Alliances and Dalliances
I love the political backroom gavotte going on between the Cons and the Dippers over their principles and which ones they will trade offs or defer between getting the budget passed and getting serious changed around environment policy.
We will have to wait and see if this is an alliance or a dalliance.
On the other hand can we soon expect another couple take to the political dance floor? Will the Libs and the Greens embrace in a struggle to see which one will actually lead in the environment agenda? I don't expect May to give up the "lead" in their dance or on the issues to Dion. She will no doubt make him work harder and look even better on the issues before the music stops and the election is called.
Citizens have yet to decide who they will actually trust and respect on the environment and climate change issues. Will it be Scowling Steve and/or Smiling Jack? Such an interesting and intense couple. Is the winner going to be Studious Stephane and/or Effervescent Elizabeth? They are earnest and energetic for sure...effective - well that is still an open question
That leaves Jilted Gilles looking for someone - anyone to pay attention to him. He faces the music alone and will come to realize that the environment trumps his aspirations for more equalization money as the dominant political issue - even in Quebec.
More on Manning's Musings:
I see Jeffery Simpson in the Globe and Mail today picked up on the Manning Op-Ed piece I posted on last Monday. He mentions the “attack ads” and the ironic timing of his message that we citizens should be showing our lack of tolerance for extremism and then the Cons launch their attack ads outside of the election cycle.
Simpson calls the ads “crude and rude.” He might soon be adding to the rhyme scheme and include “sued.” Some commentary is around that the Cons “tacky ad” content misused copyright material that is the property of others. That would be an interesting development if the content is challenged over copyright. I can see the blogosphere quips about the Cons misuse of "intellectual" property in the context of the attack ads.
Another One Bites the Dust:
So Johanne Gelinas, the Environment Commissioner has been “replaced” because her report last September criticized the former Lib and the current Cons over in actions on climate change. The reason for her departure is that her report smacked of advocacy instead of auditing. I didn’t know she reported to the Auditor General and apparently the two did not see eye to eye on things. Too bad. She was a breath of fresh air in her frankness.
Perhaps this role needs to be a separate office that reports directly to Parliament. Then it could be independent enough to audit and advocate by making recommendations for performance changes and improvements in how environment policy is being implemented.
We have seen the Chief Electoral Officer leave under a cloud of interference and now the Environment Commissioner is bounced. I hope there was no political interference in either decision. The controlling nature of the PMO is not reassuring in that regard. Two incidents do not make a trend but you have to wonder if there a pattern forming here and how much of a chill this puts on the senior bureaucracy.
Eco-pets:
I see the Cons are making merry in Question Period over the name of Dion’s dog, “Kyoto.” Perhaps Harper should get a pet Polar Bear and name him “Endangered.” That would symbolically show Steve's soft side and just how much he cares about climate change too.
So it was okay for Martin and the LPC to make a deal with the NDP but it is not okay with respect to the Cons? Common, at least be consistent.
ReplyDeleteHaving said that, I think we can both agree that the Bloc being a weaker player in Quebec would be a great thing.
-------
On your point about copyright, that is an interesting question. The issue turns on this: (1) Was the actual footage leaked to them; or (2) Did they just copy the footage from the public distribution? If (1), they should be okay. If (2), a possible lawsuit "might" be successful.
I've read some work by an "expert" in the field. He stated that it clearly isn't a copyright issue, but he didn't give a legal analysis.
The area of copyright law in Canada is murky to say the least.
----
The auditor already does make recommendations for improvement. In fact, that is one of the most important roles they have. I really don't understand how "advocate" came into play. She maybe crossed a particular line - i.e. professional advice versus simple trashing of a person.
"We have seen the Chief Electoral Officer leave under a cloud of interference and now the Environment Commissioner is bounced. I hope there was no political interference in either decision. The controlling nature of the PMO is not reassuring in that regard. Two incidents do not make a trend but you have to wonder if there a pattern forming here and how much of a chill this puts on the senior bureaucracy."
Mere conjecture with no factual bearing whatsover. You can do better. It's this type of rhetoric that turns people off politics. In neither circumstance was there any facts of political inference yet you attempt to make a link. I hope you don't try that in court.
eric - Of course it is OK for the Cons and the Dipppers to do a deal. That is the natural consequence of minority governments. It is often a very good thing.
ReplyDeleteI just like the fact it is about raw power and not high-minded principles when the deals are done.
Kingsley quit mid-term after he crossed Harper forcing him to take back an excessive donation in breach of his own new law. The Environment Commissioner had no apparent problems in September when she released her report.
Why is it all of a sudden now she is relieved of her duties 4 months later? I don't know what Sheila Fraser has said about this yet but I will look forward to her reasons.
Ken,
ReplyDeleteNot to pile on, but the comment about polar bears? Come on. I read that there are more polar bears around today than in the 1950s.
The whole environmental issue is a dogs breakfast. Yes, it appears that it is front and centre with Canadians as an "issue". But frankly, most Canadians have no clue about the real science involved (or lack thereof in some quarters). Witness the continuing blurring of GHG emissions and general air pollutions in public discourse. And Canadians are really in la-la land if they think that Kyoto or any other greenhouse gas plan is not going to hit them in the personal pocket book. As far as surveys go, everyone is "for the environment" until they realize that it will take a change in their personal behavior and consumption patterns to make a difference. I'm not saying that it is bad, or something should not be done, but public policy advocates should at least try and be intellectually honest. Dion's weakness is that he really (apparently) believes that Kyoto was a good plan. A bad plan is not better than no plan at all. Just ask the Pentagon with respect to the Iraq situation.
Ken, states factually that the working together between Cons and NDP is just about raw power and not high-minded principles when the deals are done. Really, how do you know that? Of course, the Liberals never just wanted raw power. Let's see, election of 1993, jobs, jobs, jobs, scrap NAFTA, national pharma plan, national childcare plan, and on and on and on. What did they do when they had 3 majorities. But let's not look at the "facts".
ReplyDeleteHI "Anonymous" and "Jan from BruceCounty" and thx for your comments.
ReplyDeleteFirst go ahead and "pile on" - that is some of the charm of Blogs. I thing you both make some good points.
Jan first - I am fascinated by the alliances that form on the pure pragmatics of power politics. Layton prides himself as practically the author of the last Liberal Budget. He had a positive impact on some significant changes. He makes good rehetoric but in a minority situation the little guy has leverage and they should use it. Layton was doing his job but not changing the world.
I think the Greens are going to try a lever a Dion deal sooner than later - and based on raw political power too.
They will want to decide when to topple Harper but Layton has the trump cards in that hand. Fascinating politics. Terrifying governance.
I hope I did not just give the impression I was picking favourites (Dion/May would be mine obviously)and dumping on the other alliance. They are legit political mascinations but as sincere as a Paris Hilton romance.
I sure don't hold the Liberals up as the gold standard of governance...none of the versions I have seen have been very good. I even go back to Trudeau's 1970s promise of No Wage and Price Controls. He did it after he won. It was a lie to the electorate at the level of the Income Trusts lie was in October.
We changed our government in January 2006 because we wanted a change. Harper had a policy announcement a day during the campaign and then, shortly after he got elected, he wisely ignored his plethora of policy. He said he had only 5 priorites. He did the 3 easy ones, is working hard on the 4th - crime. Sadly he is ignoring the health issue and even leaving it off the list these days. C'est la guerre.
Anonymous you are quite right too especially about a "dogs breakfast" on climate change. People really don't understand it but isn't that the job of our government and its leadership to help us understand it?
The public is obviously concerned about it - as the polls clearly show. We need politicians who bring clarity in the face of such complexity...I trust Dion to do that more than Harper. Others will disagree I know.
I can't speak for the situation in Ottawa, but I know that I was openly encouraged by New Democrats to drop in on an NDP house party here in Victoria last weekend ;)
ReplyDeleteSeriously, though, I have found myself taking a lot more interest in Environmental issues since moving to Vancouver Island. Some call my party's interest in environmental issues to be opportunistic... I think of it more as people like Bob Mills being listened to around the tory table.
The bouncing of Gelinas seems a bit of a surprise. From what i've been able to gather, this seems to be coming more from Sheila Fraser than the PMO. Ms. Fraser is a woman whom, I think, we all acknowledge as an exceptionally competent person. I, too, look forward to hearing her thoughts on this.
As for the "alliance" with Jack-O, this tory can live with it. If it adds a bit of stability to Parliament, seriously addresses environmental issues, and doesn't spend us down the river the way it did when Goodale was FinMin, i'm all for it.
Hey BR - the Gelinas dump is obviously an Auditor General movement - alone - judging from subsequent reports. Still too bad.
ReplyDeleteWe need that kind of independent prodding of the political system. Bringing truth to power is never easy...and risky when the system is controlled by political bullies.
As for Harper having a pet Polar Bear named "Endangered" - even the Americans agree as to the endangered bit - check out this story.
:http://www.canada.com/globaltv/national/story.html?id=e85e9082-df8a-42f6-a6bf-757e7075379f
"I just like the fact it is about raw power and not high-minded principles when the deals are done."
ReplyDeleteAnd Martin's deal with the dippers had high-minded principles? Give me a break.
On Gelinas, here you go Ken:
In a statement late Tuesday, Gelinas acknowledged she and the Auditor General have had a "difference of opinion" for the past year on her role as envrionment commissioner.
But she said their discussions on the matter "were in private, with no interference whatsoever from the government of Canada and its representatives."
Please think the next time before you make a ridiculous allegation with no factual foundation whatsoever. You have lost a lot of credibility on this issue. Next time you point a finger at the Con gov't, people should ask whether you have any facts to back it up - as apparently you ignore all relevant facts. I hope you apologize for such blatent inaccuracy and fearmongering.
Ken, here's another source that your latest unsubstantiated musing are wholly inaccurate: http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=af3b3065-4c13-4a5d-a584-a96c8ff469b5&k=36602
ReplyDeleteWhat does this say about your other posts? Credibility is hard-earned but easily lost. Will you please admit that you were wrong to suggest a connection between the Environment Commissioner's firing and the Cons gov't?
eric - I mused in my post saying I hoped there was no political interference in the Environment Commissioner incident. I did not say there was and I acknowledge there isn't.
ReplyDeleteI already posted an earlier comment response to you on this issue saying, in part:
"I don't know what Sheila Fraser has said about this yet but I will look forward to her reasons."
3:22 PM
I have Fraser's comments and it is now clear to my mind that there was no political interference and I no longer "wonder if there is a pattern forming..." There obviously isn't.
Musings are not statements of fact nor opinions. They are indications of unfinished business and concern over the implications as such. Don't try to construe a musing as anything more.
For example you muse about "What does this say about your (my) other posts?" You are not stating a fact or even an opinion. You are musing and pointing out possible implications for consideration.
I have considered you musing about what this says about my other postings. It says nothing about them! They are not related.
You need muse, be amused or be bemuse any further. Me neither!
Nice backtrack Ken. You made the suggestion that the PM was involved. At least I'm glad that you've realized your mistake. I cautioned that one should hear all the facts before making a conclusion. You did not heed to that caution and were proven wrong.
ReplyDeleteeric - what do you think of the premature departure of Mr. Kingsley the Chief Electoral Officer shortly after his decision to force the Cons to add their convention fees into the party's donations and be regulated by the $1000 limits?
ReplyDeleteThat issue has dropped of the public conversation. Can you reassure us there was no political interference there?
Not saying there was but Kingsley has not given any reasons for his premature departure. He really ought clear the air so this cloud can be removed. Don't you agree?
UPDATE ON KINGSLEY RESIGNATION:
ReplyDeleteSee my post 5 minutes ago on the Kingsley resignation asking him to clear the air. Checking my email this morning and guess what - Kingsley has cleared the air - there was no political interference. Check it out in the Ottawa Citizen today at:
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=4d40ba6c-5f0c-4dc2-a237-b66c7162f4f1
Thanks, I still don't understand your presumption of political interference. That may be the way things were done under the LPC but not the Cons.
ReplyDeleteI hope you are right eric that the Cons are different. The early days Deputy Minister shuffle did not indicate that.
ReplyDeleteThe recent cuts to grants for orgainzations they didn't like for example in ares of volunteers and literacy, Court Challenges and museums, to name a few, were not confidence building either.
But in fairness there is not evidence of political interference...after all Deputy Minister's serve at the pleasure of the Prime Minister. He is within his rights to be "displeased" if he so chooses.
Ken, I don't want to get started on those cuts, but I must.
ReplyDeleteI am all for minority interests who do not have personal wealth to obtain funding from the government for valid Charter challenges. But let's look at the reason for the cuts. Essentially proponents of gay marriage received a tonne of funding for various Charter challenges. I fail to understand how such a wealthy section of our society should get funding while the other side on the debate cannot. I had many debates with individuals in the legal field and thought the best idea was to change the organization's mandate rather than to cut their funding. In other words, there should be a financial need requirement before funding is given, especially where the issue is highly political.
eric - I really support many of the programs that were cut but not all of them. The cuts were justified if you are a purest on jurisdiction. I tend to be one of those so can see a reason for the feds to get out of the provincial arenas.
ReplyDeleteThe Court Challenges Program should not have been cut, especially for the Cons stated reason, "Why would we fund people to sue us?" That shallow sense of governance in a complex world is truly breath taking.
Mulroney cut it once too and then reinstated it as I recall. In the spirit of full disclosure, I personally benefited from Court Challenges Program funding once.
I acted for a group of Alberta Francophones seeking to enforce their Section 23 Charter Rights...for minority language educations rights in Alberta. This was in the mid 80's and our client's were funded, in part, under the program.
The province drove this issue all the way to the Supreme Court. Classic example of cowardly politics and making the Courts do the job of legislators. That was in Lougheed's day BTW.
ps: - we won!