Do we really need another fall election... or rather Paul Martin where art thou ?
As has been reported through various media outles, it could be entirely possible that we're heading towards a fall election. Elections are usually my favourite time of year, but I'm not so sure how I will be looking at what will be Canada's 40th General Election. You see, there are a number of issues at hand with this election, the who's, the why's, and the WTF's and most of them are not even based in policy.
First of all, each election costs taxpayers somewhere in the neighbourhood of $300 million. That's a lot of money to throw around. Or at the very least, that's a lot of money that can be better spent. Now everyone (everyone being myself and the intelligent political reporters) seems to believe that the potential result of the 40th General Election will be another Conservative minority government. Other possibilites include a Liberal minority government, with the Tories as official opposition and the last of the "likely" scenarios is a Conservative majority. Nowhere does anyone think that the Liberals will win a majority. That seems to be just about as unlikely as the NDP winning. So this just means we're spending money for no apparent reason - sounds very Canadian to me.
But then, I've said this all before. In 2004 the Liberals were elected with a minority with Paul Martin a the helm (even with the whole Gomery thing going on in the background). The Opposition then defeated the Martin government in the House forcing us to spend $300 million to elect a new government in 2006. It's now 2008 and Harper wants us to do it all over again bringing the running total to close $1 BILLION in 4 years, give or take a couple bucks here and there. Honestly, we were better off with Paul Martin, an intelligent experienced worldly politician, who faced the initial brunt of blame in the Gomery commission head-on; an over-zealous media looking for stories of corruption, backroom deals and off-shore finances; and the Tories who wanted to get him out of office at all costs before he could get his dirty little Liberal hands all over the Canadian government, its finances and its objectives and maybe make things work out positively for a change. Oh and it turns out evidence linking my ol' buddy Chretien to some malicious scheme was false too.... but I'm not bitter.
So there's the extreme costs of elections which could concievably put us right back to where we were in 2004 or 2006. If the Liberals do win it however, it isn't back to 2004 necessarily. It's Stephane Dion this time around and not Paul Martin who's leading the party. It's a guy who is a terrible communicator in both official languages. Seriously, I'm pretty much bilingual and his french sounds very Parisian proper to me - not the rough and touble Shawinigan, or the Montreal and Baie-Comeau accents of recent Prime Ministers. I can't see Dion hanging out with the likes of Gordon Brown, Obama/McCain, or Medvedev and he'd probably stutter his words and shy away like an inexperience teenage boy when trying to speak with Angela Merkel. Good thing for Dion that Hillary can't be President or he wouldn't be able to get anything done with two hot babes at a G8 Summit. He'll try and become buddy-buddy with Sarkozy, but seriously do you think Nicolas would want to hang with Stephane? He's married to Carla Bruni for pete's sake. It would be like high school all over again for these guys with Sarkozy as the captain of the football team, and Dion the captain of the chess team. They may both be captains but that doesn't mean they'll be friends.
Dion just doesn't seem like the strong and confident leader one would expect as Prime Minister. Maybe it's the way the media (read: Rick Mercer) has influenced me, but if Canada were to enter into a military conflict under Dion, I think he would be more concerned with not crushing any flowers with our tanks while driving into enemy territory instead of the well-being of our Canadian soldiers or the overall success of the mission.
Additionally, Dion just doesn't seem to have a grasp of economics - or at least not in the boring, steadfast way you'd expect. What he does have is a passion for the environment and Canada's environment in particular. Dion feels that Canada should be, and can be a leader, in a global effort for improving our environment. I can't say I disagree with him. Anyone in there right mind can see this is important and necessary, but the environment isn't the be-all-end-all of politics. It adds a dimension to policy and desicion making which must be accounted for when passing law, but aside from the very first bills, not all law needs to be about the environment. The environment needs to guide policy, not be policy. [just to be 100% clear - for that to work, there does need to some laws created for environmental protection which would make the environment "policy", but I'm thinking long-term, after things like that are done. how does one govern after the environmental reforms are complete?]
Then there's Harper and the Conservatives. The Tories can't seem to wrap their collective heads around the fact that the market won't solve environmental issues. At least not without outrageous consumer demand, and that consumer demand needs to be led by government. I completely understand the conservative strategy of laissez-faire on these issues, but it needs a damn kick-in-the-ass from the Federal level to start the ball of environmental change rolling. If the Tories feel obliged to re-create or re-vamp a Food Inspection Agency in the wake of poor Maple Leaf's woes, then I don't see why they should back away on Environmental policies.
Harper hasn't even accomplished what Tories generally do best - manage finances. Everyone saw the "credit crunch" coming and the concerns with the US economy make headlines almost every night. Jim Flaherty has even blasted Ontario's Liberal government for not being competitive enough to attract investment, and did so at the most vulnerable time to the Province when large auto makers were cutting back. The only good financial news nationwide since the Tories were elected has been the oil rich resources in Alberta and now Newfoundland. There's nothing Ontario can do about not having any oil, but the Feds can't seem to get Alberta off their minds. Compare apples to apples would ya boys. Flaherty was leading Ontario's economy during a time of relatively inexpensive gas prices and nobody gave a rat's ass about Alberta. Now that there's competition for Ottawa's attention and affection amongst provinces, Alberta is currently the favoured-son. Thanks anyway for the nice Federally paid for roads in Whitby though Jimmy (there are obvious benefits of having high-ranking cabinet members representing your riding!).
My idea has always been to throw a billion dollars at GM and have them re-vamp the Oshawa plants to create fuel efficient vehicles for sale in the European and Asian markets. The automaker, and large employer, keeps its plants open, workers paid and the Canadian government makes back the intial investment in five years from duties charged on exports and the normal income taxes from the regional workers. Plus there are long term benefits if Canada is seen as the perferred manufacturing area for environmentally friendly products. Imagine if all of a sudden there's a world-wide demand for products with consiencious manufacturing techniques and disposal of waste policies. Ontario, and Canada would be the leader initially producing environmentally friendly goods and then migrating to a the service sector again once the manufacturing techniques are stolen by China - sorry, I meant sold to developing countries.
As much as Harper liked to say that thousands of workers from GM/Ford/Chrysler who got laid off earlier this year have found new jobs and are contributing in a new economy, there's a huge loss in tax revenue from someone who was making $30/hr on the line in GM's Oshawa Plant #2 to $18/hr doing construction, repairs or line work in a non-union-heavy factory. Where would I find a billion dollars to throw at GM you ask? From the same place the government is able to find money for three $300 Million (give or a take a few million) elections in four years of course.
So how do I see this all working out? One of two ways:
1. Tories win an election and then the Liberals go searching for a new leader under the premise that "Dion, you had your chance". In comes Michael Ignatieff or another "White Knight" in a non-polarizing fashion to take over the leadership and guide the Liberals to a majority victory in 2010 (or maybe 2011 if it's polite to wait until after the Olympics).
2. Liberals win a minority government and by joining forces with the NDP and Bloc pass legislation that actually makes the government work for whole five years. Stephane Dion would then have the chance at winning a majority in 2013 but probably wouldn't.
Other things that would happen if the Liberals win a minority gov't:
First of all, each election costs taxpayers somewhere in the neighbourhood of $300 million. That's a lot of money to throw around. Or at the very least, that's a lot of money that can be better spent. Now everyone (everyone being myself and the intelligent political reporters) seems to believe that the potential result of the 40th General Election will be another Conservative minority government. Other possibilites include a Liberal minority government, with the Tories as official opposition and the last of the "likely" scenarios is a Conservative majority. Nowhere does anyone think that the Liberals will win a majority. That seems to be just about as unlikely as the NDP winning. So this just means we're spending money for no apparent reason - sounds very Canadian to me.
But then, I've said this all before. In 2004 the Liberals were elected with a minority with Paul Martin a the helm (even with the whole Gomery thing going on in the background). The Opposition then defeated the Martin government in the House forcing us to spend $300 million to elect a new government in 2006. It's now 2008 and Harper wants us to do it all over again bringing the running total to close $1 BILLION in 4 years, give or take a couple bucks here and there. Honestly, we were better off with Paul Martin, an intelligent experienced worldly politician, who faced the initial brunt of blame in the Gomery commission head-on; an over-zealous media looking for stories of corruption, backroom deals and off-shore finances; and the Tories who wanted to get him out of office at all costs before he could get his dirty little Liberal hands all over the Canadian government, its finances and its objectives and maybe make things work out positively for a change. Oh and it turns out evidence linking my ol' buddy Chretien to some malicious scheme was false too.... but I'm not bitter.
So there's the extreme costs of elections which could concievably put us right back to where we were in 2004 or 2006. If the Liberals do win it however, it isn't back to 2004 necessarily. It's Stephane Dion this time around and not Paul Martin who's leading the party. It's a guy who is a terrible communicator in both official languages. Seriously, I'm pretty much bilingual and his french sounds very Parisian proper to me - not the rough and touble Shawinigan, or the Montreal and Baie-Comeau accents of recent Prime Ministers. I can't see Dion hanging out with the likes of Gordon Brown, Obama/McCain, or Medvedev and he'd probably stutter his words and shy away like an inexperience teenage boy when trying to speak with Angela Merkel. Good thing for Dion that Hillary can't be President or he wouldn't be able to get anything done with two hot babes at a G8 Summit. He'll try and become buddy-buddy with Sarkozy, but seriously do you think Nicolas would want to hang with Stephane? He's married to Carla Bruni for pete's sake. It would be like high school all over again for these guys with Sarkozy as the captain of the football team, and Dion the captain of the chess team. They may both be captains but that doesn't mean they'll be friends.
Dion just doesn't seem like the strong and confident leader one would expect as Prime Minister. Maybe it's the way the media (read: Rick Mercer) has influenced me, but if Canada were to enter into a military conflict under Dion, I think he would be more concerned with not crushing any flowers with our tanks while driving into enemy territory instead of the well-being of our Canadian soldiers or the overall success of the mission.
Additionally, Dion just doesn't seem to have a grasp of economics - or at least not in the boring, steadfast way you'd expect. What he does have is a passion for the environment and Canada's environment in particular. Dion feels that Canada should be, and can be a leader, in a global effort for improving our environment. I can't say I disagree with him. Anyone in there right mind can see this is important and necessary, but the environment isn't the be-all-end-all of politics. It adds a dimension to policy and desicion making which must be accounted for when passing law, but aside from the very first bills, not all law needs to be about the environment. The environment needs to guide policy, not be policy. [just to be 100% clear - for that to work, there does need to some laws created for environmental protection which would make the environment "policy", but I'm thinking long-term, after things like that are done. how does one govern after the environmental reforms are complete?]
Then there's Harper and the Conservatives. The Tories can't seem to wrap their collective heads around the fact that the market won't solve environmental issues. At least not without outrageous consumer demand, and that consumer demand needs to be led by government. I completely understand the conservative strategy of laissez-faire on these issues, but it needs a damn kick-in-the-ass from the Federal level to start the ball of environmental change rolling. If the Tories feel obliged to re-create or re-vamp a Food Inspection Agency in the wake of poor Maple Leaf's woes, then I don't see why they should back away on Environmental policies.
Harper hasn't even accomplished what Tories generally do best - manage finances. Everyone saw the "credit crunch" coming and the concerns with the US economy make headlines almost every night. Jim Flaherty has even blasted Ontario's Liberal government for not being competitive enough to attract investment, and did so at the most vulnerable time to the Province when large auto makers were cutting back. The only good financial news nationwide since the Tories were elected has been the oil rich resources in Alberta and now Newfoundland. There's nothing Ontario can do about not having any oil, but the Feds can't seem to get Alberta off their minds. Compare apples to apples would ya boys. Flaherty was leading Ontario's economy during a time of relatively inexpensive gas prices and nobody gave a rat's ass about Alberta. Now that there's competition for Ottawa's attention and affection amongst provinces, Alberta is currently the favoured-son. Thanks anyway for the nice Federally paid for roads in Whitby though Jimmy (there are obvious benefits of having high-ranking cabinet members representing your riding!).
My idea has always been to throw a billion dollars at GM and have them re-vamp the Oshawa plants to create fuel efficient vehicles for sale in the European and Asian markets. The automaker, and large employer, keeps its plants open, workers paid and the Canadian government makes back the intial investment in five years from duties charged on exports and the normal income taxes from the regional workers. Plus there are long term benefits if Canada is seen as the perferred manufacturing area for environmentally friendly products. Imagine if all of a sudden there's a world-wide demand for products with consiencious manufacturing techniques and disposal of waste policies. Ontario, and Canada would be the leader initially producing environmentally friendly goods and then migrating to a the service sector again once the manufacturing techniques are stolen by China - sorry, I meant sold to developing countries.
As much as Harper liked to say that thousands of workers from GM/Ford/Chrysler who got laid off earlier this year have found new jobs and are contributing in a new economy, there's a huge loss in tax revenue from someone who was making $30/hr on the line in GM's Oshawa Plant #2 to $18/hr doing construction, repairs or line work in a non-union-heavy factory. Where would I find a billion dollars to throw at GM you ask? From the same place the government is able to find money for three $300 Million (give or a take a few million) elections in four years of course.
So how do I see this all working out? One of two ways:
1. Tories win an election and then the Liberals go searching for a new leader under the premise that "Dion, you had your chance". In comes Michael Ignatieff or another "White Knight" in a non-polarizing fashion to take over the leadership and guide the Liberals to a majority victory in 2010 (or maybe 2011 if it's polite to wait until after the Olympics).
2. Liberals win a minority government and by joining forces with the NDP and Bloc pass legislation that actually makes the government work for whole five years. Stephane Dion would then have the chance at winning a majority in 2013 but probably wouldn't.
Other things that would happen if the Liberals win a minority gov't:
- The Tories would go through a leadership change, maybe even two and may even split up for a while and then come back together. Hopefully by 2013 Peter McKay hasn't screwed things up tremendously and can be a legitamate candidate for his party's leadership.
- The NDP may or may not stick with Layton, it really doesn't matter. They aren't going to win. And they won't have more than the 30 seats they have now. Ok, maybe a couple here and there but they won't become the official opposition.
- The Bloc are on cruise control already and will probably keep the 50-55 seat total they've currently enjoyed for the past 15 years. That number may drop into the high 40's with a continued Conservative push into Quebec - but if there are two things Quebecers don't like it's wasting taxpayer money and wasting lives in Afghanistan, both of which the Rt. Hon. Stephen Harper just doesn't seem to understand.
posted by tim_cbl at
1:14 PM
|
0 Comments
