Nicole Martel has an interesting post on an Angus Reid poll on the approval ratings of certain Harper Cabinet Ministers. There net positives are for Harper, Flaherty and McKay…Prentice is not seen in any of the data reports I looked at. Jim is way too far below the radar – working hard and effectively at the coal face but nobody knows it. Everyone else looks pretty bland or just plain bad.
The moral of the story is they are mostly a 50/50 crowd with lots of “Don’t Knows” as you will see when you click the link to the Toronto Star story. This proves the nation is essentially "test driving" the Harper government to see if we what to buy his form of government. Based on these results if is pretty obvious that we are not yet impressed nor particularly dismayed with the performance either. The Harper Cons have not yet done anything to really significnat make a mark that will win our hearts and minds over the past year. The fact that al other recent polls say Harper and Dion are statisticaly tied has to be a discomforting fact for "Steve."
Nicole also directs us to the other Toronto Star piece where the Harper Cons political rhetoric is matched against the factual reality of the Liberals and Dion. I have been waiting and hoping someone would do this comparison. The various examples used are a classic rebuttal of the issues framing done by the Harper Message Machine. He and his goverment is proven to be very disingenuous in their misrepresentations about the Liberals and Dion, and I am being generous in my assessment when I say that.
The Star story is also a very effective rebuttal of the pervasive MSM culture of take things said by politicians that are purely political at face value. We see this lack of background research and fact checking is just much too prevalent in political reporting today. It all gets repeated in other media and gossip gets over reported as "news" and then the misinformation become the "reality." We mere mortals have to wonder if anyone cares about accuracy and truth in politics today.
Anyway, with polling "approval" numbers like theses, Harper better hope Layton doesn’t ask for too much in the forthcoming Budget. There is nothing in these polling approval levels to foster any confidence by, for and about a Harper victory in an election in the near future. Remember also that campaigns matter and yesterday is not a precursor of tomorrow any more.
At 50/50 Harper's fortunes could go either way...but clearly the Cons are not on solid enough ground to want an election anytime soon. With every day that passes the environment embeds as more of an issue and Layton has to wonder about May's momentum and Harper has to worry about Dion getting better known and more acceptable as a possible alternative for the next Prime Minister.
Good for the Star for reporting on the reality over the rhetoric. Thx Nicole for bringing it to our attention. I had $10 bucks riding on a spring election. I think I may have to cough up the cash and eat some crow in a couple of months.
Monday, January 22, 2007
Sunday, January 21, 2007
Dion Says the Greens Should be in the TV Debates
The Globe and Mail's Eric Reguly and Stephane Dion are calling for the Green Party to be included in any next federal election television debates. The timing of such an election is ironically within the control of the NDP based on how the seats shake down with floor crossings and caucus expulsions. My expectation is Jack Layton would be happier if the Greens were left in the Green Room and not on the stage.
The television broadcasters seem to think they should have the control over this aspect of our democracy. They get to say that if a Party does not have a seat in Parliament then you don’t get to participate in the debates. Who made them the boss of the citizens?
The environment is the #1 issue in the country right now and the Greens are the Party most identified with that issue. Besides their Leader Elizabeth May ran a very respectful second place in a recent southern Ontario By-election. She beat the Conservatives and the NDP candidates with a healthy 25% of the vote.
May and her Party are a significant and proven political force to be reckoned with. Seats should not be the only test for inclusion. Performance in voter support plays a role here too. It is no problem to include the Bloc in the debates, and their primary goal is to split up the country for God’s sake.
So regardless of your partisan politics, support the Greens being included in the debates. There is an on line petition on the Green's site. Show your support and sign up. We can show the broadcasters that they must reconsider this policy and include the Greens notwithstanding the lack of a seat.
LET'S DRAFT GARTH TURNER!
If this petition isn’t enough, let’s start a movement to draft the Independent MP, Garth Turner to join the Greens. This would be for the sole purpose of giving them a seat to “qualify” under the broadcaster’s silly rules to be for included in the debates.
I think that would be a refreshing exercise of a strategic realpolitik power play by a Turner and May tag team. It would be a perfect response to the shallow thinking of the opponents of the Greens being included. I would applaud Turner if he were to decide to stay Green or if he chooses to resign from the Greens immediately after their participation in the debates were confirmed.
I am serious about a draft Turner effort if it becomes necessary. Some times you have to fight absurdity with absurdity. It is nice when you can do it with creativity and class. But in the meantime sign the petition and let’s be sure to let the powers that be know the Canadian democracy belongs to the citizens, not the broadcasters or the politicians.
The television broadcasters seem to think they should have the control over this aspect of our democracy. They get to say that if a Party does not have a seat in Parliament then you don’t get to participate in the debates. Who made them the boss of the citizens?
The environment is the #1 issue in the country right now and the Greens are the Party most identified with that issue. Besides their Leader Elizabeth May ran a very respectful second place in a recent southern Ontario By-election. She beat the Conservatives and the NDP candidates with a healthy 25% of the vote.
May and her Party are a significant and proven political force to be reckoned with. Seats should not be the only test for inclusion. Performance in voter support plays a role here too. It is no problem to include the Bloc in the debates, and their primary goal is to split up the country for God’s sake.
So regardless of your partisan politics, support the Greens being included in the debates. There is an on line petition on the Green's site. Show your support and sign up. We can show the broadcasters that they must reconsider this policy and include the Greens notwithstanding the lack of a seat.
LET'S DRAFT GARTH TURNER!
If this petition isn’t enough, let’s start a movement to draft the Independent MP, Garth Turner to join the Greens. This would be for the sole purpose of giving them a seat to “qualify” under the broadcaster’s silly rules to be for included in the debates.
I think that would be a refreshing exercise of a strategic realpolitik power play by a Turner and May tag team. It would be a perfect response to the shallow thinking of the opponents of the Greens being included. I would applaud Turner if he were to decide to stay Green or if he chooses to resign from the Greens immediately after their participation in the debates were confirmed.
I am serious about a draft Turner effort if it becomes necessary. Some times you have to fight absurdity with absurdity. It is nice when you can do it with creativity and class. But in the meantime sign the petition and let’s be sure to let the powers that be know the Canadian democracy belongs to the citizens, not the broadcasters or the politicians.
Video of Canadian Troops Engaged in Battle
Garth Turner has an excellent video clip of Canadian forces engaged in battle in Afghanistan. If anyone doubts the danger of this deployment, this clip will remove any such doubts.
We have much to do that is helping that fragile country to rebuild. That is ultimately the most important aspect of this effort. First things first though and tht means we obviously have to make it safe for citizens to rebuild...and that is dangerous and deadly work.
Those of us who live in Edmonton have a deeper sense of community and connection with these soldiers. They are our neigbours. Their kids go to school with our kids. We all must try to better understand what is going on there, what we are doing there as a country and how we can help the Afghan people now and in the longer term.
We citizens better take some time become more informed and stay engaged in what Canada is trying to accomplish in this initiaitve...and how we are doing towards achieving our goals. Let's be sure in the meantime that our troops know that we support them and that we value what they are doing and we are proud of them.
We have much to do that is helping that fragile country to rebuild. That is ultimately the most important aspect of this effort. First things first though and tht means we obviously have to make it safe for citizens to rebuild...and that is dangerous and deadly work.
Those of us who live in Edmonton have a deeper sense of community and connection with these soldiers. They are our neigbours. Their kids go to school with our kids. We all must try to better understand what is going on there, what we are doing there as a country and how we can help the Afghan people now and in the longer term.
We citizens better take some time become more informed and stay engaged in what Canada is trying to accomplish in this initiaitve...and how we are doing towards achieving our goals. Let's be sure in the meantime that our troops know that we support them and that we value what they are doing and we are proud of them.
Saturday, January 20, 2007
Alberta is Now a Geo-Political Energy Focus
The recent news report of a meeting held in Houston about a year ago around increasing oils sands production in Alberta on a faster track with streamlined environmental processes has been interesting but mostly it has turned into a political farce.
The political attempts to frame the issue by the Harper Cons by trying to make Dion’s knowledge of this meeting or not is misdirection of the real issue here. It is not about something that trite. It has much more significant import and implications.
There is no doubt Alberta is now the centre of serious geo-political interest and concerns because of the oils sands. On the investment side we have Japan, France, USA and China all participating in projects now, with India showing interest as well. On the environmental side it is the lightening rod for GHG emissions and climate change issues.
On the security of supply for the USA in particular we are the closest, safest, more reliable and politically friendly source of fossil fuels they have. The market competition is getting heated too especially from China and India who are both in need of a secure supply of imported oil.
If the Americans ever cost out what they are actually spending in cash and lives or a barrel of Iraqi oil as opposed to saying the goal is to bring democracy to that nation, they will abandon to “struggle” sooner than later. We have Venezuela nationalizing its oil production and Russia destabilizing parts Europe and Central Asia with threats to cut off supplies to certain nations.
Now Israel is reported to be studying a kind of small surgical nuclear deployment on Iran, as if there were such a thing. The House of Saud in Saudi Arabia is not that secure politically either. Then we add terrorism taking place around the world and looking to emerge in North America. The world is a very complex place when you look at it in terms of the politics of energy.
Quiet, little, stable, safe, secure, close, open, eager and friendly Alberta all of a sudden looks pretty good to Uncle Sam. Alberta, along with Canada, would no doubt be glad to oblige and service more of the American energy demand. We have to ensure it is going to be in our best interests when we do this. That is what we better start getting our heads around…what exactly is in our best interest and how do we best serve it under mounting USA pressures to accelerate oil sands production?
We have pretty much botched the deal so far. We have insufficient production infrastructure like upgraders, refinery capacity, transmission power lines, roads and pipelines to handle the current oil sands production of 1 million barrels per day. We have failed refused or neglected to provide the necessary social and public infrastructure to meet the human needs like housing, health care, school, recreational services and cultural facilities for people working in this industry.
We have now turned most of the province into this same overheated economic engine that is about to blow a gasket given the pressure it is under. We have to provide a much better quality of life for people especially in places like Fort McMurray and Grande Prairie. That means making the investments needed and to take a more moderate, longer term and purposeful approach to the development of the oil sands.
We have talked loosely in Alberta about possibly ramping up oil sands production to 3 million barrels per day within the next decade. We have no sense yet of if we can, at what infrastructure cost and social costs never mind the unknown cumulative costs on the society and environment.
If the Houston talks was really about a target of 5 million barrel per day to meet American demand, we Albertans, our political, business, environmental a social leaders have some serious thinking to do. We have some big decisions to make and we better start planning to do right - and right now!
UPDATE: Finance Minister Flaherty is courting China as a market for oil sands. Dubya is not going to be amused.
Friday, January 19, 2007
Hancock is Staying the Course on Smoking Issues
Interesting news release from AADAC on the focus of National Non-Smoking Week.
The Stelmach government is much more open than the previous regime. Some challenges to be sure but so long as Ministers stick to commenting on their departmental areas, offering personal opinions and spending some "political capital" is a good thing to my mind.
We don't have to agree with the positions they take but it good to see what Cabinet Ministers are thinking on important policy issues and where they want to go with them before it all goes behind the closed Cabinet doors. If they get shot down in Cabinet so be it.
This is the more open political aproach and how I would like to see it operate. Not knowing what is going into a policy discussion/decision, what is going on about it and wondering if anything will ever come out of it does not help to inform the citizenry and give them confidence.
Hancock is being taken on by Ty Lund and Lloyd Snelgrove on the smoking ban idea for "talking out of turn.?" They may disagree with the position he takes but surely he ought to be able to say something about his personal positions on heath and wellness issues as the Minister responsible. A Minister would be out of line commenting publically on policy issue outside their portfolio area but that is not what is happening here.
Hancock says a smoking ban in public places will help prevent death and disease and reduce the costly demands on the health care system over time. Prevention and wellness have to be more than words if we are serious about health care reform.
Here is an excerpt from the Edmonton Journal story today on this:
Hancock said Thursday he offered his personal opinion on the issue when questioned this week by reporters, and he has no plans to keep quiet on important public policy issues. He also hopes to forbid tobacco sales in pharmacies and outlaw large smoking displays in stores.
"I'm not driving a personal agenda. I'm driving a government agenda," Hancock said. "You can't avoid talking about public issues in public, nor should you."
Works for me!
UPDATE JANUARY 20
Graham Thomson has perspective on all of this in his column today.
I see the Canadian Cancer Society is lining up behind Hancock on a smoking ban in public places too. See exceprts from their new release below:
Media Release
January 19, 2007
For immediate release
Canadian Cancer Society applauds Health Minister’s stance on smoking
Calgary… Premier Ed Stelmach’s change of heart on a provincial smoking ban came on the heels this week of Health Minister Dave Hancock’s pledge to make Alberta smoke-free. This could not have come at a better time -- January 21-27, 2007 is National Non-Smoking Week.
“Health Minister Hancock’s recent comments on pursuing strong provincial smoke-free legislation are welcome news to the Canadian Cancer Society,” says Dan Holinda, President/CEO of the Alberta/NWT Division of the Society. “We applaud the Stelmach government’s fresh approach to this issue and are behind them 110%. The new Tory leadership is taking the health of all Albertans seriously.”
Today, 10 Albertans will die as a result of tobacco, and this will happen every day this year. Tobacco use is the leading avoidable cause of disease, disability and premature death in Alberta, resulting in one in every five deaths. Second-hand smoke is responsible for 1,000 tobacco-related deaths annually across Canada.
One hundred percent smoke-free legislation will follow in the footsteps of the Premier’s pledge to improve the health of all Albertans and his welcoming of legislation on this issue reflects his desire for open and transparent government – a pillar he lead with during the race for Premier. If Albertans are interested in seeing the province become a smoke-free province, the Canadian Cancer Society urges them to write the Premier and show their support for a provincial smoking ban.
“Smoke-free legislation across Alberta will help protect all Albertans - not just minors and not just those lucky enough to live in cities whose council voted in favour of the health of their constituents,” says Holinda. “Banning powerwalls, or displays of tobacco products in such places as convenience stores and pharmacies, will help prevent youth from starting to smoke, and will also help prevent impulse-buying by smokers who are trying to quit.”
Evidence shows us that smoke-free legislation, restrictions on advertising and marketing of tobacco industry products, denormalizing the tobacco industry, higher tobacco taxes, and bans on where tobacco products can be sold are all a part of an approach that must be taken to reduce the burden tobacco places on the health of our communities and the healthcare system as a whole.
The Canadian Cancer Society is a national community-based organization of volunteers whose mission is to eradicate cancer and to enhance the quality of life of people living with cancer. When you want to know more about cancer, visit our website www.cancer.ca or call our toll-free, bilingual Cancer Information Service at 1 888 939-3333.
-30-
For more information, please contact:
Lorie Boychuk – 403-541-5375
Canadian Cancer Society, AB/NWT Division office
The Stelmach government is much more open than the previous regime. Some challenges to be sure but so long as Ministers stick to commenting on their departmental areas, offering personal opinions and spending some "political capital" is a good thing to my mind.
We don't have to agree with the positions they take but it good to see what Cabinet Ministers are thinking on important policy issues and where they want to go with them before it all goes behind the closed Cabinet doors. If they get shot down in Cabinet so be it.
This is the more open political aproach and how I would like to see it operate. Not knowing what is going into a policy discussion/decision, what is going on about it and wondering if anything will ever come out of it does not help to inform the citizenry and give them confidence.
Hancock is being taken on by Ty Lund and Lloyd Snelgrove on the smoking ban idea for "talking out of turn.?" They may disagree with the position he takes but surely he ought to be able to say something about his personal positions on heath and wellness issues as the Minister responsible. A Minister would be out of line commenting publically on policy issue outside their portfolio area but that is not what is happening here.
Hancock says a smoking ban in public places will help prevent death and disease and reduce the costly demands on the health care system over time. Prevention and wellness have to be more than words if we are serious about health care reform.
Here is an excerpt from the Edmonton Journal story today on this:
Hancock said Thursday he offered his personal opinion on the issue when questioned this week by reporters, and he has no plans to keep quiet on important public policy issues. He also hopes to forbid tobacco sales in pharmacies and outlaw large smoking displays in stores.
"I'm not driving a personal agenda. I'm driving a government agenda," Hancock said. "You can't avoid talking about public issues in public, nor should you."
Works for me!
UPDATE JANUARY 20
Graham Thomson has perspective on all of this in his column today.
I see the Canadian Cancer Society is lining up behind Hancock on a smoking ban in public places too. See exceprts from their new release below:
Media Release
January 19, 2007
For immediate release
Canadian Cancer Society applauds Health Minister’s stance on smoking
Calgary… Premier Ed Stelmach’s change of heart on a provincial smoking ban came on the heels this week of Health Minister Dave Hancock’s pledge to make Alberta smoke-free. This could not have come at a better time -- January 21-27, 2007 is National Non-Smoking Week.
“Health Minister Hancock’s recent comments on pursuing strong provincial smoke-free legislation are welcome news to the Canadian Cancer Society,” says Dan Holinda, President/CEO of the Alberta/NWT Division of the Society. “We applaud the Stelmach government’s fresh approach to this issue and are behind them 110%. The new Tory leadership is taking the health of all Albertans seriously.”
Today, 10 Albertans will die as a result of tobacco, and this will happen every day this year. Tobacco use is the leading avoidable cause of disease, disability and premature death in Alberta, resulting in one in every five deaths. Second-hand smoke is responsible for 1,000 tobacco-related deaths annually across Canada.
One hundred percent smoke-free legislation will follow in the footsteps of the Premier’s pledge to improve the health of all Albertans and his welcoming of legislation on this issue reflects his desire for open and transparent government – a pillar he lead with during the race for Premier. If Albertans are interested in seeing the province become a smoke-free province, the Canadian Cancer Society urges them to write the Premier and show their support for a provincial smoking ban.
“Smoke-free legislation across Alberta will help protect all Albertans - not just minors and not just those lucky enough to live in cities whose council voted in favour of the health of their constituents,” says Holinda. “Banning powerwalls, or displays of tobacco products in such places as convenience stores and pharmacies, will help prevent youth from starting to smoke, and will also help prevent impulse-buying by smokers who are trying to quit.”
Evidence shows us that smoke-free legislation, restrictions on advertising and marketing of tobacco industry products, denormalizing the tobacco industry, higher tobacco taxes, and bans on where tobacco products can be sold are all a part of an approach that must be taken to reduce the burden tobacco places on the health of our communities and the healthcare system as a whole.
The Canadian Cancer Society is a national community-based organization of volunteers whose mission is to eradicate cancer and to enhance the quality of life of people living with cancer. When you want to know more about cancer, visit our website www.cancer.ca or call our toll-free, bilingual Cancer Information Service at 1 888 939-3333.
-30-
For more information, please contact:
Lorie Boychuk – 403-541-5375
Canadian Cancer Society, AB/NWT Division office
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)