Showing posts with label election. Show all posts
Showing posts with label election. Show all posts

Friday, April 01, 2011

Plawiuk for Premier

As I announced on Facebook this morning
Eugene Plawiuk announced today that he is throwing his hat into the ring for leader of the Alberta Progressive Conservative party...."I am the only progressive in the race" he said, "the rest are Conservatives" His hat did not comment....

Saturday, March 26, 2011

Coalitions OK say Conservatives

For the bombing of Libya

Canadian general to take command of NATO mission in Libya

But not to be government.

To be sure, the Harper Conservatives are already circulating talking points to their candidates that refer disparagingly to the "coalition opposition." And you can expect to hear more about the evil coalition as the election campaign unfolds in the weeks ahead.


Why a Canadian?

First because we were the only country in NATO whose Parliamentary parties, left, right, centre and separatist voted unanimously to support the No Fly Zone.

Second because the Canadian General is also a NORAD commander, making this still an American mission.

Bouchard, a native of Chicoutimi, Que, had been deputy commander of NATO's joint forces command, based in Naples, Italy. The former Canadian air force commander has been a member of the Canadian Forces since 1974 and graduated as a helicopter pilot in 1976. He has worked at key posts within Norad operations and has served at U.S. military bases on several occasions. He was awarded the United States Legion of Merit in 2004


And well, because we are after all polite....even in war.

Two Canadian CF-18 fighter jets took part in a mission over Libya on Tuesday morning, but returned to base without attacking their target because the risk of collateral damage was too great.

"Two CF-18s were tasked for a ground attack mission against a Libyan airfield," Lawson told a news conference in Ottawa.

"I can confirm for you that the air crew returned not having dropped their weaponry. Upon arrival on the scene of the target area the air crew became aware of a risk they deemed too high for collateral damage."

Lawson said the risk was not related to any threat to the CF-18s, but rather potential damage to civilians or important infrastructure such as hospitals, on the ground.

Lawson said the decision was in compliance with the rules of engagement that NATO forces have been given, and proves "the system works."

PMO PO Danny Williams

Slightly overwhelmed by all the election coverage yesterday was news that Danny Williams was not going to attend the crowning of the new leader of his provincial PC party, his replacement. Party brass all were shocked and dismayed.

Shocked that Williams won't attend tribute: premier


While some have suggested it was because of this;

Former aide to Danny Williams backs away from oil board


I think this had more to do with it

Tories, Quebec ink oil exploration deal

The Conservatives are getting rid of a long-standing irritant with the Quebec government just days before an expected election call, signing a deal that opens the door to oil exploration in the St. Lawrence and fuels hopes for economic development in poor parts of the province.

The agreement to be unveiled on Thursday in Gatineau, Que., will lead to exploration for billions of barrels of oil and natural gas in the Old Harry field in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, which straddles Quebec’s boundary with Newfoundland.

A 1967 Supreme Court of Canada ruling upheld the federal government’s ownership of offshore resources.

A joint secretariat will be set up to oversee federal-provincial responsibilities regarding the management of the offshore resources and an independent tribunal will mediate potential conflicts, including an overseas boundary dispute between Quebec and Newfoundland and Labrador. Millions of dollars in royalties are at stake.

The Old Harry site straddles a boundary defined in 1964 by Quebec and the four Atlantic provinces. The boundary places most of the Old Harry oil and gas reserves on Quebec’s side of the line. Newfoundland and Labrador is challenging the boundary, and the announcement gives the province an equal say over the makeup of the tribunal.


Another interesting point about this deal was that it was done in private, days before the election call, and it resulted in this....

Federal Tories buy the silence of the Quebec Liberals

And it was hard to believe Christian Paradis, who is Prime Minister Harper's Quebec political lieutenant as well as natural-resources minister, when he said Thursday's agreement on the Old Harry offshore oil and gas deposits had nothing to do with the federal election.

It was easier to believe Quebec's natural-resources minister, Nathalie Normandeau, who said that "never have the planets been so well aligned" for what looked like the hasty settlement of a 12-year-old difference between Ottawa and Quebec.

And the agreement on Old Harry is only one sign of an apparent political arrangement between the federal Conservatives and the Quebec Liberals.

The arrangement was apparently made between Harper and Premier Charest in a private meeting last week, when the prime minister came to the provincial capital to announce an airport expansion.

In the deal, the Quebec Liberals would refrain from criticizing the Conservatives, the party most likely to form the next government, possibly a majority government, until the federal election is over.In return, the Conservative government would sign agreements giving Quebec more money.

On Wednesday, Charest defended the Harper government against criticism from the sovereignist parties in Ottawa and Quebec City over the absence of a harmonization settlement in the federal budget.

And he said that in this federal campaign, h...e will not publish an open letter asking the parties to state their positions on issues of particular concern to his government, as he had in the past. Charest said "the idea of a letter is a bit passé," even though his intervention in the 2008 campaign to criticize the Conservatives for culture spending cuts had proven effective

Friday, March 25, 2011

1984 And Now Election 2011

Warren Kinsella who used to be a Liberal Party Insider, and of course therefore a HACK, now works for the right wing conservative mouthpiece; Quebecor/SUN media, so today he declares that the election campaign is over before it begins.

Nineteen Eighty-Four wasn’t just the title of a good book by George Orwell.

It’s also a useful reminder of what may be about to happen to the Liberals and NDP in the coming election campaign.

You remember: Sept. 4, 1984, and Brian Mulroney sweeps to a massive parliamentary majority. The once-great Liberal Party — the Natural Governing Party, no less — is reduced to a paltry 40 seats.

Conservatives, up to 43%. Liberals, down to 24%. NDP, unchanged at 16%.

And if you just look at voting preferences of those absolutely certain to trek to polling stations, according to Ipsos, the Cons go up to 45%, and the Grits slide to 23%.

To put it in context, that gap is perilously close (or identical) to the 22 points that separated Mulroney and John Turner in 1984’s Gritterdammerung. Result: Tories, 211 seats, NDP 30 seats, and Grits the aforementioned 40.

So, is Michael Ignatieff this generation’s John Turner?

Of course he is but the political differences of the times are also significant. And Kinsella's prognosis is also questionable.

First in 1984 there was a great debate, a big issue that the election was to be fought over; nothing less than Free Trade.

There is no big issue in this election.


Second there was the appointment of Liberal hacks to the Senate just before the election call, which gave Mulroney his chance to defeat Turner in the debates when he challenged him to simply not appoint the Liberal hacks to the senate. "You had a choice Mr. Turner'. It was the zinger in the Leaders debate.

The NDP, the CLC trade unions and the Left had made Free Trade the issue for the election and had for two years prior. The Liberals seeing an issue which carried votes, opportunistically decided to become Anti-Free Trade hoping to get votes from the Left as the only Natural Governing Party.

In the Leaders Debate the NDP Leader Ed Broadbent carried the day as statesman, while Mulroney and Turner went at it hammer and tong. It was Mulrony who got in the election zinger.

What Kinsella fails to aknowledge is that in 1984 the NDP got enough seats, in fact increased their seats to 30, that had there been a minority government it would behoove them to ask for their support.

And even more importantly in 1984 there was NO Bloc Quebecois. In fact the BQ would originate out of the Mulroney Conservative government, a fact the current Conservative Government would like you to forget, even as they carry on in Mulroney's footsteps when it comes to gaining support in Quebec.

The Conservatives and Liberals want to have two party politics, ala the Republicans and Democrats in the US ,Conservatives and Labour in the UK.

Unlike the 1984 election this election is not about three parties but four parties. Three in English Canada and an additional Quebec based Party. By having four parties, with Quebec solidaly BQ,


The Harper Conservatives have decided to focus on the rural township votes, as they have in Western Canada, that is where their base is.

The urban cities is where the fight goes three ways, if not four. The NDP is currently more popular in Quebec than the Liberals, a historic first.


This election is about Leadership, and that is the only thing it has in common with 1984, Turner was weak, Mulroney was brash and Broadbent was conciliatory.

With the BQ there will be no repeat of 1984, we will once again have a minority government. But will it be Conservative or Liberal? The NDP is then the best place to park your vote, since Layton shows he is PM material, even more that his opponents, and if Harper has any chance so does Layton, even if it is as Leader of the Opposition.

The Liberals under Ignatieff, as they were under Turner, are toast and on that Kinsella and I agree.


Michael Ignatieff was once hailed in Liberal circles as the second coming of Pierre Trudeau. Now his challenge is to shake off the perception he's an outsider interested only in adding another ornament to his well-adorned resume.

Saturday, March 19, 2011

Harper Government (c)(tm)(r)

Welcome to the Orwellian World of the Conservative Government. The Canadian Government becomes the Harper Government (c) (tm)(r) a decision made in 2009 but only revealed this month. As they quietly implemented it across various departments in their continuous use of taxpayer programs and funding for their permanent election campaign.

The “Harper Government” moniker rose to prominence in 2009, when its use was noted in light of a controversy over Conservative MPs posing with giant, mock government cheques bearing the party logo and MPs’ signatures. The mock cheques were consigned to the dust bin, and the “Harper Government” handle went into partial hibernation.

Since December, the “Harper Government” has returned with a vengeance, sprouting like mushrooms across departmental communications.

Scores of recent news releases — from the Canada Revenue Agency to Fisheries and Oceans, Finance, International Trade, Health Canada and Industry Canada — are all headlined by “Harper Government” actions.

Even the Treasury Board Secretariat is using the term.

In this video clip former Minister for the Treasury Board, Stockwell Day deny's, denys, denys--it's the standard Government policy to deny until one is caught.

Monday, October 19, 2009

Today Is Election Day

Bill C-16

Subject to an earlier dissolution of Parliament, a general election must be held on the third Monday in October in the fourth calendar year following a previous general election, with the first general election to be held on Monday, October 19, 2009.

Well okay it should have been today, except that Harper took us into an election early, violating his own law. Instead in a cynical ploy to grab power the Harpocrites ran an election saying there was no recession, they would not raise taxes nor would they have a budget deficit...my my how things changed after they were elected with another minority government and the economy crashed.

Harper then prorogued the government within two months of that election in order to avoid being ousted by an opposition coalition, while still denying there was a recession.

Today with the threat of another election still in the air one has to ask why the rush last fall if not for the fact that actually the Harpocrites have been ready for an election since they won a minority in 2006. Every day is election day for them. They are not ruling as a government but as a party running a party campaign around the economic issues they denied were a reality last fall.

Image

However if we take the PM at his own word well perhaps we should have had an election today. But that's just a technicality...

Harper says recession is no time for an election -

Harper says recession over only in technical sense

And despite all the political platitudes offered at the time it turns out that Canada's fixed election date did turn out to be an illusion........

Bill C-16 on Fixed Date Elections
November 06, 2006

Third Reading in the House of Commons

House of Commons, Ottawa
Monday, November 6, 2006
Check Against Delivery

Introduction

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to begin debate in third reading on Bill C-16 – An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act – which would provide for fixed date elections.

First of all, I would like to note that the Bill was carefully reviewed by the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs.

A range of expert witnesses has appeared before the Committee and much discussion has taken place.

The Committee heard from the Chief Electoral Officer, representatives of political parties, academic experts, as well as me.

While I have been informed that there were lively debates on key issues, I am pleased to note that Bill C-16 carried in Committee without amendment.

Moreover, while there were some minor differences on some of the details of the Bill, I was struck by the fact that all parties represented in the House of Commons support the fundamental rationale of the Bill.

I believe that all parties share the view that elections belong, fundamentally, to citizens. They belong, Mr. Speaker, to the people.

All parties agreed with the principle that the timing of elections should not be left to the prime minister but should be set in advance so that all Canadians will know when the next election will occur.

Mr. Speaker, today I will begin with a description of the current process for calling general elections and I will discuss some of the difficulties associated with it.

This will be followed by a discussion of the many advantages associated with fixed date elections.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, I will be very pleased to present the specifics of Bill C-16.

Current Process

Today, it is the prerogative of the Prime Minister, whose government has not lost the confidence of the House of Commons, to determine what he or she regards as a propitious time for an election to renew the government’s mandate.

The Prime Minister then requests dissolution of the House from the Governor General and, if the Governor General agrees, he or she proclaims the date of the election.

What we have, Mr. Speaker, is a situation where the Prime Minister is able to choose the date of the general election, not based on what is in the best interest of the country, but what is in the interest of his or her party.

Bill C-16 will address this problem and will produce a number of other benefits.

Advantages of Fixed Date Elections

Mr. Speaker, before going into the details of the bill, allow me to discuss the key advantages of fixed date elections.

Fixed date elections will provide for greater fairness in election campaigns, greater transparency and predictability, improved governance, higher voter turnout rates, and will help in attracting the best qualified candidates to public life.

Fairness

First of all, allow me to discuss the issue of fairness.

Fixed date elections will help to level the playing field for those seeking election in a general election.

With fixed date elections, the timing of general elections will be known to all.

Since the date of the next election will be known to all political parties, each party will have an equal opportunity to make preparations for upcoming election campaigns.

Instead of the governing party having the advantage of determining when the next election will take place – an advantage they may have over the other parties for several months – all parties will be on an equal footing.

And it’s only fair that each party will have equal time to prepare for the next election and know when it will be.

Transparency and Predictability

Another key advantage of fixed date elections is transparency.

Rather than decisions about election dates being made behind closed doors, general election dates will be set in advance as prescribed by this bill.

Once this bill is passed, the date of each election will be known by all Canadians.

Predictability is also a key advantage of fixed date elections.

Canadians and political parties alike will be able to rely on our democratic election system working in an open and predictable fashion for all general elections.

Plans can be made on a reliable basis to prepare for, and respond to, fixed date elections.

Improved Governance

Mr. Speaker, fixed date elections will allow for improved governance.

For example, fixed date elections will provide for improved administration of the electoral machinery by Elections Canada.

The Chief Electoral Officer, in majority situations, will know with certainty when the next election will occur and will be able to plan accordingly.

This will almost certainly involve greater efficiency at Elections Canada and will, therefore, very likely save money for taxpayers.

Political parties will also likely save money as they will not have to remain on an ‘election footing’ for extended periods of time.

Moreover, fixed date elections will allow for better parliamentary planning.

For example, members of parliamentary committees will be able to set out their agendas well in advance, which will make the work of committees, and Parliament as a whole, more efficient.

Higher Voter Turnout Rates

Yet another reason for adopting fixed date elections is that this measure will likely improve voter turnout because elections will be held in October, except when a government loses the confidence of the House.

The weather is generally favourable in most parts of the country.

Fewer people are transient. So, for example, most students will not be in transition between home and school at that time and will be able to vote.

Moreover, seniors will not be deterred from voting as they might be in colder months.

And, of course, citizens will be able to plan in advance to participate in the electoral process, arranging for advanced voting if they plan to be away.

An additional benefit is that pre-election campaigns to ‘get out the vote’ will be able to be well prepared, as the organizers will be aware of exactly when the next general election will take place.

Candidates

Finally, I want to mention an advantage that will have resonance to many of those in this chamber.

It is a difficulty with the current system that I have witnessed personally (and something I have mentioned in interviews when Bill C-16 was first introduced).

Fixed date elections will help to attract many of the best qualified Canadians into public life because it will be easier to plan their own schedules to enable them to stand for election.

For many of our most talented Canadians, unfixed election dates make it difficult to plan to enter public life because they simply don’t know when the next election is going to be held.

I think fixed date elections can only help in attracting the most qualified individuals to public life.

Details of the Bill

Mr. Speaker, I would like to turn to the details of the bill.

1. Responsible Government

Legislation providing for fixed date elections must be structured to meet certain constitutional realities of responsible government. They include:

• the requirement that the government have the confidence of the House of Commons;

• respecting the Governor General’s constitutional power to dissolve Parliament.

The bill before us was drafted carefully to ensure that these constitutional requirements continue to be respected.

So, the bill does not in any way change the requirement that the government must maintain the confidence of the House.

Moreover, all of the conventions regarding loss of confidence remain intact.

In particular, the Prime Minister’s prerogative to advise the Governor General on the dissolution of Parliament is retained, to allow him or her to advise dissolution in the event of a loss of confidence.

Moreover, the bill states explicitly that the powers of the Governor General remain unchanged, including the power to dissolve Parliament at the Governor General’s discretion.

2. Modeled After Provincial Legislation

As set out in the government’s platform, this bill is modeled after existing provincial fixed date elections legislation.

The legislation is very similar to the approach used by British Columbia, Ontario and Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, it should be noted that the legislation in all of these provinces is working – and working well.

British Columbia recently had its first fixed date election (May 17, 2005) and Ontario and Newfoundland and Labrador will soon have their first fixed date elections (October 4, 2007 and October 9, 2007 respectively).

In British Columbia, there was certainly no evidence of what some critics have called a “lame duck government”.

3. Mechanics

The government’s bill provides that the date for the next general election is Monday, October 19, 2009.

Of course, this will be the date only if the government is able to retain the confidence of the House until that time.

So, for example, if the government were to be defeated tomorrow, a general election would be held according to normal practice.

However, the subsequent election would be scheduled for the third Monday in October, in the fourth calendar year after that election.

And that is the normal model that would be established by this bill.

General elections will occur on the third Monday of October in the fourth calendar year following the previous general election.

We chose the date very carefully and one of my parliamentary colleagues will provide a full explanation of our choice during the course of this debate.

However, in brief, we chose the third Monday in October because it was the date that was likely to maximize voter turnout and to be least likely to conflict with cultural or religious holidays – or with elections in other jurisdictions.

4. Conflicts

This raises an additional feature of the bill that I want to bring to your attention – a feature that provides for an alternate election date in the event of a conflict with a date of religious or cultural significance or an election in another jurisdiction.

In the current system, the date of the general election is chosen by the government, so it is rare that a polling day is chosen that comes into conflict with a date of cultural or religious significance or with elections in other jurisdictions.

However, with the introduction of legislation providing for fixed date elections, there is some possibility that, in the future, the stipulated election date will occasionally be the same as a day of cultural or religious significance or an election in another jurisdiction.

The Ontario fixed date elections legislation provides that, if there is a conflict with a day of cultural or religious significance, the Chief Elections Officer may recommend an alternate polling day to the Lieutenant Governor in Council, up to seven days following the day that would otherwise be polling day.

Using a variation of the Ontario legislation providing for fixed date elections, our bill empowers the Chief Electoral Officer to recommend an alternate polling day to the Governor in Council should he or she find that the polling day is not suitable for that purpose.

The alternate day would be either the Tuesday or the Monday following the Monday that would otherwise be polling day.

Allowing alternate polling days to be held on the following Tuesday or Monday is consistent with the current practice of holding elections on a Monday or a Tuesday.

Illusory in Nature?

Mr. Speaker, some Opposition members had concerns that this bill is illusory in that the Prime Minister can call an election at any point up until the fixed date for the election.

However, Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has to retain his prerogative to advise dissolution to allow for situations when the government loses the confidence of the House.

This is a fundamental principle of our system of responsible government.

Moreover, if the bill were to indicate that the Prime Minister could only advise dissolution in the event of a loss of confidence, it would have to define ‘confidence’ and the dissolution of the House of Commons would be justiciable in the courts – something that we certainly do not want.

Conclusion

Mr. Speaker, this bill providing for fixed date elections is long overdue in Canada.

In June, Ipsos-Reid released the results of a poll which showed that 78% of Canadians support the government’s plans to provide for fixed date elections.

You may know that the third week in October is already Citizenship Week in this country where we celebrate what it means to be Canadian citizens.

Of course, fundamental to being a Canadian citizen is our civic responsibilities, including our duty to vote.

It is fitting, then, that general election dates will be set for the third Monday in October.

This legislation will provide greater fairness, increased transparency and predictability, improved policy planning, increased voter turnout, and will help to attract the best qualified Canadians to public life.

I hope my colleagues on both sides of the House will join with me in supporting it and I look forward to the Bill’s speedy passage in the Senate.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.


tags
, , , ,, , , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, September 15, 2008

Rahim Worried


Sign, sign, everywhere a sign
Blockin' out the scenery, breakin' my mind
Do this, don't do that, can't you read the sign?

Signs Lyrics by Five Man Electrical Band

Week one of the hottest election contest in Edmonton. I am speaking of course of my riding Edmonton Strathcona where Linda Duncan of the NDP is running again against the incumbent Rahim (dolittle) Jaffer.

And is Rahim worried? You bet. In the past Rahim has waited to put up signs in front of houses, relying instead on his landlord business pals to put up big signs on their buildings.
But last week, he was out with lawn signs, as was Linda.

If the battle of the signs is any indication, this will be a close race.
Though as an old pal of mine once said; boulevards don't vote, belittling the impact of lawn signs in public space rather than in front of houses. A message that seems lost on the Liberal candidate Claudette Roy who has few lawn signs up in front of homes relying instead on littering the 99th St. hill with her signs.



Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
, , , , , , , , , , , ,

Elizabeth May Progressive au contraire

Contrary to the current political myth that Elizabeth May and her Green Party will take votes from the left, ie. the NDP in reality they are a right wing party, and will take votes from the Tories.


Tom Flanagan: Yes, the Greens are mainly a threat to the other parties of the left, especially the NDP. The Conservatives lost some supporters to the Greens at the time of the merger (2003), but that's ancient history now. Elizabeth May doesn't threaten Stephen Harper; she threatens Jack Layton and his attempt in this election to displace the Liberals as the Official Opposition.


May herself may want to focus on the environment, but her passion for putting her foot in her mouth will be challenged when she gets into the debates.

Like this little jewel which exposes her for being the good Catholic she really wants to be.....,

"I'm against abortion. I don't think a woman has a frivolous right to choose".


She has denied that she said 'frivolous' just like she has denied she has called Canadians 'stupid'.

The Youtube controversy was created by Blogging Tory founder Stephen Taylor, showing that the Conservatives are worried about the impact of May on their voters.

But backpeadling when your words are in print or on YouTube, further shows her lack of political maturity.

Now that she is in the leaders debate I frankily look forward to May sticking her foot in it again. And au contraire her impact will be greater on the Liberals and Conservatives more than it will hurt Jack Layton and the NDP.


See:

Green Party

Elizabeth May


Peter MacKay


Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
, , , , , , ,

, , , , , , ,


Friday, September 12, 2008

Yep I am Back

As you can tell from yesterdays posts I have returned! Aw shucks who could keep away from blogging especially after a week likethis one.

The Conservatives launched their elect Uncle Steve campaign, as in the old Soviet Uncle Joe campaign, showing their Man of Steel to be the kind cuddly family guy (like Peter from Family Guy). Leadership 08 is their their slogean.

Which then blew up in a flight of puffin feathers and communiations team suspensions that showed when Steve ain't the authoritariean strict father,Tory kids playing at politics in his war room get outta control.

So toss out 'the soft and colourful' sweaters and let the real Steve out. The angry man who called this election a year early cause he couldn't get his way in parliment.

The Tories have only just begun their neo-con social re-engineering of Canada with war mongering support of U.S. Imperialism, cuts to womens programs, cuts to arts and culture programs, attacks on Insite, privatization of Atomic Energy Canada, deregulation of Canadian Food Inspection, etc. They want the power to finish the job.

They have drooled and panted for an election since Dion became Liberal leader. And when he failed to bring them down they did the job themselves. Now that's leadership.



Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
, , ,, ,,

Thursday, September 11, 2008

Another Failed Surge

Stephen Harper's war is over. His surge has failed. He admits this
with his election declaration that Canada will leave Afghanistan in 2011. So for the next three years we can watch as more Canadians die in a futile counter-insurgency campaign.
Why not leave now. Why not move our forces to protect real development projects like schools, which non-military volunteers who are Canadian have been killed for creating, with no protection from their country.
The failure of the counter-insurgency is no better exposed then the death of the Vancouver volunteer who built a girls school and was murdered by the Taliban for his efforts.

See:

Schools In Afghanistan

Sir Robert Bond Idiot

Afghan Woman Speaks Out

The War For Women's Rights

Democracy In Afghanistan

Where Are The Women?

Afghanistan



Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
, , , , , , , , , , ,,, , , , , , , ,
, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Harper is a fruit


Out of the closet. The ultimate he man PM has admited he is a fruit, soft and colourful. Probably a peach of a guy. Yep like we didn't know that from last election when he dressed up as one of the Village People for the Calgary Stampede. Except his admission to being soft and colourful has not won him any friends in the gay community. Gay community united in stance against PM: poll

Green Shift Tax=GST

The green PM Brian Mulroney gave us the GST a tax on consumers, a regressive tax, one the Liberals promised to abolish but never got around to doing so. Stephne Dion and his Liberals now offer their of the GST with their Green Shift Tax. Again the average Canadian faces another Gouge and Screw Tax aimed at consumption rather than producers/production.
The Liberals new Green Shift is not green but it certainly is a shift, from taxing producers of greenhouse gases to those who consume the products.
In other words same old same old.
Brought to you by the folks who signed Kyoto but who had no plan to deal with it.
The Conservatives have no plan period, so this election anything they do is sheer opportunism; hence their diesel tax reduction. Which will not bring down the prices of your vegetables, furniture, or tropical fish, or anything else transported by truck.
The only party that is actually proposing a Green plan that meets the needs of capitalism is the NDP. New Zealand this week adopted a carbon cap and trade plan, Chicago has a cap and trade commodities market in place, Quebec supports cap and trade, and is creating its own market for it as well, hoping to use its hydro power as a carbon offset against the greenhouse gases produced by more inefficient coal powered utilities in Ontario and of course against the greenhouse gases produced in Alberta and the Wests rapidly expanding oil and gas fields.
Cap and Trade is the Kyoto solution for capitalism to address the climate crisis. Create a market place for trading emissions, make it a cost of doing business but market it based on an investment model.
Why the Liberals and Conservatives don't get this is simple because they fare old party's of the aristocracy and as much as they have adapted to bourgeoisie parlimentarism they fail to understand how capitalism functions. It sees a problem and it sees an investment opportunity. The Liberals and Conservatives being the old party's of the state only understand taxation not investment. They are lousy capitalists. Ironically for the libertarian ideologues of the free market it is the statist socialists who understand real world capitalism best.
The Whigs and Tories of old understood only taxation, they inherited their titles and their title to capital. With the rise of the workers movement there came the call to universal sufferage in Europe and these two old parties of the ruling classes of their day adapted. However what they did not adapt to was capitalism.
The new workers parties of Social Democracy on the other hand educated by Marx's Kapital knew of the the new world being born by their labour.
After 100 years of battle inthe parilments of capitalist democracy, honed through booms and busts and failed revolutions, they came to an post-modernist understanding in the ninties, in order to pose an alternative to the neo-con agenda of revival of 19th Century lazzie faire Austrian School economics
they needed a different social agenda. So they added eco to eco-nomics.
The Kyoto accord is not some socialist agenda to overthrow capitalism, despite its characterization as such by such neo-con mouthpieces as Stephen Harper, rather it is very much a 'market' solution to overproduction of emissions. And capitalists like it, they understand it, they endorse it which is why in states in the U.S. across Europe and around the world cap and trade is their prefered choice over carbon taxes.
But because business and its mouthpiece political party, the Conservatives, of all lands oppose carbon taxes does not mean that we as workers should support them. They are after all the most regressive form of tax that on consumption rather than production.
Nor should we be fooled that creating new stock markets based on cap and trade will actually have any real impact on the environment.
Rather we need to pose the one alternative to the crisis of capitalism and it's impact on our world, workers control of production. Nothing less will halt capitalisms ultimate entropy which is the climate crisis.




Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
, , , , ,
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
, , , , , , , ,

, , ,
, , , , , ,
,
, , , , ,
, , , ,
, , , , , ,
, , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, March 18, 2008

Spring Has Sprung 2

Well it is official spring has sprung earl. With the Liberals winning three of four by elections yesterday they are now gearing up for a spring election.

How do I know?

Well it could be that big honking
Claudette Roy Liberal Candidate for Edmonton Strathcona sign gracing the corner of 99th st. and Whyte Avenue over the launderette.

Or like pussy willows it could just be another sign of spring; the same sign was up last year too, same location.

Dion mum on election plans after byelection wins



tags
, , , , , ,
, ,




Thursday, November 08, 2007

Sask Election

It's not so much about the Saskatchewan Party winning as it is about the NDP election strategy that lost them the Election. You don't run an election based on messaging that now is not the time for change. Even the Tired Old Tories in Alberta know that. You run as the party that is for change especially when all the polling tells you that's what voters want.


Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
, ,, , , ,

Tuesday, November 06, 2007

Spring Election

This is why Stephen Harper likes closed meetings with his volk where the media isn't present. In case he blurts out his hidden agenda. In this case his plan for a surprise Spring Election.

In Castlegar, Harper put out the call for more Tory blue in B.C., even getting a bit ahead of himself in asking voters to support their local Tory candidate at the polls "next year."

He quickly corrected himself to say "next time."


Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
,

,
, ,

Tuesday, October 30, 2007

Liberals Favorite Tax Cut

The Liberals will support the Harpocrites mini-budget because it contains one of their favorite tax cuts.

"We certainly like the significant corporate tax cuts," Liberal Finance Critic John McCallum told CTV's Mike Duffy Live.



The image “http://www.ndp.ca/xfer/html/2007-10-12/LiberalWarningHeader-en.gif” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.



SEE:

How To Spend The Surplus

House Divided



Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
, , ,
,
,
, , ,

Wednesday, October 17, 2007

House Divided

The Liberals are saying that Canadians tell them they don't want an election. Actually its the Liberals who don't want an election. After all the past few days have been like the rest of Dion's year as leader, Annus Horribilis.

Stephane Dion remained undecided Tuesday whether to bring down the Harper government over its throne speech even as evidence mounted that his Liberal team - particularly in Quebec - is not ready to fight an election.

The Liberal leader lost both his Quebec lieutenant and the director general of the party's Quebec wing just hours before Prime Minister Stephen Harper unveiled the government's blueprint for the new session of Parliament.

More top Quebec Liberal officials quit party

With a federal election campaign possibly only days away, the federal Liberal party has just lost two of the key people responsible for ensuring it can fight a campaign in Quebec.

On Tuesday, former MP Serge Marcil resigned as the director-general of the party's Quebec wing, saying he has decided to take an attractive job offer in the private sector. While Quebec wing president Robert Fragasso agreed the timing was "very particular," he said Mr. Marcil is leaving the Quebec wing in good shape and there are a number of talented people who can replace him.

However, Mr. Marcil's departure leaves the Quebec wing without a director-general, just as the party is searching for a national director to replace Jamie Carroll, who quit amid controversy over remarks many members of the party's Quebec wing felt treated Quebec francophones as just another ethnic minority.

News of Mr. Marcil's departure came only 24 hours after Hull-Aylmer MP Marcel Proulx handed in his resignation as the Liberals' political lieutenant for Quebec. After MP Denis Coderre, a savvy veteran political organizer turned him down, Mr. Dion reached past his dozen Quebec MPs and into the Senate to name Celine Hervieux-Payette, one of the few caucus members who supported his leadership bid, as his new Quebec lieutenant.

However, her Senate colleague, Liberal party president Marie Poulin, was nowhere to be found on Tuesday.

While her office refused to comment, confirming only she was not going to be present for the reading of the speech from the throne, sources said Ms. Poulin is vacationing in Bermuda.

Ex-Dion adviser is now the Prime Minister's secret weapon

Mark Cameron knows the inner workings of Stéphane Dion's brain, and now he is one of Stephen Harper's most trusted advisers.

In the unique position of having served Mr. Dion and now the Prime Minister, Mr. Cameron recently joked that if the Conservatives lose the next election and the Liberals win, he could just stay in the PMO and no one would notice.

Chrétien's book revives spectre of house divided
Pollster says former prime minister's memoir could undermine Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion

Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion could find that his old boss, Jean Chrétien, is more trouble than any Conservative attack ads, according to pollster Nik Nanos.

By reigniting his old feud with Paul Martin, his successor, in his new book, Chrétien could do some serious damage to the Liberals, Nanos says.

"The Liberal brand has been able to effectively weather the image storm outside of Quebec," Nanos said yesterday. "Even with Stéphane Dion's rough ride, the Grits are still very competitive in Ontario and urban Canada. However, if a narrative emerges that the Liberals are a house divided, that would be potentially more damaging than any attack ad on Dion."

Harper vs. Dion: A battle of the bland

A new poll suggests the next federal election won't exactly be a battle of towering personalities.

Both Tory Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Liberal Leader Stephane Dion have a "charisma deficit" among voters, according to the Canadian Press Harris-Decima poll.

The good news for Harper is that while his personality is deemed a weakness by 41% -- among voters of both sexes and almost every age group -- Dion fares even worse.

Half deem Dion's personality as a weakness.

And while 38% consider Harper's personality an asset, just 19% feel that way about Dion.

The natural governing party is a house divided. Which means this is the best time for an election for the Conservatives and NDP.

The image “http://www.ndp.ca/xfer/html/2007-10-12/LiberalWarningHeader-en.gif” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.

SEE

Adscam Aftershock

Denis Lebel Nationalist

Sept. 11 for Dion

Politics is Local

Quebec By-elections

Rudderless Liberals

Liberal Flap

Ouch

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
, ,

,
, , ,

Tuesday, October 02, 2007

LiberalTory Surplus Story

So the Throne Speech will be a Budget Speech. The new-con men; Harper's Neo-Con Government are preparing for a confidence vote. The only way they can bring themselves down.


Fresh from closing the books on last year's massive $13.8 billion surplus - about four billion more than it had recently predicted - the department said Friday that already in the first four months of this year it was operating on a $7.8 billion surplus, about one billion more than last year's monster haul for the same period.

Despite announced spending increases in the March federal budget, fiscal analysts have been watching with mild surprise as the surplus built up in government coffers month by month since April.

The new surplus was accumulating even though program spending rose by $3.7 billion during the first third of the year on higher transfer payments and increased expenses for such things as the war in Afghanistan.

But budgetary revenues also rose significantly by $4.9 billion, spurred on by higher tax receipts from corporations and individuals.

And July saw another $1.4 billion added as money continued to flow into Ottawa faster than the government can spend it.

"Wow," reacted John Williamson of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation. "This is feeling little like the atmosphere we had prior to the Liberals rolling out their five-year tax cut plan that began in 2000.

The calls for broad-based tax relief, particularly from the corporate sector, grew louder yesterday as the federal government disclosed its surplus for the first four months of the current budget year, at $7.8-billion, is on pace to become the largest federal windfall in the country's history.

The total is nearly three times what it projected for 2007-08 and more than halfway to the $14.2-billion windfall recorded for 2006-07, which the government unveiled this week.

Assuming spending and the rate of tax revenue growth remain as they are, the surplus is headed toward $23-billion -- which would make it the highest on record, surpassing the $19.9-billion set in 2000-01.

"All the stars are aligning for the federal government to unleash some stimulus -- if not in next year's budget, then before," said Douglas Porter, deputy chief economist at BMO Capital Markets.

"The confluence of events we have here is that there is pressure on the economy from the currency and the credit crunch; we have surplus numbers well above last year's lofty levels; and we have an election possibly looming."

He said the scenario was reminiscent of the fall of 2000, when the former Liberal government unveiled a $100-billion tax-cut package in an early mini-budget. Weeks later, an election was called, and the Liberals secured a third consecutive majority government.

For the four-month period ended July 31, the $7.8-billion surplus represents an increase of 15%, or just over $1-billion, compared with the same time last year. Corporate tax revenue climbed 25%, while revenue from personal taxes gained 3.5%, to $37.7-billion. On the whole, revenue for Ottawa increased 6.5%, to $80.5-billion.


The stars are aligning for Harper with a few clouds gathering. A budget speech means the government can fall, bets are increasing for a fall/winter election. Place your wagers now.

Harper pledges $725-million in tax cut

Harper's team gears up for election

Liberals ready for election, adviser says

And Harper uses his executive authority to pay down the countries debt, Alberta style, despite previously calling for parliamentary oversight. But then he was leader of the opposition and had to say that. Yeah right. $14 billion gets ya less than a billion in tax cuts. Peanuts.

The national debt now stands at $467 billion.

And speaking of peanuts,this surplus, shows that $1 billion in program cuts made last year, and those now pending in the Department of Environment, were not needed. They were purely for partisan political purposes.


With all the ceremony of an election stump speech, Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced Thursday that a $13.8-billion surplus - one which exceeded the federal government's own projections - has gone towards paying down the debt.

The move is an interesting role reversal for Harper, considering how loudly the Conservatives used to crow from the opposition benches when the previous Liberal government delivered massive surplus after massive surplus.

But when asked about the difference, Harper replied like a man headed to the polls: Liberals tax to spend, while Conservatives tax to put the fiscal house in order.

Despite that stance, echoed by Finance Minister Jim Flaherty as he fielded questions following Harper's quick exit, critics weren't impressed.

NDP Leader Jack Layton this week questioned the wisdom of using the surplus to pay down the national debt, suggesting that the government's failure to adequately fund social programs and infrastructure while swimming in dough makes it less likely his party would prop up the minority government.

Liberal finance critic John McCallum said the party's position on surpluses would be made clear when it releases its election platform, but noted that in the past Liberals have favoured a splitting the "surprise" windfalls between tax cuts, new spending and debt repayment.

"The lessons I draw from this is that there was certainly no need to raise the income tax rate and no need to cut the most vulnerable people, like women's groups, literacy programs and museums," he added. In the first Flaherty budget, the Conservatives reversed former Prime Minister Paul Martin's half-point reduction in the lowest income tax bracket in order to pay for a cut to the GST tax.

Paying down the debt Alberta style, meant that while Ralph Klein could symbolically burn the provincial mortgage, declaring Alberta debt free, the province was a mess.

Ralph Klein says provincial debt is dead.

On July 13, 2004, Premier Ralph Klein announced that Alberta was the only debt-free province in Canada. It had owed $23 billion when he took office in 1992

In order to pay down the debt it deferred much needed infrastructure funding, had unfunded pension liabilities, contracted out services and cut staff. Now in order to play catch up by funding infrastructure and services, and paying off pension liabilities, the costs are skyrocketing in an overheated economy. Causing the current treasurer to cry gloom and doom, hinting at future debt and deficits.

Paying down the debt is an illusion, it sounds good but it is unsound economics.

Like cuts to the GST rather than its elimination.

At least one neo-con press pundit, from Calgary of course, has claimed that Harpers good fortune economically has less to do with the belt tightening cuts made by then Finance Minister Paul Martin, than to the long term wisdom of Brian Mulroney.

No seriously, the man who left Canada in a debt and deficit crisis should be thanked for introducing NAFTA which she says is now paying off. Sure in sales of Canadian iconic industries to foreign capital and our link to the declining credit market.

Actually paying down the debt was Federal Liberal policy, and the debt reduction act was adopted under PM Paul Martin, one which was modeled on Ralph's. The Harpocrites are merely following through, well actually pushing through debt reduction as a priority. It is after all a policy of theirs since they were the Reform Party,created in those halcyon days of the debt and deficit bugaboo.

Meanwhile the rising dollar has offset the immediate impact that the credit market meltdown has had. And the surplus gives the illusion all is well in the marketplace.

One fly in the ointment is that the Canadian economy has yet to feel the full brunt of a credit crisis, which first surfaced in August and could result in fewer revenues for the government. But few expect that a mild economic downturn will do more than slow down the flow of cash from taxpayers.

But the inevitable storm clouds are gathering, despite the voluntary efforts of another Tory right winger; Purdy Crawford point man for Canada's big banks and credit unions.And despite viewing the melt down with rosy glasses for the past two months, David Dodge, finally had to bite the bullet Friday.


The Bank of Canada injected almost $1-billion into money markets yesterday, a stark reminder that all is not right in Canada's credit market.

Just two days after Bank of Canada Governor David Dodge declared that "the overnight market is now well on its way back to normal operations in Canada," the bank found itself having to defend its key interest rate with one of its largest cash injections to date.

The central bank also increased the amount that it leaves in its settlement system to allow for easy money transfers between banks. It has set aside $300-million, instead of the $150-million target of the past few weeks, and the $25-million during normal market conditions.



Something is definitely amiss in Canada's money markets.

The Bank of Canada, for the third business day in a row, injected about $1-billion into the overnight market to defend its key interest rate.

A bank spokesman said the liquidity provision was simply a technical move, a normal quarter-end demand for more cash.

But for the Bank of Canada's monetary policy to work properly, it's not enough to just defend the overnight rate. That rate needs to act as a benchmark for the short-term borrowing rates that corporations, home buyers and consumers pay.

That bail out was announced the same day that the second budget surplus was declared. And since paying down the debt results not in any real economic savings for Canadians simply a better credit rating, it is ironic that it could be wiped out in a credit market melt down.

But the Canadian economy is facing difficulties other than the strong loonie and the risk of a protracted U.S. slowdown, Mr. Hall said.

New elements in play have led the Bank of Canada to adopt a neutral approach to interest rates, Mr. Hall said. Those factors include the implicit tightening as a result of the widening of credit spreads and a reduction of liquidity as banks reverse a process in which they could push loans off their books by securitization. "It will take time for these effects to be felt," Mr. Hall said.

The freeze-up in the Canadian asset-backed commercial paper markets along with the rise in the Canadian dollar will make this Friday's release of the Bank of Canada's quarterly business outlook survey an important report, said David Wolf, economist and strategist for Merrill Lynch Canada Inc.

Government can only effectively pay down the debt when they have the secure asset base to do it. That is your infrastructure is paid for.

Instead of paying down the debt, the government needs to expand investment in its assets, not selling them off. Infrastructure needs investment which the Harpocrites deny since it runs counter to their neo-con monetarist policy.

Debt reduction only works if you have no liabilities, such as infrastructure. And to show exactly how hidebound the government is, they would rather have parliament literally fall down around their ears than abandon their neo-con ideology.

“Paying down the debt” means “reducing the public’s supply of T-bonds.” In other words, it means “reducing the public’s net financial wealth”

When the public’s T-bond supply gets too low, it puts a damper on the money creation process. And, as we saw in article 1 of this series, when new money is not created at a sufficient pace (or worse, when the money supply contracts), it results in economic stagnation or contraction. To me, that goes a long way to explaining our dubious history of paying down the debt.

As we reviewed in article 1, inflation is caused by too much money deflation is caused by too little money. But T-bonds are not money, they are merely “proto-money.” Because of that, and because it takes money to create inflation, it follows that increasing the public’s T-bond supply does not cause inflation. Let me say that another way: Deficits do not cause inflation, because deficit spending is the process of increasing the T-bond supply, not the money supply. Monetary policy causes inflation or deflation; fiscal policy does not.



Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,