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.
Saturday, March 31, 2007
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!
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
What If Borat Came to Film Mario Dumont's View of Quebec?
It occurs to me that Borat may be searching for a sequel to his cult flick “Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan.” Where better to go than have Mario Dumont take him on a road trip to make a movie based on the ADQ's view of Quebec! The funding would, no doubt, come from Canadian government sources, all in the name of national unity, so what is the risk?
What about this for a working title: “Mario Treats Borat to a Cultural Learning of the Glorious Autonomous State of Quebec.” Just substitute Celine Dion for Pamela Anderson, and have Mario do a quick script adaptation. He could write himself in as the new Asmat, the Producer and could use most of his election speeches and media comments as background and research.
I think a moose instead of the bear and a maple syrup truck works better in a Quebec context. How about a duet? Mario and Borat singing "Mon Pays" to the tune of "O Canada"! They could sing it from the Hotel de Ville balcony in Montreal in honour of Charles deGaulle's famous "Vive Quebec Libre" pronouncement. What a fitting tribute to the essence of the Dumont goal of renaming the province to "The Autonomous State of Quebec." As for the naked wrestling scenes, they could happen just about anywhere.
How much would have to change from the original movie? Just some minor adaptations and reasonable accommodations to fit the ADQ perceptual context and voila - you have a hit sequel.
What about this for a working title: “Mario Treats Borat to a Cultural Learning of the Glorious Autonomous State of Quebec.” Just substitute Celine Dion for Pamela Anderson, and have Mario do a quick script adaptation. He could write himself in as the new Asmat, the Producer and could use most of his election speeches and media comments as background and research.
I think a moose instead of the bear and a maple syrup truck works better in a Quebec context. How about a duet? Mario and Borat singing "Mon Pays" to the tune of "O Canada"! They could sing it from the Hotel de Ville balcony in Montreal in honour of Charles deGaulle's famous "Vive Quebec Libre" pronouncement. What a fitting tribute to the essence of the Dumont goal of renaming the province to "The Autonomous State of Quebec." As for the naked wrestling scenes, they could happen just about anywhere.
How much would have to change from the original movie? Just some minor adaptations and reasonable accommodations to fit the ADQ perceptual context and voila - you have a hit sequel.
The Polls Tell Us Why Harper Will Not Be Going to the Polls - at Least Not Now.
The continuing volatility amongst Canadian's and our feelings about our federal government is showing up in the to-and-fro opinion polls results for the past many months. Flux and frustration are the political realities in the country today and Harper knows it. Do not hold your breath for an early election under the circumstances.
Harper is dancing as fast as he can, trying to catch up to the new rhymes and rhythms of the Canadian consciousness. He has made moves to change his framing from GST tax cutter and baby-bonus boy into the "thoroughly-modern vert-nouveau man." In the process has has been- seriously testing his credulity with Canadians. We just do not believe him nor do we seem to believe in him.
He breaks promises. He chases butterflies like Quebec "nation" without understanding the concepts and consequences. He panders and poses and under performs even on his tepid Five Priority Policy Agenda. Then he compounds the problem with cheap shots about parliamentarians loyalty and the Taliban, and makes unwarranted and unfounded personal slurs around the Air India tragedy, just to name a few.
Every time he sees the light and does something right and not just mean he get a 5 point bounce in the polls, for a day or two, moving from 35% to 40%. The mainstream media immediately goes into a rhetorical overdrive printing headlines about the Cons flirting with majority government territory and salivating over election fever. Then they retreat as the cold light of day emerges in follow up polls and we find that Harper has fallen back to earth, yet again.
The latest iteration of Harper’s up again and down again toilet-seat political fortunes happened over the March 19th Budget. The bounce to 40% territory happened in the first 2 days after the Budget. By the end of the week he was down to 35% again as people reflected on the Budget's political implications and realized Harper' s personal intentions.
Now we have to wait and see what the fallout is going to be for Harper out of the Quebec election. We all can see the consequences of his Budget bungling and interference in the Quebec election. He bet billions of our tax dollars on the Charest horse who turned up lame, in more ways than one.
The fiscal pain inflicted on the rest of us Canadians increased our frustration when Charest decided to use the Harper largesse for enhanced equalization money purely for personal tax cuts to Quebecers. We all understood the extra funs were intended to address the mythical fiscal imbalance for Quebec. The rest of Canada got no tax relief from the federal Budget and we are not amused. Especially Saskatchewan and Newfoundland who are legitimately angry with Harper. He screwed them royally in the process of paying off Quebec to purchase a personal power base.
Harper has essentially shown no progress in earning the trust and confidence of Canadians in the 14th months he has had control of the government. Do not be fooled, even with a minority government Harper has had de facto control. The Liberals spent most of 2006 finding a new leader and all of 2007 figuring out where they want to go with him so they have not been a force.
The major reason is after 5 years in federal leadership politics 65% of Canadians say they do not yet “know Prime Minister Harper any better as a person.” Those numbers are the same for all of Canada – expect for Quebec where a mere 59% say they don’t know him. This is not the stuff of long term viable political leadership.
I remember the headlines "Joe Who" immediately after Clark was chosen Progressive Conservative Party leader. Five year after Harper was chosen Reform/Alliance/Conservative party leader and over a year since he was chosen Prime Minister, we are still asking ourselves "Who is Stephen Harper?"
That is the real problem Harper has going int the next election, whenever it happens...we simply do not know who he really is after all these years.
Harper is dancing as fast as he can, trying to catch up to the new rhymes and rhythms of the Canadian consciousness. He has made moves to change his framing from GST tax cutter and baby-bonus boy into the "thoroughly-modern vert-nouveau man." In the process has has been- seriously testing his credulity with Canadians. We just do not believe him nor do we seem to believe in him.
He breaks promises. He chases butterflies like Quebec "nation" without understanding the concepts and consequences. He panders and poses and under performs even on his tepid Five Priority Policy Agenda. Then he compounds the problem with cheap shots about parliamentarians loyalty and the Taliban, and makes unwarranted and unfounded personal slurs around the Air India tragedy, just to name a few.
Every time he sees the light and does something right and not just mean he get a 5 point bounce in the polls, for a day or two, moving from 35% to 40%. The mainstream media immediately goes into a rhetorical overdrive printing headlines about the Cons flirting with majority government territory and salivating over election fever. Then they retreat as the cold light of day emerges in follow up polls and we find that Harper has fallen back to earth, yet again.
The latest iteration of Harper’s up again and down again toilet-seat political fortunes happened over the March 19th Budget. The bounce to 40% territory happened in the first 2 days after the Budget. By the end of the week he was down to 35% again as people reflected on the Budget's political implications and realized Harper' s personal intentions.
Now we have to wait and see what the fallout is going to be for Harper out of the Quebec election. We all can see the consequences of his Budget bungling and interference in the Quebec election. He bet billions of our tax dollars on the Charest horse who turned up lame, in more ways than one.
The fiscal pain inflicted on the rest of us Canadians increased our frustration when Charest decided to use the Harper largesse for enhanced equalization money purely for personal tax cuts to Quebecers. We all understood the extra funs were intended to address the mythical fiscal imbalance for Quebec. The rest of Canada got no tax relief from the federal Budget and we are not amused. Especially Saskatchewan and Newfoundland who are legitimately angry with Harper. He screwed them royally in the process of paying off Quebec to purchase a personal power base.
Harper has essentially shown no progress in earning the trust and confidence of Canadians in the 14th months he has had control of the government. Do not be fooled, even with a minority government Harper has had de facto control. The Liberals spent most of 2006 finding a new leader and all of 2007 figuring out where they want to go with him so they have not been a force.
The major reason is after 5 years in federal leadership politics 65% of Canadians say they do not yet “know Prime Minister Harper any better as a person.” Those numbers are the same for all of Canada – expect for Quebec where a mere 59% say they don’t know him. This is not the stuff of long term viable political leadership.
I remember the headlines "Joe Who" immediately after Clark was chosen Progressive Conservative Party leader. Five year after Harper was chosen Reform/Alliance/Conservative party leader and over a year since he was chosen Prime Minister, we are still asking ourselves "Who is Stephen Harper?"
That is the real problem Harper has going int the next election, whenever it happens...we simply do not know who he really is after all these years.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)