I don't), no one can argue that Canada has carried way more than its fair share relative to other NATO allies. In other news, Danny Williams is stepping up his ABC campaign (Anything but Conservative). While I can understand why as a former Progressive Conservative himself he may find Harper too right wing for his views, he is the premier and he cannot determine the outcome of the next election, so he has to at least be able to work with whoever wins. I think Dalton McGuinty's approach of going after the government when they adopt policies that he feels are bad for Ontario is the right approach as opposed to doing it just out of a personal vandetta, which is what it looks like in the case of Danny Williams.
Liberals
Definitely a slow start out of the gate, but considering the situation the party is in I think they are doing alright, although their polling numbers could certainly be better. At the same time despite what some say, the Tories are not on the cusp of a majority. Based on the results from last time around, they need around 42-44%, not 40% to get a majority. Now this off course assumes the shift is even across the country and the Liberals only bleed votes to the Tories not anyone else. In reality, only a riding by riding poll could really say how close or not close they are. The Liberals new ad portraying Stephane Dion as an ordinary Canadian seems like a good idea as this seems to have helped Harper, so maybe it could help Dion. Also, I like the fact they are taking the high road and not using the gutter tactics the Tories are using or what the Liberals used in the two elections. Still, I fear they may have no choice but to go negative if they want to win, which is regretable that elections are more about how bad one's opponent is than how good one is on their own merit. Dion's proposed gun ban is a logical sensible policy as it would exempt all firearms that can be legitimately used for hunting or sporting purposes. In the past, I have been reluctant to support tighter gun laws as Canada's gun laws are already very strict and they do have legitimate purposes for hunting and target shooting. However, this is definitely one I could support. Although I do think cracking down on gun smuggling at the border is where the biggest problem is. I would suggest doing more checks for weapons at the border and giving longer jail sentences for those illegally importing firearms as well as barring all non-citizens without the legal right to reside in Canada from entering Canada for five years if caught smuggling in firearms. His move on the childcare tax benefit was brillant and totally discredited one of the Tory attack ads still up on their webpage incidentally. I also agree with his plan to restore the court challenges program as access to justice should not depend on one's size of their wallet. Many Tory supporters argue the program only supported left wing causes, however even if this were true, this should be corrected by reforming the program not scrapping it. I do agree those who decide which cases to fund should be non-political people from the legal community such as lawyers and retired judges as this would eliminate the idea it was a liberal slush fund.
Bloc Quebecois
If there is one party that seems to not only be polling poorly, but also making mistakes, this is it. Going after a Conservative candidate for her religious views clearly stepped over the line. Attacking someone because of their views on certain issues, even if they are religiously motivated is fair game, but attacking someone for what religion they belong to is not as we have religious freedom in Canada. More importantly many people who have strong religious views believe in practicing them personally, but not imposing them on others. As long as one can keep their faith separate from their political decisions, I could really care less what faith they belong to. To make matters worse today, one former PQ minister attacked the Bloc Quebecois as being an NDP clone. Considering that separtism is declining (note it was already in decline prior to adscam so it has simply returned to pre-adscam levels) the Bloc Quebecois has to have some reason to exist and trying to block Harper from getting a majority seems to be the only raison d'etre. Unfortunately, the Bloc coalition was far from ideologically coherent. While strong in the East end of Montreal, which is working class neighbourhood with a large number of social activists and union members, they were also strong prior to 2006 in the Appalaches-Chaudiere region (just south of Quebec City) which is where the Union Nationale and Credistes were historically strong and now the ADQ, thus a conservative nationalist area. Without the issue of separtism, keeping these two groups together really wasn't possible. That being said as much as I would hate to see the Tories win more seats, I would welcome the decline of the Bloc and seeing Quebec move away from its separtist/federalist to the left vs. right like the rest of Canada.
NDP
As usual overshadowed by the other parties, although it appears their efforts in trying to stop the Green Party from participating in the debates hurt them and in many ways more than the Tories as according to an Angus-Reid poll, their supporters overwhelmingly supported Elizabeth May being included whereas Tory ones were evenly split.
Green Party
The big issue was about them being excluded from the debates. Unlike most Liberals and Canadians, I do agree they should be excluded but for totally different reasons than Stephen Harper or Layton argue. That being said, I would rather than consortium set out clear guidelines for next election on what one needs to get to qualify for the debate. My proposal would be any party who has an elected member or gets over 5% of the vote, which the Greens did neither in 2006 although they probably will get over 5% this time around. This would prevent leaders like Layton and Harper from bullying the consortiums to exclude someone without looking stupid. That being said, strategically it seems odd the Liberals favoured including the Greens but the Tories opposed. After all, the Tories are the most dissimiliar to the Greens of all parties. In terms of votes, the Greens are far less likely to siphon off votes from the Tories than the Liberals. If anything this will only make the centre and left more crowded thus helping the Tories. Even though Elizabeth May claims many Red Tories and ex Reformers are supporting the Greens, my guess is these are probably people dissatisfied with Harper who weren't going to vote Tory anyways. In addition, unlike some, I don't believe more parties is necessarily a good thing. Ideally, I would like there to be three parties since it gives more choice than having just two, but at least allows for stability which usually doesn't exist when one has many parties. In many multi-party European countries, the party with the most votes frequently gets less than 30% thus leading to less stability and also meaning each party represents a different niche market rather than a large chunk of the population. Ideally, we would have one party on the right, one in the centre, and one on the left. Instead as Suzuki himself pointed out, it is better to promote environmental policies within the greater scheme of things rather than on its own. I would agree with this and I would make far more sense to have an environmentalist wing within each party rather than its own party. In Britain and the US, all major parties have environmentalists caucuses or wings and this is more likely to bring about change, than from a party that will never form government. Off course with Harper's tight control and dictatorial tendencies, we won't see one form within the Conservative ranks here.
posted by Monkey Loves to Fight at 6:51 PM
3 Comments:
I agree with much of what you have written. However, Harper did apologize for the puffin thing (which I don't think was that big of a deal). I think Dion calling Harper a liar is far worse. Perhaps Dion could show some class and apologize too.
Anon - Harper IS a liar. Dion has said over & over again that he would not raise the GST back to it's previous levels & would not do away with the child care funding. He even said it on the day that Harper reiterated the same lies at a press meet on Day 2 of the election. And Dion said it before Harper spoke at the media meet. Harper insists on "sticking" to his lies, no matter what.
Anonymous - Harper was right to apologize and I don't think this alone will sink his campaign, but if his party continues its trend of gaffes eventually it will sink the party. The Beer and Popcorn comment in 2006 or Cheryl Gallant's comment on comparing abortion to the murder of Nick Berg in Iraq in 2004 didn't hurt either party immediately in the polls, but several other gaffes did in the end. As for calling Harper a liar, I think he is, although I think using the term dishonest or not telling the truth is a bit more diplomatic than calling him a liar. After all, Dion is known as a man of integrity and I think trying to engage in gutter politics won't work for him. He needs to take the high road. Let others in the party attack Harper, which they should. In 2003, Dalton McGuinty took the high road and ran a positive campaign, while George Smithermann played the role of attack dog. Dion should do the same. I would have Bob Rae play the role of attack dog since he is far better at it than Dion.
Post a Comment
<< Home