Politics in 2014

[Brad Sallows]

Alternative hypothesis: Canada is running fairly well at present - except for the indignity of being run by a Conservative administration and a PM without the proper credentials, resume, and breeding - so it is worth taking some time to go where the problems and opportunities are (abroad), notwithstanding the health risk it poses in some quarters where blood pressure rises to dangerously high levels and triggers excited outbursts of nonsense.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Alternative hypothesis: Canada is running fairly well at present - except for the indignity of being run by a Conservative administration and a PM without the proper credentials, resume, and breeding - so it is worth taking some time to go where the problems and opportunities are (abroad), notwithstanding the health risk it poses in some quarters where blood pressure rises to dangerously high levels and triggers excited outbursts of nonsense.

Except, Brad, that the current government, in order to be re-elected must hold on to (or find offsetting gains for) all the 160+ seats it currently holds (plus an independent or two) and gain 9 of the thirty new seats. That's doable, not a 'cake walk' but doable, but elections are won on domestic, mostly pocketbook issues, not on foreign policy or international statesmanship. Prof Bliss' use of Robert Borden is germane. Borden was an excellent international statesman, he "did Canada proud," but he managed to lose his government at home.

 

[a_majoor]

One place where foreign affairs could make a difference (properly packaged and sold) is the raft of Free Trade deals concluded during this term of office, including the EU, the ROK and entry into the TPP talks. Good, solid numbers on the job creation front and GDP growth due to these initiatives (or even compelling narratives from companies and Entrepreneurs who benefit) would go a long way to linking foreign affairs to the Canadian pocketbook, to the benefit of the CPC.

 

[Brad Sallows]

>elections are won on domestic, mostly pocketbook issues,

Yep.

>linking foreign affairs to the Canadian pocketbook

And yep.

The US still isn't very healthy economically, and I'd be very surprised if Canada has a future as an autarky.

The Supreme Court appointment and "Fair Elections" may resonate with Bliss and others in the small and highly self-regarding intelligentsia but I'd be equally surprised if either is a top concern of most voters.  The Senate issue might have legs because many of the media are determined to ensure that it does.  The greatest threat to Harper is that the Liberals and media are determined to turn the next federal election into a vote for prom queen.

 

[dapaterson]

I think the Supreme Court could resonate, but kudos to the PM - he's acknowledging the judgement, which defuses the issue.  Were he to press the issue it would resonate and "damage the brand" so to speak - Canadians still have a great deal of respect for institutions like the Supreme Court.

 

[Remius]

Another omnibus bill it would seem...

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/national/Conservative+budget+bill+loaded+with+unrelated+measures/9673517/story.html

If you read at the end the title of it is actually a mouthful.

 

[Griffon]

If you read at the end the title of it is actually a mouthful.

It's not that bad, just "Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 1."

The rest of it makes up the title of the government web page along with the act, the journalist misinterpreted that title as the title of the Act.  Not shocked by that at all.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Another omnibus bill it would seem...

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/national/Conservative+budget+bill+loaded+with+unrelated+measures/9673517/story.html

With this interesting little "morsel" included:
"Thousands of Veterans to receive voluntary one-time payment"

.... The compensation announced today will be made through a one-time payment to more than 5,000 eligible individuals, including Veterans, survivors or dependents. The Department is beginning the work necessary to implement these changes, which are subject to parliamentary approval of the Budget Implementation Act 2014 ....

Which means a vote against anything in said bill becomes "a vote against vets getting their money".

 

[PPCLI Guy]

Another omnibus bill it would seem...

Every day it gets harder to hold my nose.....

 

[Edward Campbell]

Despite my often stated objections to some, even most of the Conservatives' "law and order" agenda,* I do support the Fair Elections initiative.

The Globe and Mail editorialized its opposition to the Act. In fairnes, they do make some good points. But: the Globe and Mail also gave Pierre Poilievre, the Minister of State for Democratic Reform, space to rebut and, in my opinion, he did so most effectively.

I am sure there are some provisions of the bill that will be problematical, but, on the key points: voter ID, public information (as opposed to public relations) and enforcement, the government, not the media and the Laurentian Elites is on the side of the angels.

_____
* Leaving a few Army.ca members to wonder if I really am a Conservative and why I support the party

The Globe and Mail, along with most other media, continues to argue, vehemently, against the Fair Elections Act.

David Parkins in the Globe and Mail ~ reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisoj sof the Copyright Act
Source: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/you-like-me/article17173783/#dashboard/follows/

The opposition has two main problems: vouching and the rights of the Chief Electoral Officer.

    First, vouching: with 39, count 'em 39 pieces of acceptable identification vouching is not necessary. Vouching does allow nefarious people to vote when they should not. Since it is not necessary and it might be misused it can,
    and should be scrapped.

    Second, the Chief Electoral Officer: his duties is to manage the electoral processes, he is not in the "get out and vote" business. Chanting "get out a vote" is harmless, but it consumes resources. Not a big problem, either way, in my opinion.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Michael Bliss, a historian worthy of respect, reminds Prime Minister Harper that "all politics is local," as former US House Speaker 'Tip' O'Neil quipped, in this article which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the Globe and Mail:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/while-the-prime-minister-travelled-ottawa-burned/article17642490/#dashboard/follows/

I think Prof Bliss is a bit hyperbolic in saying, e.g. "Pierre Poilievre [is] a political lightweight with no credibility outside of the most extreme partisan circles" or that the PM is "grandstanding in Ukraine, junketing in Israel, or hobnobbing at pointless G8 meetings" but, hyperbole aside, he makes a very valid point: The Conservatives' support is eroding, for a whole host of reasons, it hasn't eroded beyond recovery but it is the leader's job to maintain, burnish and enhance the party's political position, and, while being seen as an effective international statesman will help a bit, elections must be won at home.

And here is more, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the Globe and Mail, on the problems "at home" that are perceived to be being ignored while the Prime Minister focuses on foreign affairs:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/the-harper-machines-in-disarray/article17747088/#dashboard/follows/

The Harper machine is in disarray

LAWRENCE MARTIN
Special to The Globe and Mail

Published Tuesday, Apr. 01 2014

Few expected this. The bet would have been that the Prime Minister would have gone to the wall to protect Dimitri Soudas, as he has many other loyalists after acts of folly.

But just four months after having been appointed, the Conservative Party’s executive director is out the door. He joins a lengthening list. In recent months, Stephen Harper has also lost his chief of staff, his finance minister and a Supreme Court nominee, plus several senators as a result of the expenses scandal.

What’s often been reputed to be a well-oiled machine has seldom been in such a state of disarray.

The young and extremely partisan Mr. Soudas, who had previously served in the Prime Minister’s Office as one of the so-called boys in short pants, was hired to be the party’s principal election organizer. But he meddled too much in trying to secure the nomination of his fiancée, MP Eve Adams, in a Toronto-area riding.

By the standards of malfeasance of this governing party, the tactics did not appear unusually offensive. In Liberal land, for example, we notice that Justin Trudeau has been accused of interference in his party’s nomination process.

It may be that Mr. Harper’s willingness to jettison Mr. Soudas is a sign of a greater willingness to listen to the rank and file. What seems clear is that the party is not prepared to kowtow to Mr. Harper the way it once did. He doesn’t exert the dominance he once did. His party has been trailing the Liberals in the polls. He presided over a scandal he claimed to know little about, but should have known a lot about. Rebellious caucus types have confronted him, demanding some freedom of speech. Former finance minister Jim Flaherty contradicted him on income-splitting, a major policy plank.

This kind of disorder and unrest is often seen with prime ministers of long duration. The governments of Pierre Trudeau, Brian Mulroney and Jean Chrétien encountered strong headwinds around the 10-year mark. The same story applies to many provincial premiers. In some cases, the leaders take the hint and leave. In others, they plunge forward, putting their legacies at risk.

In their determination to set things right, the leaders have a tendency to circle the wagons. Mr. Soudas was one of three young ultra-loyalists promoted by the PM. Another was Ray Novak, who once served as Mr. Harper’s suitcase carrier and was appointed chief of staff, replacing Nigel Wright. The third was the abrasive Jenni Byrne, who became deputy chief of staff despite opposition to her MO.

To a party (not to mention a public) that has been demanding more openness and respect for the democratic process, these were dubious choices, as was the appointment of another young hyper-partisan, Pierre Poilievre, as minister for democratic reform.

Were it not for Mr. Soudas, the talk today would be about the Liberal leader’s nomination meddling and his f-word blast with microphone in hand at a public forum on the weekend. That word is so common nowadays that its use doesn’t get the blowback it once did. But given the depths to which political morality has plunged, given the demand for dignity, the gratuitous display of vulgarity was ill-advised.

Mr. Trudeau announced last week he is a writing a “candid” autobiography, to be released this fall. The suspicion in Ottawa is that he wants to get any old skeletons out of the closet on his own terms before the Conservative attack machine has at them. In the case of the late NDP leader, Jack Layton, there was the leak in the 2011 election claiming he had been found in a massage parlour back in the 1990s.

Fortunately for Mr. Trudeau, his problems are overshadowed by those of a Prime Minister who has been spending too much time on the road instead of minding the store at home. There is much minding to be done. He needs to heed that old cliché about the natives getting restless. They have good reason to be.

Perception or reality? Is the "Harper machine" really in disarray? I'm sure Lawrence Martin hopes so, I doubt it is as bad as it seems. But the Conservative Party remains split, as it was 10+ years ago when Stephen Harper and Peter MacKay put it together into an uncomfortable coalition.

Canada, and in my view most countries, including the USA, are not as neatly divided as some groups (Reformers and Tea Party)would like to believe. We are, I think, all both liberals and conservatives. Most of us, almost all of us, want people to be 'free' to do as they wish, so long as their acts do not infringe on the 'rights,' including the right to privacy, of others. That's a liberal impulse. In some of us it is tempered by e.g. religious beliefs ~ some people believe, in the strongest sense of that word, that some of your and my rights and freedoms, under the law, must be constrained because an almighty and all powerful, all knowing and perfect god has decreed that there is a higher law which must be obeyed. That's an illiberal impulse and I think it is less common and less powerful than the broad, general liberal impulse towards 'freedom.' But we are, also, mostly conservative, too. We are reluctant to change institutions and society at large, even when we suspect that the changes might be beneficial. Our institutions, our society, our culture is comfortable and we are happy to leave it as it is. I think some Conservatives do not understand that; some CPC members hope that a "hard line," absolutist position will work. I suspect that Stephen Harper is closer to that view than I am.

But that doesn't mean that the big CPC "machine" is broken ~ it's damaged but still working.

But: Stephen Harper needs to take ownership and impose some discipline. I have never liked the "boys in shorts pants," I don't think politics is a game, but I think that people like Dimitri Soudas treat it as such. I miss Niger Wright, a progressive grown up, but a real conservative, too. There are others in the Party: Baird and Clement and Flaherty (on his way out) are progressives and real conservatives, too. Others of their friends, people who understand Ontario, especially the suburbs, need to be brought in, by Prime Minister Harper to reorganize the party and the platform and the process and get ready to fight the next election campaign.

 

[Edward Campbell]

There will be another Toronto area by-election. The Star is reporting that long serving (Scarborough) Liberal MP, Jim Karygiannis is resigning, immediately.

In the liberal civil wars Karygiannis was a Chretienista until the early 2000s when he became a Martini; he was also famous notorious for some of his over th top and ill considered  comments about veterans and for being voted, by the Hill Times, the laziest politician in Parliament.

What makes the seat interesting is that Scarborough ~ home of Rob Ford and Ford Nation ~ is, probably, switchable, from Liberal to CPC.


Edit: to add:

And the Globe and Mail reports that Mr Karygiannis wil run for City Hall and the report goes on to suggest that he, Karygiannis, has concludee that he is not a good fit with M. Trudeau's modern Liberals.

 

[Remius]

Along that same line of thought it would seem that he his throwing his hat into the Toronto city council circus...

Edit for correction.

 

[Crispy Bacon]

In the liberal civil wars Karygiannis was a Chretienista until the early 2000s when he became a Martini; he was also famous notorious for some of his over th top and ill considered  comments about veterans and for being voted, by the Hill Times, the laziest politician in Parliament.

Ah, yes. Jim "giving money to soldiers is like giving alcohol to drunks" Karygiannis.  Good riddance.

 

[a_majoor]

Ah, yes. Jim "giving money to soldiers is like giving alcohol to drunks" Karygiannis.  Good riddance.

While he may be unusual in speaking openly, this is the same crowd that believes that parents will spend money on "beer and popcorn". The only constant is while you work hard to earn your money, only *they* can be trusted to spend it for you...

 

[Brad Sallows]

That just shows how out-of-touch Liberals are.  It's "beer and pizza" and "soda and popcorn".

 

[Edward Campbell]

The mainstream media, well, one member of that estate anyway, decides to actually talk about Justin Trudeau's lack of substancein this article which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from David Akin's On The Hill blog:

http://blogs.canoe.ca/davidakin/politics/are-you-in-justin-trudeaus-middle-class/

Are you in Justin Trudeau’s middle class?

David Akin

April 2nd, 2014

Monday
Ajax, Ont.

Reporter (Marissa Semkiw): “What income range for individuals and households constitutes middle class?”

Trudeau: “You’d like a number?”

Reporter: “What income range constitutes middle class?”

Trudeau:  ”There are all sorts of different ways of calculating which decile or quintile constitutes the middle class. The reality is that I consider the middle class is people who work for their income, …not people who live off their assets and their savings. And for me, as we’ve seen across the country, they’re struggling. We have a stalled set of numbers…if you want numbers…over the past 30 years, since 1981 the Canadian economy has grown over 100 percent. Median family income in this country has increased only by about 14 percent, which means middle class Canadians haven’t had a real raise in 30 years.”

Tuesday
House of Commons foyer.

Reporter (Daniel Proussalidis): Do you want to take another stab at what income range forms the middle class?

Trudeau: I have been very clear that people who live off their incomes are of the middle class and those who live off their assets, their portfolios, their trust funds are not.

Wednesday
House of Commons foyer again.

Reporter (me): The middle class. You were asked twice to define it, and you were very clear yesterday that it is people who earn income and not those who live off assets. So going further then, what sort of policy tools are available for you or for someone who wants to help the middle class, help the salaried CEO of Tim Horton’s as well as the hourly-waged baker at Tim Horton’s. They’re both in your middle class. What do you do to help them?

Trudeau: I’ve been very clear since I launched my leadership campaign back in the fall of 2012 that we are focused on helping middle class Canadians and the Canadians who hope to achieve middle class status. What the definition of the middle class is — we’ll let economists argue about which quintile or decile it starts or ends at, for me, it’s people who live paycheque to paycheque . . .

Reporter: But that’s an important issue which quintile or decile they’re in, is it not? That’s an important issue?

Trudeau: Canadians of multiple income levels are facing similar kinds of challenges of the reality of a generation where young people are not looking at having the same kinds of opportunities or quality of life their parents had, where seniors are worrying not just about retiring not just without a pension but into debt …

Reporter: But people on pensions aren’t in your middle class? You were asked that twice — you said people with pensions aren’t in the middle class?

And that’s where Trudeau moved on to other questions. (Watch the video of this exchange below… )

Videolink

Why is this important?  Because boosting the fortunes of the middle class is what Trudeau has staked his claim to government on, that a Liberal Party will focus on improving the lot of the middle class. Indeed, here’s Trudeau, in his own words, on Tuesday, speaking in the House of Commons foyer: “it is my priority to make sure that we have an economy that works for everyone in this country, specifically the middle class. And I’d like to see a government that instead of spending all its energies on attacking me spends all its energies on attacking the problem of the challenges facing the middle class. And that’s what we need to see.”

So presumably someone who is considering supporting Trudeau would want to know: am I in Trudeau’s middle class? Is he going to spend all his and his party’s energies on my challenges? If not, which party is? And, from a public policy standpoint, the number of people who might benefit by a middle class tax cut (or, for those not in Trudeau’s middle class, be hurt by a tax hike) or get a tax credit or get to use a government program set up by a Trudeau government for the middle class is an important number if we are trying to assess how much it will cost.

Indeed, the Conservatives, for example, have provided enough information about their income splitting campaign commitment — available to couples with children under 16 who will be able to dish off up to $50,000 in taxable income to the lower-earning spouse — contains enough detail that voters can determine for themselves if they benefit and policy types can determine and debate the macro effects of this policy.

So getting Trudeau to tell us who is in the middle class would seem to be an important issue:

And this week we tried three times and learned that you are in Trudeau’s middle class if you are one of those people who:

    a) “…work for their income, not people who live off their assets and their saving.” (Monday)
    b) “…people who live off their incomes are of the middle class and those who live off their assets, their portfolios, their trust funds are not.” (Tuesday)
    c) “…who live paycheque to paycheque…” (Wednesday)

And if you’re confused,

    d) “..we’ll let economists argue about which quintile or decile it starts or ends…” (Wednesday)

M Trudeau and his handlers cannot duck the issues for ever, eventually he will have to tell Canadians that he actually has a brain and some substance.

I think he's a likable, probably honest and upright young man, but I doubt that he has the mix of policy thought and vision that i want in a leader.

Prime Minister Harper, on the other hand, while easy to dislike, does have policies - I don't like all of them, but he's got some and he actually understand them - and he has a vision for Canada, and that's why he, not M Trudeau, still has my vote.


Edit: grammar  :-[

 

[Fishbone Jones]

It seems "He's way in over his head". 8)

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

The mainstream media, well, one member of that estate anyway, decides to actually talk about Justin Trudeau's lack of substancein this article which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from David Akin's On The Hill blog:

http://blogs.canoe.ca/davidakin/politics/are-you-in-justin-trudeaus-middle-class/
M Trudeau and his handlers cannot duck the issues for ever, eventually he will have to tell Canadians that he actually has a brain and some substance.

I think he's a likable, probably honest and upright young man, but I doubt that he has the mix of policy thought and vision that i want in a leader.

Prime Minister Harper, on the other hand, while easy to dislike, does have policies - I don't like all of them, but he's got some and he actually understand them - and he has a vision for Canada, and that's why he, not M Trudeau, still has my vote.

Edit: grammar  :-[

Defining the middle class is difficult due to a variety of reasons, including the concept of the middle class as part of the hierarchical society between the working class and the upper class.  In the older days, one had to have the capital required to be a noble to be middle class, with the difference being that they weren't a "noble".  I would suggest that he's right in saying that you can't just put a number on it as a simple definition.  Any number of influences could force someone from the upper class to the "middle class" including caring for dependents, living in Vancouver or Toronto and paying up to 40% of your salary on mortgage payments, etc.

That said, his vague comments and policies play more like cheerleading than policy.  Blindly saying that the middle class is struggling and having NO concept of what the middle class is, even within a debatable definition is ridiculous.  His statements seem to  indicate that he wants to help the "working class" vice the professional middle class, but who knows....  :dunno:

Mr. Trudeau, and really Canadians, need to first define what we consider to be a middle class, and what the lifestyle expectations for a middle class ought to be.  Once a reasonable definition is provided, than we can better define if there is a problem, why there is a problem, and make a plan to solve it.

Just food for thought

 

[a_majoor]

Defining the middle class is difficult due to a variety of reasons, including the concept of the middle class as part of the hierarchical society between the working class and the upper class.  In the older days, one had to have the capital required to be a noble to be middle class, with the difference being that they weren't a "noble".  I would suggest that he's right in saying that you can't just put a number on it as a simple definition.  Any number of influences could force someone from the upper class to the "middle class" including caring for dependents, living in Vancouver or Toronto and paying up to 40% of your salary on mortgage payments, etc.

That said, his vague comments and policies play more like cheerleading than policy.  Blindly saying that the middle class is struggling and having NO concept of what the middle class is, even within a debatable definition is ridiculous.  His statements seem to  indicate that he wants to help the "working class" vice the professional middle class, but who knows....  :dunno:

Mr. Trudeau, and really Canadians, need to first define what we consider to be a middle class, and what the lifestyle expectations for a middle class ought to be.  Once a reasonable definition is provided, than we can better define if there is a problem, why there is a problem, and make a plan to solve it.

Just food for thought

Why are you not the leader of the Liberal Party? Your answer is far more detailed and nuanced than anything that has come out of the Young Dauphin's mouth since his entry into politics...