My Business Partner, Satya Das, just returned from participating in the Canada 2020 Conference on “Who Should Do What in a Progressive Canada.” All accounts were very positive about the event with presentations by Slamon Rushdie, Wired magazine's Chris Anderson and Tim Flannery author of "The Weathermarker's" and President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf of Liberia.
A wider range of topics and all presenters and presentation videos are on the Canada 2020 website thanks to the event coverage of CPAC. You can view the presentations on line if you miss them on the CPAC broadcasts.
Progressives will want to watch the presentations and keep in touch with the Canada 2020 site for more events and updates. For example the book, co-published by Canada 2020 and Crossing Boundaries, entitled “Progressive Governance for Canadians” is worth the download and a read for Progressives and how we need to engage governance changes in Canada. It really frames the need for citizen re-engagement into our democracy and the power it would have once it happens.
Thursday, April 05, 2007
Wednesday, April 04, 2007
I Am Home
Paris was terrific. Can't tell you about the business dealing due to confidentiality agreements. Suffice to say I am pleased.
I had most of Tuesday to myself. Having gone on a Hemingway Pilgrimage to the Left Bank haunts of him and Picasso and the Paris School in earlier days for dinner (the name will come to me...I have been up for 27 hours). Then off to the Rosebud Bar, another famous Hemingway haunt, just around the corner for after dinner drinks.
Then I decided to adventure the next day and to strike off one of my list of "things to do before you die." I spend the day finding it and the afternoon hanging around in the famous Parisian bookstore Shakespeare and Co. (is bookstore masculine or feminine in French?) That visit was a delight for a book guy like me.
As the wheels touched down the shuffle on my iPod played Simon and Garfunkel's Homeward Bound. More found poetry. I find it often. It pops up quite regularly when you keep your eyes peeled for it.
Off to catch up on some sleep in my own bed and off to work tomorrow. I will be back blogging regularly starting tomorrow. I promise.
I had most of Tuesday to myself. Having gone on a Hemingway Pilgrimage to the Left Bank haunts of him and Picasso and the Paris School in earlier days for dinner (the name will come to me...I have been up for 27 hours). Then off to the Rosebud Bar, another famous Hemingway haunt, just around the corner for after dinner drinks.
Then I decided to adventure the next day and to strike off one of my list of "things to do before you die." I spend the day finding it and the afternoon hanging around in the famous Parisian bookstore Shakespeare and Co. (is bookstore masculine or feminine in French?) That visit was a delight for a book guy like me.
As the wheels touched down the shuffle on my iPod played Simon and Garfunkel's Homeward Bound. More found poetry. I find it often. It pops up quite regularly when you keep your eyes peeled for it.
Off to catch up on some sleep in my own bed and off to work tomorrow. I will be back blogging regularly starting tomorrow. I promise.
Saturday, March 31, 2007
Paris in Spring Time
I am off to Paris today on business - the real one like in France - not the plastic one like in Hilton. Gone until Thursday. My postings will be more sporadic than usual this week but I will no doubt have something to say while I am away.
Friday, March 30, 2007
Polls Show Canadians Prefer None of the Above for Prime Minister
The polls continue to point in every direction as to the wisdom of a spring election. The policy issues are not making any difference in poll results because the polls are not asking about them. They are focused on the "beauty contest" aspects of the leaders only.
Leadership is a driving value for citizens today but there is so much more on our minds these days that will also have a significant influence how we will actually vote when an actual election is called and it all becomes serious and meaningful. These beauty contest polls are mere media fodder and mostly serve as PR for polling firms. Much ado about nothing when it come to the real world concern of citizens.
So for the "entertainment value" lets look at some of the more interesting findings of recent polls. An SES poll showed Harper’s Budget actually can best be described as having a lukewarm impact in Quebec. It showed only 27% seeing him more favourably, 33.5% not changing their minds and 36.6% thinking less of him.
Charest was not the benefactor of the Harper Budget largess either in Quebec. Only 20.9 improved their opinion of him, 38% were the same and 37.8% say him in a less favourable light. No big confidence booster the for the Charest leadership. The Quebec election results showed the consequences of these numbers in spades.
This poll is important because it focuses on something that is really framing the one of the dominant value drivers for elections right now. It is the quality and character of leadership as well as trust and respect. The overwhelming policy issue is the environment (except for Quebec where health care still runs #1) but leadership is also very important.
SES deserves serious consideration because it was the only pollster who called the 2006 election results accurately. The rest of the polling industry embarrassed themselves with just how far out of touch they were with the voter reality on election day. Could this be happening again given the wide range of results emerging from the various polling firms?
Ipsos Reid yesterday concluded no bounce for Harper out of the Budget last week and commented “…the numbers should stand as a warning to all major parties that an election is not in any of their interests.”
Angus Reid, on the other hand, a day earlier claims Harper’s Cons have a 17 point lead and the Dion Liberals “plummet to 22% nationally.” Harper apparently has a 49% post budget approval rating in Quebec. Given the cash he promises to pour in there what do you expect? Will he sustain these numbers is the question.
This poll is being touted as another proof Harper should go to the electorate now. His approval ratings reflect a tepid support for his leadership also found in the SES poll.
The real interesting number in the Angus Reid poll is the fact that a full 43% say they are Not Sure or that Neither Dion or Harper is the right guy. Couple that with 64% saying the country is on the Wrong Track or Not Sure you have a recipe for volatility and change. The volatility is everywhere too from a high of 71% in BC to a low of 54% in Manitoba and Saskatchewan.
Leadership, character, respect and trustworthiness are key considerations. Given an earlier Ipsos Reid poll showed about 65% of Canadians still feel they don’t know what Harper stands for as a person and you can see why he wants to wait and not be facing the country any time soon. Dion is in no better shape in earning the trust and confidence of Canadians yet.
Campaigns matter and it is not time for Harper to go yet. So it looks like the Cons will settle for calling Dion names in another round of attack ads instead. Proving once again they are good at political tactics but deplorable at good governance.
Leadership is a driving value for citizens today but there is so much more on our minds these days that will also have a significant influence how we will actually vote when an actual election is called and it all becomes serious and meaningful. These beauty contest polls are mere media fodder and mostly serve as PR for polling firms. Much ado about nothing when it come to the real world concern of citizens.
So for the "entertainment value" lets look at some of the more interesting findings of recent polls. An SES poll showed Harper’s Budget actually can best be described as having a lukewarm impact in Quebec. It showed only 27% seeing him more favourably, 33.5% not changing their minds and 36.6% thinking less of him.
Charest was not the benefactor of the Harper Budget largess either in Quebec. Only 20.9 improved their opinion of him, 38% were the same and 37.8% say him in a less favourable light. No big confidence booster the for the Charest leadership. The Quebec election results showed the consequences of these numbers in spades.
This poll is important because it focuses on something that is really framing the one of the dominant value drivers for elections right now. It is the quality and character of leadership as well as trust and respect. The overwhelming policy issue is the environment (except for Quebec where health care still runs #1) but leadership is also very important.
SES deserves serious consideration because it was the only pollster who called the 2006 election results accurately. The rest of the polling industry embarrassed themselves with just how far out of touch they were with the voter reality on election day. Could this be happening again given the wide range of results emerging from the various polling firms?
Ipsos Reid yesterday concluded no bounce for Harper out of the Budget last week and commented “…the numbers should stand as a warning to all major parties that an election is not in any of their interests.”
Angus Reid, on the other hand, a day earlier claims Harper’s Cons have a 17 point lead and the Dion Liberals “plummet to 22% nationally.” Harper apparently has a 49% post budget approval rating in Quebec. Given the cash he promises to pour in there what do you expect? Will he sustain these numbers is the question.
This poll is being touted as another proof Harper should go to the electorate now. His approval ratings reflect a tepid support for his leadership also found in the SES poll.
The real interesting number in the Angus Reid poll is the fact that a full 43% say they are Not Sure or that Neither Dion or Harper is the right guy. Couple that with 64% saying the country is on the Wrong Track or Not Sure you have a recipe for volatility and change. The volatility is everywhere too from a high of 71% in BC to a low of 54% in Manitoba and Saskatchewan.
Leadership, character, respect and trustworthiness are key considerations. Given an earlier Ipsos Reid poll showed about 65% of Canadians still feel they don’t know what Harper stands for as a person and you can see why he wants to wait and not be facing the country any time soon. Dion is in no better shape in earning the trust and confidence of Canadians yet.
Campaigns matter and it is not time for Harper to go yet. So it looks like the Cons will settle for calling Dion names in another round of attack ads instead. Proving once again they are good at political tactics but deplorable at good governance.
Thursday, March 29, 2007
Let's Hope That Somewhere, Somehow, Harper Sill Has an Agenda
It is a rare but valued occasion when someone you know to have significant philosophical differences with you seems to express themselves in ways that converge and align with you rather than diverge and divide you. The cynic in me would conclude in such circumstances, one of us simply does not understand the issue. That is not the case this time with Link Byfield.
Link Byfield is a staunch conservative and I am a pure progressive. We have little in common other than a respect for democracy and a high regard for our freedom of speech and a distrust of power structures. His recent Commentary on what Stephen Harper is doing is ironically almost totally consistent with my point of view. I just wanted to share it with you.
So with his permission, I give you Link Byfield and his take on the federal budget, the Quebec election and what the hell Stephen Harper is doing:
Let's hope that somewhere, somehow, Harper still has an agenda
There appear to be two very different views of last week’s federal budget and this week’s Quebec election.
One attitude could be labeled “let’s go,” and the other “let them go.”
The “let’s go!” crowd is saying, “The budget worked, the Conservatives have reached majority territory at 40% in the polls, and Quebec separatism is dead. Let’s have an election.”
The other is saying, “The budget was a ridiculous Quebec spending spree, it won’t work, and I’d rather let Quebec go.”
They’re angry that Quebeckers got more than anyone else in this budget, and always do.
No, actually, Maritimers and Manitobans get far more than Quebeckers per capita, for equally dubious reasons and with even worse effect.
So why is nobody complaining about them?
More to the point, why are conservatives not upset that this budget drives federal spending to its highest and fattest level in history?
In constant dollars per Canadian, Harper is spending more than Trudeau, Mulroney or Martin ever did (see Andrew Coyne at http://andrewcoyne.com/columns/2007/03/flaherty-biggest-of-big-spenders.php).
“Overall, no plan to address the productivity and demographic challenges facing the Canadian economy over the long term,” observed Jack Mintz, highly regarded former CEO of the C.D. Howe Institute. “This budget marks a turning point – major tax relief seems impossible, even from this government.”
Harper must do this, say the “let’s go” people, to get a Conservative majority.
Oh? And what will he do with it when he gets it? Will he then cut taxes and transfers? Tell the have-not provinces to pull up their socks and get to work? Tell Quebec to get in or get out?
If he can’t do these things now because he’s in a minority, and can’t discuss them during a campaign for fear of losing votes, what makes us think he’ll do them ever? Maybe he has a master plan. But how would we know?
At what point could we reasonably conclude that his overall objective has changed from fixing federalism to staying in power?
It’s hard to blame Harper, but in so many ways – fiscal federalism, climate change, the Quebecois nation – he is saying or doing one thing while (we hope) meaning and intending another.
While it may be necessary, do we not run a terrible risk that having started, he will be unable to stop? That having enmeshed himself in contradictions, he can never untangle himself?
This is why we at the Citizens Centre are organizing a People’s Parliament – a parliament without parties and politicians, just regular citizens interested in the public welfare.
Most Canadians are not cynical, and wish well for their country. But as a nation we are quite confused – and apparently in disagreement – over what federalism is about and how it should work.
Is it about preserving “social and regional equality” and “two founding nations,” as we are now so often told? Or is it still about ensuring the older values of freedom and prosperity at home, and supporting them abroad?
These two objectives are plainly in direct collision, but it takes a long discussion for people to understand why, and to decide which one matters more.
Canadians need a national assembly free of the cynicism, invective and dishonesty of our existing political institutions.
To find out more about this urgently needed project, visit www.ccfd.ca
Link Byfield
Link Byfield is an Alberta senator-elect and chairman of the Citizens Centre. The Centre promotes the principles of personal freedom and responsible government.
Thanks Link!
Link Byfield is a staunch conservative and I am a pure progressive. We have little in common other than a respect for democracy and a high regard for our freedom of speech and a distrust of power structures. His recent Commentary on what Stephen Harper is doing is ironically almost totally consistent with my point of view. I just wanted to share it with you.
So with his permission, I give you Link Byfield and his take on the federal budget, the Quebec election and what the hell Stephen Harper is doing:
Let's hope that somewhere, somehow, Harper still has an agenda
There appear to be two very different views of last week’s federal budget and this week’s Quebec election.
One attitude could be labeled “let’s go,” and the other “let them go.”
The “let’s go!” crowd is saying, “The budget worked, the Conservatives have reached majority territory at 40% in the polls, and Quebec separatism is dead. Let’s have an election.”
The other is saying, “The budget was a ridiculous Quebec spending spree, it won’t work, and I’d rather let Quebec go.”
They’re angry that Quebeckers got more than anyone else in this budget, and always do.
No, actually, Maritimers and Manitobans get far more than Quebeckers per capita, for equally dubious reasons and with even worse effect.
So why is nobody complaining about them?
More to the point, why are conservatives not upset that this budget drives federal spending to its highest and fattest level in history?
In constant dollars per Canadian, Harper is spending more than Trudeau, Mulroney or Martin ever did (see Andrew Coyne at http://andrewcoyne.com/columns/2007/03/flaherty-biggest-of-big-spenders.php).
“Overall, no plan to address the productivity and demographic challenges facing the Canadian economy over the long term,” observed Jack Mintz, highly regarded former CEO of the C.D. Howe Institute. “This budget marks a turning point – major tax relief seems impossible, even from this government.”
Harper must do this, say the “let’s go” people, to get a Conservative majority.
Oh? And what will he do with it when he gets it? Will he then cut taxes and transfers? Tell the have-not provinces to pull up their socks and get to work? Tell Quebec to get in or get out?
If he can’t do these things now because he’s in a minority, and can’t discuss them during a campaign for fear of losing votes, what makes us think he’ll do them ever? Maybe he has a master plan. But how would we know?
At what point could we reasonably conclude that his overall objective has changed from fixing federalism to staying in power?
It’s hard to blame Harper, but in so many ways – fiscal federalism, climate change, the Quebecois nation – he is saying or doing one thing while (we hope) meaning and intending another.
While it may be necessary, do we not run a terrible risk that having started, he will be unable to stop? That having enmeshed himself in contradictions, he can never untangle himself?
This is why we at the Citizens Centre are organizing a People’s Parliament – a parliament without parties and politicians, just regular citizens interested in the public welfare.
Most Canadians are not cynical, and wish well for their country. But as a nation we are quite confused – and apparently in disagreement – over what federalism is about and how it should work.
Is it about preserving “social and regional equality” and “two founding nations,” as we are now so often told? Or is it still about ensuring the older values of freedom and prosperity at home, and supporting them abroad?
These two objectives are plainly in direct collision, but it takes a long discussion for people to understand why, and to decide which one matters more.
Canadians need a national assembly free of the cynicism, invective and dishonesty of our existing political institutions.
To find out more about this urgently needed project, visit www.ccfd.ca
Link Byfield
Link Byfield is an Alberta senator-elect and chairman of the Citizens Centre. The Centre promotes the principles of personal freedom and responsible government.
Thanks Link!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)