THIS MAGAZINE: BECAUSE EVERTHING IS POLITICAL

Search for:

• FEATURES
• THIS & THAT
• ARTS & IDEAS
• FICTION & POETRY
• LETTERS
• BLOG THIS
•  
• SUBSCRIBE
• BACK ISSUES
• SUPPORT THIS
•  
• ABOUT THIS
• CONTRIBUTORS
• CONTACT THIS
• ADVERTISE
• SITE MAP

Home » Blog This

October 18, 2008

election comedy

Posted by Daniel Tseghay at 02:55 PM ET | Comments (0)

Jon Stewart of the Daily Show had a funny bit on the Canadian election, noting why Stephane Dion might have not won this year. Check it out:

More entries on: Election 2008

October 17, 2008

Alternate reality

Posted by Melissa Wilson at 11:54 AM ET | Comments (0)

It's been three days since the de ja vu election and I, like many Canadians, have been walking around in a bit of a daze wondering what happened on Tuesday. Are we really in the same place we were before? Did we really just spent $300 million to shuffle around a dozen or so seats? In the age where so many Canadians attend post-secondary school and access to information and education is essentially instantaneous via the internet, did we really in 2008 see the lowest voter turnout on record?

I'm having a hard time believing all of it, so here's a little alternate reality for you: What would happen if, instead of forcing curmudgeonly old-timers and bored boomers to the polls each time, we let teenagers decide our fate? It may sound a little crazy, but think about it for a second.

In the days and weeks preceding the gigantic waste of time and money that was October 14, 2008, more than 4,000 schools across Canada were preparing for a round of mock elections organized by the non-partisan Student Vote. Youngins from Nova Scotia to B.C. cast their ballots and here were the results:

Conservative Party of Canada
100 seats - 26.8% of popular vote

New Democratic Party of Canada
66 seats - 23.7% of popular vote

Liberal Party of Canada
54 seats - 19.3%

Green Party of Canada
44 seats - 25% of popular vote

Bloc Quebecois
24 seats - 1.1% of popular vote

The eerie thing is that the results don't differ too drastically. There's still a Conservative minority and there's still a disproportionate number of seats for certain parties, further illustrating the problems with a "first-past-the-post" electoral system. But in the alternate reality results, the NDP and the Green Party have, collectively, the same number of seats as the Tories, giving them the opportunity to exert some serious pull when it comes to the environmental and social issues that Harper has been ignoring.

We might have gotten our arts funding back.

On the other hand, there's also the fact that, as a friend of mine pointed out, many students aren't as properly educated about party platforms as they should be in order to vote. I'd go on to say, however, that many (most?) adults wouldn't know where to find platforms even if they wanted to read them. Who knows what would have happened if every vote came from an individual (child or adult) that was fully educated on each issue. A Green Party majority? Probably not, but given the embarrassing voter (59 percent!) turnout this election, we'll probably never know.

But, there is at least one shining hope for any future Canadian elections. Four times more schools participated in Student Vote this year than during the 2006 election, totalling about 400,000 students. Educated or not, this means the potential for four times more students graduating with a yearning to vote than in years past.

As a relative youngin myself, I'm still waiting for the day when the youth of Canada shed their bad rap and actually give a crap about who's running their country. Maybe next time.

In the meantime, if you're unhappy with the turn your riding took this election, why not check out who might have been elected had you handed the power off to a bunch of kids. If you're living in Central Nova, you'd have said goodbye to Peter McKay, as Elizabeth May took the seat in a landslide. If you're living in my home riding of Toronto Centre, you'd be be cozying up with Johan Boyden of the Communist Party of Canada.

More entries on: Election 2008

October 15, 2008

The election that wasn't

Posted by Graham F. Scott at 03:01 PM ET | Comments (0)

The Canadian federal election of 2008 slouched to its ignominious end last night. Having blogged about it here over the last five weeks, we can say several things:

1. It didn't produce a strikingly different parliament and we could have all saved ourselves the time and money;
2. None of the parties experienced much of a victory or a defeat;
3. It was kind of dull.

Which isn't much to show for five weeks of campaigning. Especially considering that it had the potential to be one of the most ideologically heated elections in decades. Between worldwide economic collapse, an unprecedented electoral preoccupation with hot-potato arts funding, the entry of the Green Party into the debates and the Liberal party's choice to campaign on its dud "green shift" platform, and the ballooning cost of the Afghan war, there was plenty of material over which the parties could engage meaningfully.

Instead we got jokes about sweater vests and animated shitting puffins. We all responded with a resounding yawn: the number of eligible voters who actually bothered to go to the ballot box plunged to a new low of just 58 percent.

The electorate's apathy in this election could be chalked up to any number of things: uninspiring leaders, boredom with the same old platforms and policies, exhaustion after several years of minority governments and frequent elections, dissatisfaction with the First-Past-The-Post system, and so on. That last point is the one that, for me and many others, emerged as the theme of this election.

Our parliamentary representation is divorced from reality. That became very clear as the numbers rolled in yesterday. The Bloc Québecois received less than 10 percent of the popular vote and gets 50 seats; the Green party receives almost seven percent of the popular vote and receives none. The NDP receives almost twice as many votes as the Bloc but ends up with a third as many seats.

If this was a method of choosing contestants on Canadian Idol, it would be denounced as corrupt and quickly scrapped, but apparently it's just fine for choosing the government of our fine dominion.

The frustration that hundreds of thousands of Canadians feel about this is obvious: the vote-swapping groups on Facebook and the strategic voting sites like voteforenvironment.ca and anyonebutharper.ca are symptoms of a deeper dissatisfaction with how this country is governed. Millions of votes are ignored under this system, and it disenfranchises people who actually take the time to vote — a dwindling population, and no wonder.

Proportional representation works in dozens of modern democracies around the world. It's time for Canada's election system to grow up and adopt a PR electoral system. This issue cuts to the heart of Canadian democracy, and we should be demanding that it be at the top of every party's to-do list when the next election rolls around — which, at this rate, could be any minute now.

More entries on: Election 2008

October 14, 2008

A final hearing

Posted by Daniel Tseghay at 05:07 PM ET | Comments (1)

The Toronto Star today published short pieces written by four of the national leaders: Stephen Harper, Stephane Dion, Jack Layton, and Elizabeth May. There essays included specific proposals, broadsides against other leaders, and some evocative language.

Both Harper and Dion used the word "strong" in one form or another, and often. Harper used it three times, saying "Canada now has the strongest economy in the G7"; insisting on your vote because of his "strong support for families"; and concluding that he will ensure Canada remains "strong, united, independent and free." In his first sentence, Dion asks if Canada has "grown stronger under the Harper Conservatives?". He also litters one sentence with the word, saying: "Only the Liberal Party offers the combination of a strong record as economic managers, a strong team of experienced men and women ready to take action on Day 1, and a strong plan for Canada's future."

Layton surprised me when he used the word not once. But he did use another one of his catch-phrases: evoking the mythical "kitchen-table" and asserting that Harper does not care about the concerns of people who make their decisions there.

May was increadibly vague and lofty in her essay. She wrote of representative democracy's history in North America and the moral obligation to political engagement, only mentioning her actual proposals in the penultimate paragraph. She doesn't exactly have Barack Obama's gift for expression, so I suggest she sticks to more concrete discussions in the future.

Harper wrote of his party's economic prudence. He wants to convince us he can do a good job of handling the current economic situation. For that end, he criticized Dion's carbon tax for being expensive and, therefore, very untimely. Dion, in turn, did not forget to include Harper's comment that the economic downdraft was the right time to buy stocks, effectively painting Harper as insensitive and unprepared to handle the problem. Naturally, Layton criticized Harper, but he also had some words for Dion. He called the carbon tax unfair and pointed out the fact that Dion voted along with the Conservatives 43 times as Opposition leader. Layton wants us to believe that he, unlike Dion, can truly fulfill the obligations of the official Opposition party's leader. If not the government's leader.

And that's what we all want to know. Who will best fulfill the role of Prime Minister today? We will not have a conclusive answer to that question anytime soon, but we will know who the nation elected to be Prime Minister by the end of this evening.

More entries on: Election 2008

THIS Magazine liveblogs the Canadian Federal election results

Posted by Graham F. Scott at 12:20 PM ET | Comments (5)

Today's the big day! People seemed to like the liveblogs we did of the two federal election debates, and so we'll go for the hat-trick by blogging the election results this evening.

In case you didn't see the invitation we posted on the blog below, or the Facebook invitation, we're having an election-watch party tonight, and we'll be blogging from there with friends, food, and drink. Come on by if you're able.

On to the main event, and remember, you can comment in real-time by logging in to ScribbleLive here.

More entries on: Election 2008

October 11, 2008

Yet another weekly recap, folks

Posted by Melissa Wilson at 04:22 PM ET | Comments (0)

Other than the Tories finally releasing their platform, it's been a slow week for bloggers and newsies alike, so if you're like me and suffering from a serious case of election fatigue, here's a lightning-fast recap on the week's (arguably pretty slow) happenings:

Monday: Orphan voters are left out in the cold while a group of renegade Canadian musicians advocate strategic voting to keep Harper out of office.

Tuesday: Conservative platform day! Huzzah!

Wednesday: The potential of a coalition government to wreak havoc if Harper wins a minority and a pop quiz to see how well you know your candidates.

Thursday: More musing on strategic voting and the answers to Wednesday's quiz.

Friday: A formerly glossed-over issue, HIV/AIDS, picks up a little steam in the election.

And finally, a bit of entertainment to hold you over until Monday. The Hour's George Stroumboulopoulos has launched a campaign to lure Stephen Harper into coming on the show before the election that is full of bribery, threats and hilarity.

See the rest of Strombo's efforts here.

More entries on: Election 2008

October 10, 2008

Lend a hand this election day

Posted by Dominique Jarry-Shore at 02:46 PM ET | Comments (3)

With four days to go, the rhetoric is heating up. Here in Quebec two Green Party candidates have told their constituents to vote Liberal because they (the Greens) have no chance of winning in their riding anyway. Of course, they neglected to check with their party leader first. I'd love to have heard the conversation between the two candidates and Elizabeth May when she got wind of their plan.

But one thing I really didn't want to hear were Stephane Dion's false starts to a muddled question on ATV (an affiliate of CTV). Dion was assured the flubs wouldn't be broadcast. Imagine his surprise when he saw them aired. Journalists are now officially considered pond scum -- and who knows, this whole thing may even get Dion a whole lot of sympathy votes.

So, to counter the nastiness -- and in the spirit of all that is good -- I have a suggestion: help someone vote on Tuesday. Lend a hand (in a non-partisan fashion... or not) to help someone who will have trouble getting to the polling station on Tuesday.

It's the perfect way to end this nasty, drawn out election on a positive note.

More entries on: Election 2008

Parties speak out about a forgotten issue

Posted by Melissa Wilson at 10:38 AM ET | Comments (1)

According to 2005 estimates from the Public Health Agency of Canada, some 58,000 Canadians are living with HIV, and about a quarter of those are unaware of their condition.

I was surprised to learn the numbers were that high, and apparently, so were the five party leaders. Four of the five federal party platforms (the Green Party being the exception) have produced no plans to put money towards AIDS research, prevention, education or treatment in Canada. (Though, both the NDP and the Liberal platforms have vague mentions of plans to help solve the AIDS crisis in developing countries.)

According to an article in the Toronto Star today, over the last two years Harper's Conservatives have scuppered nearly $21 million in federal AIDS funding. The 2004 federal government moved to double funding from $42.2 million to $84.4 million by 2008/2009, but much like the national day care program, once Harper got his hands on the plan, things turned out quite differently.

The Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network asked seven questions of the five parties as to what they would do for the HIV/AIDS community if elected next Tuesday. All but one party responded (I'll give you one guess...).

The whole report can be downloaded in PDF form here, but here's a quick recap of how four leaders responded to the first question: Will your party increase funding for Canadian and international research on HIV prevention technologies, including microbicides and vaccines?

The Bloc Québécois
The Bloc proposes that Ottawa "substantially increase its budget allocations for basic reseach," and comments on the fact that the Quebec provincial government already provides resources for the fight against AIDS, and suggests that any extra funding provided by Ottawa should be paid directly to the provinces to allow them to strengthen their own health care systems.

The Greens
The Green Party supports increased funding for research on prevention technologies and believes that the costs will pay for themselves in the long run by "reducing reducing long-term treatment costs and improving the productivity of future generations."

The Liberals
Camp Dion proposes a comprehensive approach that focuses on prevention, care, treatment and provide funding for the research on prevention technologies.

The New Democrats
The NDP insists that "prevention must be the cornerstone of any effective HIV/AIDS strategy" and says that a New Democratic government will ensure that federal support for prevention research is "pegged at the highest priority."

Really, they're all saying pretty much the same thing, which is fine. What I am more concerned about is the party that isn't saying anything at all.

More entries on: Election 2008

October 09, 2008

Voting angst

Posted by Dominique Jarry-Shore at 12:32 PM ET | Comments (1)

During an election a few years ago I suggested that my mother vote for the NDP. "Why would I vote for them?" she asked me. "They're not going to win!"

Wanting to vote for the winning candidate instead of the one you believe in, is just one of the ways the results of our flawed electoral system can be skewed. And even though I've always "voted with my heart," this is the first election I've seriously considered strategic voting.

I wanted to see if strategic voting could be the tipping factor for me of one party over another since I still haven't decided who I'm voting for. On voteforenvironment.ca I punched in my postal code and was told I could "vote with my heart" since in my riding, the race is between the Liberal's and the Bloc -- both environmentally-friendly (read: not Conservative). In other words, my vote doesn't really count anyway, so I can vote for whomever I want.

It's dangerous territory when people start to feel their votes don't count -- and a signal of the need for change.

More entries on: Election 2008

Answers to Yesterday's Quiz

Posted by Lindsay Kneteman at 07:48 AM ET | Comments (0)

Yesterday I posted a short quiz to test your knowledge on what the five major parties' have been telling us over the past five weeks. Below are the answers to that quiz. How did you do?

1. Which party has promised to roll back taxes income trusts?
The Liberals.

2. Which party wants to bring in proportional representation?
The NDP.

3. Which party is aiming to have a federal debt to GDP ratio of 25 percent by 2011-2012?
The Greens.

4. Which party has previously spent $300 million to help protect women from cervical cancer?
The Conservatives.

5. Which party plans to take on spammers who collect personal info under false pretences or for illegal purposes?
The Conservatives (page 8).

6. Which party would invest $1 billion to make Canada's manufacturing sector greener and more competitive?
The Liberals.

7. Which party wants to limit income tax for those earning less than $20,000?
The Greens (page 7).

8. Which party plans on eliminating the GST on books?
The Bloc Quebecois (page 13).

9. Which party wants to spend $50 million to boost our country's slaughterhouse capacity?
The Conservatives (page 23).

10. Which party has mentioned allowing people without status who are currently in Canada the chance to apply for legal status?
The NDP.

More entries on: Election 2008

October 08, 2008

Can the Conservatives be defeated by a coaltion of parties? Doubt it.

Posted by Daniel Tseghay at 05:10 PM ET | Comments (2)

Judy Rebick's piece in today's Globe and Mail raises the troubling possibility that this election will not be democratic. For it to be democratic, the thoughts and feelings of Canadians would have to be represented by their government. "More than two-thirds of Canadians", Rebick says, support "strong action on climate change; government intervention to create jobs and defend ordinary Canadians against the impact of the global economic crisis; an end to the war in Afghanistan; public support for the arts; implementation of at least the Kelowna Accord to raise the standard of living for aboriginal people; and a national child-care program that includes the creation of thousands of new child-care spaces." And still, the Conservatives may just eke out a win, even a majority. How representative would that be?

Her suggestion is that the Liberal Party, the NDP, the Green Party, and the Bloc Quebecois establish an alliance in the event of a Conservative minority government. As a majority-of-minorities they can overwhelm the Conservatives with their concerted effort to push progressive policies.

I like the sentiment behind this proposed tactic: it would be nice to see our representatives cast differences aside for the greater good. But things might not work out as smoothly as Rebick hopes. She describes the events unfolding like this: "With such agreement, they can defeat the government and go to the Governor-General with an offer to form a new government. They don't have to agree on everything, and they don't need to form a full coalition government. They just have to agree on some key points, and whoever has the most seats can form the government with a written promise to bring in the policies agreed on."

Well and good. But I can't help but think this is a little idealistic. This sounds a lot like the power-sharing of proportional representation and we've seen how that's worked in other countries. In Italy, for example, the Prime Minister's office has been occupied 37 times, sometimes by the same man, like the the current PM, Silvio Berlusconi, who is serving his third and inconsecutive term. It's the constant coaltion-building and power-sharing that causes all this instability. Alliances of parties that are still, let's not forget, in competition with one another are inherently unstable. The various parties in Italy simply realized they have as good a reason to dissent from even the most noble coaltion as they do to cooperate.

Canadian political parties are not above all that, in my opinion.

More entries on: Election 2008

Dancing in the Streets to the Parties' Economic Platforms

Posted by Robert Near at 05:00 PM ET | Comments (0)

Harper's enemies are dancing in the proverbial street today because the polls continue to show that he's going down on October 14th. Yay! Whooo! Oh wait, his downfall is due to a similar slide in the stock market and housing prices. Hrm. That's not that good. Is it time to celebrate?

Yes it is, says Margaret Atwood in The Globe and Mail, because a Conservative majority would wreak untold terror in this country. The Tyee claims a similar point: our potential housing bubble is Flaherty and Harper's deregulating fault and should they stay in power the downturn will only get worse. On the other side of the debate is Andrew Coyne, who argues that, hey, we're in a bit of a temporary economic jam here, not a depression and Canadians should realize that markets rise and fall. No one seems to to agree on the current state of the economy.

But supposing we are in for a recession, what will the new governing party do about it? Time for some policy perusing - here are all the major parties economic policy plans:

Liberal's A Richer Canada

Conservative's A True Strong North and Free

NDP's Making Life More Affordable for Families – Creating Jobs

The Green Party's The Green Economy

More entries on: Election 2008

Quiz Time

Posted by Lindsay Kneteman at 08:57 AM ET | Comments (1)

It's time to test your knowledge on the 2008 federal election. Below are 10 questions with the answer to each question being the name of one of the five major parties. See how many you can figure out and then check back tomorrow for the answers.

1. Which party has promised to roll back taxes income trusts?

2. Which party wants to bring in proportional representation?

3. Which party is aiming to have a federal debt to GDP ratio of 25 percent by 2011-2012?

4. Which party plans on spending $300 million to help protect women from cervical cancer?

5. Which party has discussed taking on spammers who collect personal info under false pretences or for illegal purposes?

6. Which party would invest $1 billion to make Canada's manufacturing sector greener and more competitive?

7. Which party has promised to limit income tax for those earning less than $20,000?

8. Which party plans on eliminating the GST on books?

9. Which party wants to spend $50 million to boost our country's slaughterhouse capacity?

10. Which party has mentioned allowing people without status who are currently in Canada the chance to apply for legal status?

More entries on: Election 2008

October 06, 2008

You Have A Choice: Stop Being an Orphan Voter

Posted by Robert Near at 01:00 PM ET | Comments (0)

A few days ago, Avaaz.ca released a song, "You Have A Choice", a catchy ditty about how you can stop a Harper majority through strategic voting. To save the world from escalating temperatures due to the mass release of greenhouse gases (GHG), one should vote for the candidate most likely to defeat the Conservatives.

Um, ok. In my riding, Trinity-Spadina in downtown Toronto, that would be any party except the Marxist-Leninist Party of Canada and the Canadian Action Party.

Too much choice, perhaps, but then again, not enough - what if I wanted to vote for the Conservatives? What if I thought a reduction of GHG gases by 20% from 2006 to 2020 was a great idea? I would have little choice.

Just as another of our columnists felt lost in the Conservative wilderness of Alberta, so too do many people whose riding is a long-held party bastion. Wanting to vote one way, but resigned to the fact that if they did, it would simply be an academic exercise.

Fair Vote Canada calls these people Orphan Voters. It's set up a website detailing why there are so many orphan voters and how to best stop them from recurring. It's mildly provocative, but concise, clear and timely.

More entries on: Election 2008

What have you got up your sleeve, Steve?

Posted by Melissa Wilson at 09:39 AM ET | Comments (2)

After being mercilessly ridiculed at last week's leadership debates for not having released a party platform, Stephen Harper is apparently planning to unveil his master plan tomorrow.

Based on the past four-odd weeks of campaigning, here are my predictions for what the Tory 2008 Platform will promise:

For families
- Parents will continue to receive $100 monthly cheques for their little ones, which will come in handy when they have to quit their jobs to take care of their children due to a lack of available day care space.
- Parents will receive a tax credit for putting their children in artistic activities, which will be awesome until those children grow up and can't get any federal funding for the arts.
- Stricter regulations for marketing tobacco items to kids. (This, I fully support, though I admit I'll miss my Popeye cigarettes if Harper does away with them.)
- Self-employed men and women will be able to opt in to EI premiums, and therefore take advantage of maternal and paternal leave after having a child.

For the economy
- Harper will continue to insist that nothing is wrong, and nothing will go wrong. I expect his platform to reveal plans to erect a giant bubble over Canada to emphasize that we are not the United States.
- Help for first-time home buyers in the form of a $5,000 tax credit to go towards closing costs
- $24 million for the development of cruise destinations along the St. Lawrence. (Seriously?)

What do you predict will come out of the grand unveiling of the Conservative party platform?

More entries on: Election 2008

October 03, 2008

This blog has seven days

Posted by Dominique Jarry-Shore at 08:15 PM ET | Comments (0)

Here's a quick recap of the topics blogged about this week, in what has been a very busy five days:

On Monday The NDP finally released their platform, and The Political Compass helped us situate the five parties (turns out the Green party are right wing authoritarians -- Just kidding. Sort of.)
On Tuesday We got the low-down on a debate in Kensington market where the Conservative candidate was conspicuously absent.
On Wednesday Harper's pledge to stop exporting bitumen was analyzed and exposed as an empty promise, advance polls were promoted, we were pointed to an article helpful in cutting through the rhetoric of environmental policy, the French leader's debate was liveblogged, and Canada's foreign policy (or lack thereof) was questioned.
On Thursday We were asked if we care whether or not our candidates live in our ridings, told that some Tory candidates are refusing to show up for debates or speak to reporters, and treated to the liveblogging of the English leader's debate where important questions such as 'what is Stephen Harper hiding under his hair?' were raised.
On Friday Everybody was urged to vote, especially those of us born before 1984.

More entries on: Election 2008

Get off your ass and vote on October 14

Posted by Melissa Wilson at 10:20 AM ET | Comments (1)

I'm still recovering from keeping up with the antics of last night's leadership debate ("Where are you hiding your platform?" Layton prodded Harper. "Under the sweater?" Just one of the many, many highlights from last night's festivities, which can be viewed at CBC online.) so for today I'm going to take a break from policy and propaganda and focus on something else.

It's no secret that less than two-thirds of Canadians of voting age will be hitting the polls on October 14th, and as shameful as that is, the Toronto Star reported today that less than a quarter of youth under 25 vote. When it comes to those who just reached the age of majority, the numbers drop even lower.

That is over two million people that could be voting that are not. That could make or break the election. That could push Dion or Layton into the PMO or push Harper into a majority government. Whether you're lazy, uninformed or just planning on falling into a turkey coma, get out there and vote.

If you don't want to pull on your turkey pants and venture out the day after Thanksgiving (which also happens to be a Jewish holiday), then don't. Vote today. Or tomorrow. Or Monday.

The Young Greens of Canada are calling today, the first day of advance polls (October 4 and 6, also), Youth Voter Day 2008. Check out the website for solid instructions on how to vote quickly and easily. If you're a student living away from home, you don't have to worry about trekking it back, you can simply vote where you're living now (residence, student ghetto, whatever.)

But before you do that, go and educate yourself on what each party is promising (or, in Harper's case, not promising) and then just do it.

Then again, I'm just one little person hiding behind an online handle. Don't want to listen to me? I wouldn't want to listen to me either, so here are some celebrities advocating the vote, after the jump.

Granted, these are all regarding the American election, but they still serve a pretty good purpose.

Check out Michael Moore's new movie, Slacker Uprising, which follows the filmmaker as he tries to inspire university and college students to vote in the 2004 election. You can download it for free, too.

Here's Leonardo DiCaprio urging you to vote by using some reverse psychology. Ohhh...tricky.

For those of you that don't care about washed up actors, here's Florida punk band Against Me! telling you to vote:

And finally, Christina Aguilera's spot for Rock the Vote. She's pretty hot, right? Do what she says.

More entries on: Election 2008

October 02, 2008

This Magazine liveblogs the October 2 English-language leaders' debate

Posted by Graham F. Scott at 04:55 PM ET | Comments (1)

And here we go again: Dominique Jarry Shore's great liveblog of the French-language federal leadership debate last night was such a success, we're doing it again!

Tonight, This Magazine editor Graham F. Scott and This Election Blog Squad^TM member Melissa Wilson will be doing the full rundown of the debate.

You can follow the liveblog and leave real-time comments on ScribbleLive or you can see it as it happens in the window below (it will automatically update with the latest entries). There might also be the occasional dispatch from the U.S. Vice-Presidential debate, which is sure to be a totally hilarious gong show.

More entries on: Election 2008

Why so quiet Tory candidates?

Posted by Lindsay Kneteman at 04:36 PM ET | Comments (1)

This article in today's Toronto Star caught my eye. It's about how more than a few Conservative candidates have been missing local debates and dodging local reporters. The reason why it grabbed my attention is because I've being hearing how my riding's Tory candidate has often been M.I.A. when it comes to public events (though she did show up to an all-candidates debate on Monday night).

When I first heard that my Tory candidate was skipping out on some events, I just thought it had to do with the fact that she's running in a riding (Toronto's Parkdale-High Park) that she doesn't stand a chance in hell in winning. I can understand that given how the odds are against her, she might not be giving this race her everything. After all, events such as debates and interviews are time-consuming and stressful.

But after reading that Star article and this Liberal press release, I no longer believe that this is just the case of one Tory candidate deciding that she has better things to do with her time than trying to fight an unwinnable battle. I mean, Tony Clement, the current health minister, is abstaining from some public debates as is Rob Anders, the current MP for Calgary West. As incumbents who are likely going to hold onto their seats, their decisions to not attend various local events is just plain arrogant.

And overall, I find this whole situation a bit disturbing. Voting isn't just about voting for a particular party, it's also about voting for the two individuals who represent that party - the party leader and the potential MP. By going "silent", these Conservative candidates are in way reducing themselves to technicalities in the voting process, leaving the public to decide who to vote for based on the party itself and its leader.

But I guess maybe that's it, that for whatever reason, these individuals have decided that it's better for the party and Harper if they stay quiet and out of sight. While this might turn out to be a very effective strategy, it certainly isn't a very democratic one. How is the public supposed to know if a Tory candidate is truly worthy of their votes if that candidate won't stand up and publically discuss what s/he believe in? I'm not a Conservative but if I was, I'd be pretty pissed that my candidate wasn't showing up at local debates.

Speaking of debates, I hope that everyone is looking forward to tonight’s leaders' debate. Remember, the first person in the room to suggest switching to the US V.P. debate has to chug a whole bottle of American beer.

More entries on: Election 2008

But where do they live?

Posted by Dominique Jarry-Shore at 01:59 PM ET | Comments (1)

I think it's pretty important for a candidate to live in the riding they're running in.

But often they don't. Is this a big deal? Should it matter?

To me, living in the riding shows a commitment to the people of the area and that the person isn't just some fly-by-the-night stand-in. By living in the riding, you get a feel for the struggles, the issues, the history...

My riding of Jeanne le Ber -- incidentally one of the battleground ridings in Quebec -- is currently held by the youthful Bloc MP Thierry St Cyr.

Here's a quick run-down of the candidates as well as who lives in our traditionally working-class and ever gentrifying 'hood -- and who doesn't.

Bloc Quebecois: Thierry St Cyr -- Yes, lives in the riding
Liberal: Christian Feuillette -- does not live in the riding "But will move here as soon as he wins" according to someone who works on his campaing.
Conservative: Daniel Beaudin -- Yes, lives in the riding.
NDP: Daniel Breton -- Does not live in the riding, but lives in another working class riding (they're all the same, right?) UPDATE: and used to live and work in the riding for 14 years.
Green Party: Veronik Sansoucy -- Yes, has lived in the riding for four years.
Independent: Darryl Grey -- Does not live in the riding but is the pastor of a church here and very active in the community.

So, where do your candidates live and do you care?

More entries on: Election 2008

October 01, 2008

What war in Afghanistan?

Posted by Melita Kuburas at 06:24 PM ET | Comments (0)

Last week Senator Barack Obama voiced his concern about the unfavourable manner in which little foreign kids with dreams perceive America. Do any of our candidates care about how they perceive Canada?

The CBC asks, have foreign policy issues dropped off the radar? To rephrase a coworker who recently quipped, "What war in Afghanistan?" my answer is: "We have foreign policy issues?"

No one is arguing that economy isn't important, but where do the party leaders stand on the growing aggression between Russia and its near abroad? Do they think NATO should strike al Qaeda targets in Pakistan? When will we find out?

Given that they've largely ignored Afghanistan for the past three weeks, the candidates should perhaps also focus some time on reassuring the remaining 41 per cent of Canadians who still support the war of its virtues, or, for the 56 per cent who oppose, of its sins. Quebec has the lowest support for this war, so it will be interesting to see whether anyone brings it up tonight.

More entries on: Election 2008

This Magazine liveblogs the October 1 French-language leaders debate

Posted by Graham F. Scott at 04:56 PM ET | Comments (4)

This Magazine election blogger Dominique Jarry-Shore will be liveblogging the French-language leaders' debate tonight. And tune in tomorrow when we'll be doing the same with the English-language debate.

The debate starts at 9 pm EST. Dominique's commentary will appear in the window below. You can also read it at ScribbleLive and even leave comments in realtime.

More entries on: Election 2008

enviro-friendly debate

Posted by Daniel Tseghay at 03:51 PM ET | Comments (0)

For all you environmentally conscious types who believe the problems facing our rapidly weakening ecosystem can be tackled by government regulation and coordination, check out this piece from the CBC. It streamlines the deluge of information we have been getting from our federal parties into a simple assessment of what their environmental proposals are, how they plan to achieve them (the most important part, in my opinion), and suggested questions to ask these parties.

Let's hope enough time is spent discussing this during tonight's debate so people can make informed (read: correct) decisions.

More entries on: Election 2008

This PSA: You Can Vote October 3, 4 and 6

Posted by Robert Near at 11:20 AM ET | Comments (0)

We're in the dog days of the election. The televised debates won't start until tonight (French Language: 8 p.m. to 10 p.m. EDT on CBC Newsworld, Radio-Canada, CTV Newsnet and TVA and the English language goes tomorrow, 9 p.m. to 11 p.m.EDT) and most parties already released their policy platforms earlier in the week. So there's only time for base partisan politics, spearheaded by a five year old speech and an attractive female with impeccable timing. Surely there are those who are tired of the whole dam election.

So get it over with - advanced voting happens this weekend on October 3, 4, and 6. If you've long ago made up your mind who you're voting for (or Thanksgiving weekend is just too busy), this weekend is your weekend. Let's get those participation numbers up.

More entries on: Election 2008

Mr. Harper Goes Green

Posted by Lindsay Kneteman at 08:51 AM ET | Comments (0)

Back on Friday, Harper announced that if we elected him back into power, he would have Canada stop exporting bitumen to countries that have lower greenhouse-gas emission standards than we do.

At first listen, this sounds like a great policy from an environmental perspective-we'll stop selling our oil to nasty countries that pollute a lot and thus help to save our world from global warming and cannibalistic polar bears and all of that unhappiness. And while I doubt anyone's going to read about this promise and decide that Harper's the new David Suzuki, it does give Conservative supporters something to point to when they claim that their party does care about the environment.

But if Harper and company really cared about the planet, they'd come up with something a lot better than this promise that might be a little too easy to keep.

Bitumen is the tar-like form of petroleum that is pulled from the Alberta oilsands. Currently, Alberta produces around 1.3 million barrels of bitumen on average each day and according to the Conservatives, around 500,000 of those barrels are shipped across the border. But for the most part, this sticky substance isn't being shipped over to China or India or some other heavily-polluting third world country; no, almost all of our bitumen is sent to the United States.

But isn't the US one of the biggest polluters in the world? And wouldn't this promise mean that we'd no longer be able to export our bitumen to them? Well, yeah, the US is the world's second largest producer of greenhouse gases but they are but they are planning on cleaning up their act (at least a bit). Both Obama and McCain have promised to cut America's greenhouse gas output, something that should bring the US in line with(or even exceed) Canada's own un-ambitious greenhouse gas emission standards that include the goal of reducing emissions to three percent below 1990 levels by 2020.

But even if the next president decides to do nothing about greenhouse gas output, the Conservatives could still follow through on this promise and not cause massive economic turmoil because this new rule wouldn't apply to existing contracts. And as for how this concept could affect future bitumen exports to Asia, Enbridge's proposed multi-billion dollar pipeline to coastal BC is still years off from being operational and who knows who will be in power then.

You can call Harper a lot of names but you can't call him dumb. He knows that Canadian voters care about the environment, a topic that's clearly one of the Conservative party's weak spots. He's also seen how poorly the Liberal's complicated (though intelligent) Green Shift plan has gone down with the general public. So he's gone out and come up with a promise that, at first glance, is green, easy to grasp and very keepable.

True, keeping it will likely piss off some Albertans, but what are they going to do about it? Go and form their own federal party or something?

More entries on: Election 2008

September 30, 2008

To market, to market

Posted by Melita Kuburas at 05:56 PM ET | Comments (1)

This weekend's Trinity-Spadina federal candidates debate in Kensington Market was, at first, like one of those earnestly quirky but kind of lame dinner parties where the host insists you wear a toga and play Headbandz and which, for one reason or another, you feel obligated to attend.

But despite the cheese, (like swearing allegiance to Trinity-Spadina and having the candidates wear colour-appropriate capes) it turned into a decent debate about issues like transportation and the economy, thanks, in no small part, to the Pedestrian Sundays audience.

Oh I can't stay long, NDP candidate Olivia Chow insisted at first, perhaps because gentrification is forcing her campaign up and away, towards the Lakeshore condominiums to be exact. Let's just hope those condo owners aren't too annoyed with the "Sorry I missed you" campaign brochure someone slipped under the door and force their superintendent to tighten that No Solicitation policy.

Liberal candidate Christine Innes is proving to be a strong contender in the riding--an Annex resident who may or may not have access to her husband's old Rolodex, Innes, like Chow, gives sharp answers and has strong connections to the community.

The only other problem with the Kensington debate is that not a lot of people knew about it. Apparently Conservative candidate Christine McGirr didn't get the memo either.

So if like me you're losing interest in the increasingly crusty war of words in the Stephen vs. Stephane vs. Jack saga, try to find out where and when your next local MP debate is. And if you want to see Chow, Innes and Green Candidate Stephen LaFrenie in round two, come to the Miles Nadal Jewish Community Centre on Oct. 6 at 7:30. No need to bring the toga.

More entries on: Election 2008

September 29, 2008

A compass for the road to the general election

Posted by Daniel Tseghay at 05:30 PM ET | Comments (4)

We often use the old left-right spectrum while describing political sympathies. You are on the right if you favour the free market, limited government intervention, and, often, social conservatism. You are on the left if you favour economic safety nets, or progressivism, and social inclusiveness. Simple. Neat. Inadequate.

The Political Compass tries to lend us a few more tools for this endeavour. We can now use the concepts of Authoritarianism and Libertarianism to draw a more detailed description of our political leanings; therefore allowing for more discriminating analysis. For example, both Stalin and Gandhi were leftists because they favoured the coordination of the economy by government bodies. But they obviously were very different as well. One viewed citizens as mere things to be pushed around and controlled by the state; while the other assumed the intrinsic worth of every individual and therefore gave great importance to the notion of personal choice - Gandhi would not force anything on you. So, Stalin is a leftist-authoritarian while Gandhi is a leftist-libertarian. Simple. Neat. A little less inadequate.

Now look below for where the Canadian federal parties place during this election season. I was surprised by the Green party.

More entries on: Election 2008

NDP (finally) releases platform

Posted by Melissa Wilson at 10:23 AM ET | Comments (0)

With just over two weeks left in the race, Jack Layton and the New Democrats finally released their party platform yesterday, and along with it came a pledge from Layton to end poverty in Canada within the next 12 years, as reported by the Toronto Star.

The platform is rich with hot button issues like child care, the economy and the environment, but here are a few easily-missed points that add a little sugar to the campaign:

If elected, Layton will...
- Ditch "unfair" charges for incoming text messages (This means you Bell/Telus!)
- Fork over a $1,000 grant to every student enrolled in an undergraduate (or equivalent) program who qualifies for a student loan (if only he could now amend the OSAP criteria, I would be all set)
- Create a federally funded youth gang diversion program

So far, the only party not to release an official platform is PM Stephen Harper's Conservatives, who are still relying on a vague list of "Key Issues" on the Tories' website (while taking a much needed nap mid-campaign).

Here is a list of all of the parties' dreams for Canada. I encourage each of you dear readers to forward them on to some of your more apathetic neighbours and try to inspire them to vote.

Bloc Québécois Platform
Conservatives' Key Issues
Green Party Platform
Liberal Platform
NDP Platform

More entries on: Election 2008

September 26, 2008

Elizabeth May in Montreal

Posted by Dominique Jarry-Shore at 09:35 PM ET | Comments (0)

CLAUDE WILLIAM GENEST GREETS ELIZABETH MAY

Elizabeth May and her train made a quick stop in Montreal today.

The Green Party leader greeted about 60 supporters and began her brief address to the crowd in French. (I, and many other Quebeckers I think have been dreading hearing May stumble along in the upcoming French debate, but if today is any indication it might not be as bad as we thought.)

May derided Jack Layton for spending his time in BC putting down the Liberal's Green Shift, saying "Shame on you Jack!" and calling his cap and trade policies "half-measures." And she told the crowd that "The good news from Nova Scotia is that I will get into Parliament," because her campaign is going so well in New Glasgow.

Before May arrived Claude William Genest, a Green candidate in the Westmount St Louis riding, spoke a mixture of French and English that would have made Justin Trudeau proud. Genest also talked about some of the Green Party's policies, among them the $5000 Guaranteed Livable Income.

May spent the afternoon going from interview to interview -- including CTV, and Musiqueplus, and she joked about needing a glass of wine a la Tout le Monde en Parle.

She told the gathering she's been travelling with her daughter and described the trip across Canada as "part campaign, part family road-trip." She even invited any Green supporters who were feeling spontaneous to hop on the train with her as she heads to Nova Scotia. "I'll lend you my toothbrush," she quipped.

PHOTOS BY DOMINIQUE JARRY-SHORE

More entries on: Election 2008

Layton to announce national drug program

Posted by Melissa Wilson at 11:20 AM ET | Comments (0)

According to CBC.ca, New Democratic Party leader Jack Layton will be in Vancouver today to announce his plans for a universal prescription drug plan for Canadians who pay more than $1,500 in drug costs each year.

The announcement came about a week after a study by Wyatt Health ranked Canada 17th out of 18 OECD countries studied in terms of of public funding of pharmaceuticals. According to the study, Ottawa forks over about 45 percent for prescription drugs, which is just slightly higher than the United States' contribution (about 40 percent), who came in dead last.

I could say, at least we're still ahead of the U.S., but second-last is an embarrassment. Lack of access to necessary prescriptions drugs is an obvious problem in Canada, especially in the Atlantic provinces who notoriously lag behind the rest of the country.

So, good on you, Jack Layton, for pledging to do something about the sorry state of drug coverage in Canada, but you better come up with a more solid plan, because your announcement came over a week after Liberal party leader Stéphane Dion announced his $900 million plan to bring universal drug coverage to Canada. (Dion also had the sense to make this promise in Halifax, not British Columbia, which has a relatively solid drug plan. While you're at it Layton, why not promise GST cuts to Albertans?)

Regardless, a good plan is a good plan, especially when paired with Layton's $1 billion pledge to help solve the doctor crisis in Canada (opening up more spots in medical schools and offering to forgive student debt for any doctor to spends his first ten years out of school in family medicine), but I can't help but wave the red flag yet again: Where are you boys getting this money from?

With the U.S.'s economy in shambles, gas prices higher than ever and every Canadian talking about a possible recession, it's almost (almost) understandable that so many Canadians are voting Conservative: he may have scrapped the national daycare program, toted ideas about privatized medicine and handed out truckloads of corporate tax cuts, but he hasn't totally screwed us. Yet.

While both Dion and Layton have got some awesome ideas, they're still both recovering from financial mismanagements of days past. Has anyone forgotten about the sponsorship scandal? I think not. And my parents, like many middle-class Ontarians, still haven't forgiven the NDP for the Rae Days of the early 1990s.

Personally, I would love to see boatloads of money poured into health care, social programs, education, the arts, the works, but I'm a Toronto journalism student. I'm predisposed to see things a certain way. Layton, Dion, May: you're going to have to put forth a much more solid economic plan to win over my parents.

More entries on: Election 2008

September 25, 2008

If You Could Ask Any Question...

Posted by Lindsay Kneteman at 03:42 PM ET | Comments (2)

Sorry to be so late with today's blog entry but I was just so exhausted from attending last night's taxpayer-subsidized arts gala that I fell asleep in my couture gown and didn't awaken until after noon.

Then it was time for me to review my social obligations for the upcoming week. As usual, my schedule is jammed-pack - an interpretative dance performance on Saturday, a book launch on Monday, a pro-choice on rally on Wednesday. But on Thursday, October 2, I'm going to plop myself down on my couch and, just like an ordinary person, turn on the TV because that's the night of the leaders' debate.

Did you know that you can submit a question to this email address question@electiondebate08.ca in hopes of having debate host Steve Paikin pose it during the debate? I think that's kind of fun idea. I realize that Paikin's probably only going to ask something like three email-submitted questions and that at least one of them will be some sort of cutesy "If you were a province or territory which province or territory would you be?" type thing but I still think that figuring out what question you'd want to hear asked is a great exercise.

Over the past few days, the various arts-and-culture-related discussion lists and groups that I belong to have been asking members to submit questions about arts and arts funding. Given Harper's current hate-on for the arts, this makes sense. But to be completely honest, I'm much more concerned about Harper's environmental policies than his treatment of the arts. After all, screwing over the arts just leaves the country bland and boring but screwing over the environment leaves us... well, how apocalyptic do you want to get?

But while I know without a doubt what topic my debate question will be about, I haven't quite figured out how to say it without sounding over-dramatic or using some version of the phrase "WTF". (Hey, have you read Zoe Cormier's column in this month's issue? Read it and you'll be depressed about our planet too.) While I realize that it's unlikely my question will be asked, I'd like to give a fair shot or at least make it clear to the debate organizers that this Canadian (ordinary person or not) wants the subject of the environment to get its fair share of questions.

Do any of you out there in cyberspace have a question you plan on submitting? Or maybe you're stuck like me, with a topic but no exact question yet?

More entries on: Election 2008

Hump Day

Posted by Dominique Jarry-Shore at 02:40 PM ET | Comments (1)

Today marks Day 19 of the federal election. It's Hump Day. There are 19 days left until we (well, some of us) vote on October 14th.

And like the Wednesday mid-week blahs that some people experience, I've been feeling less enthusiastic about the election this week.

Some might say that things are just heating up with all the focus on arts, culture and crime. But at school, talk of the election has taken a back seat to the U.S. economy. I'm not even looking forward to seeing Canada's most watched political panel tonight on TV.

We've already talked about how media coverage is focusing on all the wrong things and far be it from me to cast the first stone. Maybe it's the overkill and all the attention paid to little gossipy details that's burst the bubble for me.

Tomorrow Elizabeth May is in Montreal. I'll be doing my best to check out what she has to say. And who knows, I might even hear something to get me excited about the second half of the campaign.

More entries on: Election 2008

September 24, 2008

Vancouver's InSite becomes a political football

Posted by Daniel Tseghay at 05:34 PM ET | Comments (0)

In this election, and in most others, strong words are common and as plentiful as the air we breathe. Stephane Dion has been pegged an effete, weak-chinned, intellectual; Jack Layton, a crude Barack Obama imitation; and Stephen Harper, stone-hearted and disengaged. Well now Harper can add "genocidal" to the list. Dr. Julio Montaner, a researcher on HIV/AIDS, accused the Harper government, on monday, of practicing the worst of all criminal activities due to their support of closing down Vancouver's supervised drug injection facility, known also as InSite.

Montaner's problem with this is that InSite, as some studies have shown, has done quite a bit to reduce the spread of HIV/AIDS in the downtown Eastside of Vancouver, with nurses providing clean needles.

I understand the intuition behind the Conservatives' position. It's something like this: all things being equal, we should not assist others in their acts of self-harm. But, of course, the real world is messy and complex, and it forces us to do things we might not like for the benefit of greater goods. And there is a greater good with InSite. The drug addict is better off with this alternative to sharing needles and risking transmitting diseases.

If you feel the same way, you have an alternative as well. From the Globe and Mail, Layton this monday on InSite: "All of the evidence indicates that this is a way that we can help people, and it is tragic that the federal government is not providing that support," he said at a campaign stop in Montreal. "It saves lives."

More entries on: Election 2008

Layton's infertile coup

Posted by Graeme McElheran at 04:27 PM ET | Comments (3)

IN EDMONTON

Why hasn't there been any outcry from the Conservatives over Jack Layton's call for the assassination of Stephen Harper last weekend?

At an NDP rally in Edmonton on Saturday, Layton was working the crowd and himself to climax when his rant took a turn to the seditious. "Well," he said, "I say it's time to take Stephen Harper to the woodshed!"

The CBC, the Toronto Star and the Vancouver Sun all carried that quote, and there's no mistaking its intent. In these parts, the woodshed is where one takes an old farm dog to be put down with a rifle, or perhaps the blunt end of a hatchet (if the dog was small enough). Apparently it's also the place one goes to give or receive a good old ass-whuppin'.

The phrase is sometimes used in joking reference to old folks deemed past their prime. But it's not common to politics. At least, not in Alberta.

Naturally it is to be assumed Layton was speaking metaphorically about the need to replace Harper's government - not kill the man outright, or physically beat him senseless. But still... take'em to the woodshed? Them's fightin' words!

They sounded surprising over the radio. I've met Jack Layton several times, and I'm quite sure he wouldn't reference woodsheds in his home riding of Toronto-Danforth. There, the schoolyard would be a more apt metaphor for violence.

Maybe that sounds harsh, given Toronto's rocky record on school violence, but it translates. The woodshed reference was Jack's folksy attempt at talking tough in Alberta. It came across as a limply veiled threat from a guy who's not from here but wanted to sound like he could be. And it sounded a bit pathetic, since the NDP have not sent an MP from Alberta to the House of Commons in 20 years.

Nevertheless, Layton has been on the offensive this entire campaign, and the woodshed comment is his attempt to bring the fight to Alberta's Tory stronghold. So what's he thinking? That colloquial rhetoric will win votes for Linda Duncan and Ray Martin, the NDP's two best bets in Alberta?

Probably. And his accusation that the Harper Tories are taking Albertan votes for granted may resonate beyond the NDP faithful to anyone in the province who doesn't vote Conservative.

But NDP policy in Alberta is a tough sell. Of Layton's two pushpoints on Saturday - getting tough on crime and slowing oilsands production - only one will wash in Canada's wealthiest province. Care to guess which?

Here's a hint (as if you needed it): it's the one that might have some impact on schoolyards in Cowtown and The Chuk, as well as The Big Smoke.

More entries on: Election 2008

Arts cuts and "ordinary people"

Posted by Graham F. Scott at 12:18 PM ET | Comments (2)

The YouTube Video above, an English-subtitled version of a French Quebec-made video about cuts to arts funding by the federal government, is closing on 100,000 views, and the original has been viewed more than 400,000 times.

The unlikely trajectory of arts and culture as a wedge election issue is worth examining. Since the $45 million cuts in arts and culture funding were first announced, arts and culture groups have been organzing, talking amongst themselves, and hunkering down for a long fight with the Conservative government that has made it clear that cultural spending is not a priority. But despite anger among artists and some cultural workers, the cuts seemed to have little resonance with most voters.

Popular French musician Michel Rivard's video above has put the cuts on the electoral agenda in Quebec, where "culture" is an even more loaded term than in Anglophone Canada, wrapped up as it is with Quebecois identity and notions of a "distinct society." Stephen Harper, up until yesterday, had been doing an impressive job of ignoring the whole thing: there was nothing to be gained on Conservative stumps by talking about the arts.

For some reason, that changed yesterday. At his campaign stop in Saskatoon, Harper said that "ordinary people" weren't interested in arts and culture funding, and that artists at "a rich gala all subsidized by taxpayers claiming their subsidies aren't high enough" were off-putting to Mr. and Mrs. Ordinary Canadian. The content of his remarks isn't too surprising — it's a pretty standard wedge-issue talking point that the U.S. Republican party perfected, and their Canadian admirers have increasingly adopted — but it puts the issue on the table, and the reaction has been swift and fierce.

The Conservatives have more to lose than to gain by bringing up this issue. The people who agree with the PM's remarks were already going to vote for him. Many more people see the cuts to arts and culture as emblematic of everything that is appalling, small-minded, and economically backward about conservative (and Conservative) ideology. So my question is this: why did the Prime Minister choose to bring this issue up now, and what does the Conservative party hope to gain?

More entries on: Election 2008

If only I had someone to split my income with

Posted by Melita Kuburas at 11:50 AM ET | Comments (0)

There needs to be more debate on the issue of income splitting this election. Conservatives have flirted with the idea in years past, and Stephen Harper promised last week he would allow income splitting in homes where one person stays home to care for a family member with a disability. Jack Layton was quick to blast the announcement, giving us an idea of his official stance on the issue.

Meanwhile, the Greens are outright supporting the taxing method, as stated in Part 4 of their vision, aptly titled: People: "It will allow one spouse to work from home in growing a garden, in developing artistic talents, in writing for perilously low income."

Even though income splitting is allowed in many industrialized countries, including the United States (since 1948), France, Germany and Switzerland, Canada remains opposed. The big split would allow couples to pool their income and bring the breadwinner into a lower tax bracket, potentially saving them thousands of dollars per year. It's criticized for being of little to no benefit to lower-income earners, while potentially costing the government up to $5 billion a year.

Some think throwing his support behind income-splitting would give Stephane Dion more pull with the middle-class, family-oriented voters, however apart from musing over his position last year, he hasn't turned pro yet.

In this in-depth CBC feature from 2006 (which also explains in what capacity Canadians are able to employ the income split), then-independent (now Liberal) MP Garth Turner is cited for his support, saying it is "a tacit acknowledgment that the family, and not the individual, is the basic unit of the economy." The argument is further explained in the feature: Why should a family where both partners earn $40,000 pay $3,500 less tax than a family where one earner makes $80,000 and the other stays home?

More entries on: Election 2008

Long Live the Election Lawn Sign

Posted by Lindsay Kneteman at 09:07 AM ET | Comments (1)

There are some people out there that hate election lawn signs. Some find them ugly things that clutter our landscape and advertise incorrect grammar. Others find the idea of publicly declaring who you're voting for vulgar. Points out my partner, "It's supposed to be a secret!"

And that's fine, if you want to keep who you vote for a secret then go for it. But to me, there's nothing ugly or vulgar about telling the world that you take part in democracy and that you've already decided who your allegiances belong to. Because of that, I encourage people to get their own lawn sign as a way of both celebrating the election and educating themselves on it. After all, most people probably aren't going to put up a sign without first doing a little research on the candidate and the party that s/he represents.

As for the celebrating part, think of lawn signs as being to an election as what garland and lights are to Christmas, helping to set the tone and the mood for the big day. Here in my Toronto riding of Parkdale-High Park, lawn signs are everywhere, with the Liberals and the NDP splitting the majority of them. The result is the feeling that the election is a big deal and that it's something that we should all be participating in. I truly believe that all of these signs create the kind of politically intense, competitive atmosphere that encourages discussion, debate and a higher turnout at the polls.

Signs are also an in-your-face reminder that hey, it's election time and here are your candidates. As for whether or not more signs equals more votes, a study of an Ontario riding during the 2004 election by Munroe Eagles, a professor of political science and Canadian studies at the University of Buffalo, found that each lawn sign added nearly 0.7 percent of a vote for a candidate. So it's not a huge number, but in a tight race, every little bit helps.

Besides, election signs are a great way to learn a bit about your neighbours since a sign is basically a public declaration of one's values and priorities. I grew up in a small rural Alberta town, the type of place where (in the '90s anyway) you'd assume that everyone would vote Reform in a federal election. But come election time there plenty of signs for the Conservatives, the NDP and even the Liberals. Sometimes these signs confirmed my existing impressions of certain people while other times they showed that I was completely wrong; that it was possible to drive a massive truck, work in the oil and gas industry and vote NDP.

To further show my support for the election lawn signs, I've gathered some links below that will help you easily locate the major party candidates in your riding. From there, getting your own lawn sign is just one email or phone call away.

Bloc
Conservatives
Greens
Liberals
NDP

More entries on: Election 2008

Chamber of Commerce Speaks, Politicians Pack Swim Trunks

Posted by Robert Near at 07:42 AM ET | Comments (0)

The Canadian Chamber of Commerce (CCC) has 175,000 members from a wide range of sectors (agriculture, technology,energy,etc.) and sizes(small, medium and large cap). It is by far the biggest business association in Canada; when it speaks, Canadian politicians listen.

And so it was that every political party had it ears open to CCC president and CEO Perrin Beatty's speech at the Economic Club of Toronto yesterday. In it he presented the policy directives his organization hopes will come from the government that forms after the election. They include continuing to lower taxes (both personal and business), updating our copyright laws, improving our infrastructure and continuing to foster good working relations with the U.S. Other topics he touched on were the need to lower inter-provincial trade barriers, as well as reforming EI and streamlining our immigration system. He even invited his politician friends to join the CCC in a special organization session on October 4th. Be sure to bring your swim trunks, Gilles et al.

As 3.5% inflation and the credit crisis south of the border have Canadians worrying more and more about their money, look for these goals to figure heavily in the coming weeks.

More entries on: Election 2008

September 23, 2008

Centre for Policy Alternatives has new book about Stephen Harper, good timing

Posted by Graham F. Scott at 03:34 PM ET | Comments (0)

Lefty think-tank the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives has just published "The Harper Record," a new book analyzing the record of the Conservative Government under Stephen Harper, just in time for the election. Even better for curious readers out there, the whole thing is available to download as a free PDF.

The CCPA swears up and down that the proximity of the publication date and the election are coincidental (books don't materialize overnight, after all). But "The Harper Record" provides campaign ammunition for Conservative opponents, and it pulls together a lot of information into one easy hymnbook for everyone to sing from.

In all, it contains 38 chapters on every aspect of the Conservatives' record, from their handling of manufacturing closures, conduct of the Afghan mission, biofuels, tarsands, nuclear energy, migrant workers, disability rights, child care, and so on.

More entries on: Election 2008

Layton, Harper, and the Arts

Posted by Daniel Tseghay at 11:50 AM ET | Comments (0)

So far, the Conservative Party has made a real push for votes in Quebec. Harper recently asked Quebecers to ignore the Bloc Quebecois, saying the party would do nothing but come "empty-handed". And the Conservatives were doing quite well in the polls — beating the traditional favourites, the Bloc, infused with the sense that this was a sign of even more good to come. But all things are liable to change. Harper's proposal for a $45-million cut in arts funding has not been well-received (read: hated) by the average Quebecer. Who could have guessed it?

Well, perhaps the NDP's Jack Layton. Glimpsing the Zeitgeist, he swooped into Quebec with plans to reverse the Conservatives' proposed cuts. Fleshing out the details, he said he would expand to the rest of the country the common Quebec practice of income-averaging for artitsts; and he would provide tax exemptions to those earning income from copyright and residuals; among other, artistically-conscious, things. He also played the guitar and sang for the press.

I must say I enjoy this kind of instant-democracy. One party proposes a plan that does little more than anger people, and another comes along to provide its opposite. It might have been better to get it right from the beginning; or to not have to rely on public outrage to find out what the people want, but this is the way it goes - for better or worse. Our political system is a lot like what a scientist might call a kludge: a clumsy and inelegant, yet surprisingly efficient, solution to a problem.

More entries on: Election 2008

September 22, 2008

The carbon-tax is a plan, but where is it taking us?

Posted by Daniel Tseghay at 11:25 AM ET | Comments (0)

The Liberal and the Green party share at least one thing in common this election: they both have carbon-tax plans. The specifics, of reducing income taxes and increasing taxes on fuel and other carbon emitters, are almost exactly alike. Well, except for Elizabeth May's superior presentation. Speaking of Stephane Dion, she says: "I can explain it better than he can."

But we should not forget that carbon-taxes have been implemented before, primarily in European countries. And we would do well to survey the various incarnations of this globe-trotting plan; forming an evaulation of the Liberal/Green proposal(s) in this light.
So, to begin, Finland started this eco-conscious trend in 1990 with its carbon-tax plan. As of January 2008, Finland has increased its tax by about 9.8% and exempted taxes on biofuel. In the UK, after including a Fuel Price Escalator, by which the tax would gradually, but inexorably, increase, there were public revolts. People were simply paying too much. The increases have since ended. British Columbia already has a carbon-tax plan and Stephane Dion, for one, has stated he would not exempt it from his national plan: effectively taxing its residents twice.

Questions also arise concerning how efficient carbon-taxes are, assuming people can even afford them. Is it true they require heavy government subsidies? How does it remain a self-sustaining way of taxing the bad things in our environment if these subsidies must be made?

I for one believe our environmental problems can be solved, in part at least, through economic means. The carrot and stick of economic incentives are quite persuasive. I just wonder if our national leaders have found the precise way of getting us on the right track.

More entries on: Election 2008

Jack Layton online? Maybe not.

Posted by Melissa Wilson at 09:50 AM ET | Comments (0)

Jack Layton's online games.

In the September/ October issue of This Magazine, two writers commented on presidential nominee Barack Obama's insurmountable online presence (see Chandler Levack and Jordan Heath-Rawlings' takes on Web Obama) and though the success of his web campaign has been undeniable, it seems that our Canadian party leaders have been hesitant to follow suit. New Democratic Party leader Jack Layton has at least made a meager effort.

Similar to Obama's my.barackobama.com, a politically charged social networking site that unites democratic followers, Camp Layton has The Orange Room, which allows users to gather and upload media (videos, pictures, news, etc.) to the site. There's even an orange-tinted video of Layton welcoming users to the site, and the clever Rapid Response team that asks users to help debunk smear campaigns against the NDP.

While I like the photo caption contests and the colour is a bit more cheerful than Obama's site, The Orange Room's usefulness doesn't even come close. The Orange Room is clearly an attempt to appeal to the younger voter, and it's clear Layton doesn't really know what the younger voter wants in his or her online experience.

Let's not kid ourselves. Youth want to be able to publicly rant and eviscerate political candidates online through the safety net of an online handle. They want to get into heated debates about politics and policy without having to change out of their pajamas. More than that, they want a personal experience with cyberspace. The Orange Room doesn't even have a function that would allow users to comment on each other's videos, let alone forum or blog capabilities. Who are you trying to fool, Jack Layton?

One of the reasons Obama has been so successful is that he has managed to make youth feel like he cares about them. My U.S. election newsletters don't come from American Democrats--they come from Barack Obama himself (and occasionally Joe Biden and Michelle Obama). My NDP email newsletters come from Canada's New Democrats.

Like I posted earlier about Elizabeth May, I've got to give any candidate props for at least trying to appeal to the young adult voting market, but they have got to do a lot better than this. The twentysomethings are an unswervingly apathetic bunch. Of my young cohorts, I'd say they fall into three categories:

They don't know anything about politics (and don't care to) so they don't vote.
They know a little and are so jaded by unreliable politicians that they don't vote.
They care and they vote. (These kids are very much the minority.)

Party leaders are going to have to do a lot better than an endorsement by Jason Collett to engage young voters.

More entries on: Election 2008

September 19, 2008

Where have all the rational voters gone?

Posted by Daniel Tseghay at 11:27 AM ET | Comments (0)

Although a lot of us would hate to admit this, myself included, we are, in at least some very significant ways, determined by our genes. We are open to new experiences; dogmatic; and open-minded, among other personality traits, because of genetic inclinations. But what's more, researchers are now saying these traits affect our political orientation. So, my genes indirectly, but surely, affect my voting preferences! Some people just can't help but be conservative, while others liberal. Also, a study being published today says our physiological tendencies affect our views on specific policies.

From today's Globe and Mail:

"The researchers examined 46 individuals with strong political attitudes and found that those with "measurably lower physical sensitivities to sudden noises and threatening visual images were more likely to support foreign aid, liberal immigration policies, pacifism and gun control."
On the other hand, "individuals displaying measurably higher physiological reactions to those same stimuli were more likely to favour defence spending, capital punishment, patriotism and the Iraq war.""

All of this raises doubts about our claim to being rational decision makers during election time. The majority of us will be voting on the basis of genetic predispositions; heritable ideological outlooks; and just plain knee-jerk reactions. So what's the point of debating the policy promises of Harper, Dion, Layton, May, and Duceppe?

Well, despite all this research, I think there is a point. Our genes might affect our minds, let's grant that, but our minds are perfectly capable of clearing genetic hurdles. It might be difficult for our dogmatic friends, but they can learn to be a little more humble in their opinions. The open-minded soul can become narrow and rigid, xenophobic even. And the easily frightened defence-spender may become bold and fearless. Anything is possible. But only with constant engagement and effort. So, on with the debates, party leaders. We'll try to listen for a change.

More entries on: Election 2008

Looks like the Sweater is running scared

Posted by Melissa Wilson at 10:46 AM ET | Comments (0)

If any of you readers have been following the polls and surveys regarding this election as obsessively as I have, you'll know that Stephen Harper and his sweater have been taking a slight nosedive in our nation's popular opinion, according to the most recent data put out by the Canadian Press/Harris-Decima.

While Harper is still the front-runner, he has been flip-flopping percentage points and it seems like his dream of a majority government is starting to slip farther and farther away. According to the CBC, he has apparently chosen Bloc Québécois leader Gilles Duceppe as his primary target and has set his sights on nabbing the Bloc strongholds in Quebec.

Yesterday, Harper appealed to Quebec's artsy side by promising to toss them $25 million for French-language television programming if they check his name on October 14.

Now, I'll be the first to say that if Harper puts that kind of scratch towards the arts, English or French, it'll be a wonderful thing, but the big question in any campaign promise remains the same: where's all that money coming from?

Before the election was called, the Conservatives massacred arts funding, making over $45 million in cuts. Harper is also promising even more tax cuts. Where is all that money going to come from?

Harper claims to be an avid fan of the arts (Check him out playing the piano) but when it comes to finances, we all know were his priorities lie.

Will a Harper majority in 2008 will soon become synonymous with "death to creativity?"

More entries on: Election 2008

You lost me at $87 000

Posted by Dominique Jarry-Shore at 08:56 AM ET | Comments (3)

IN MONTREAL

As a self-employed worker, a full-time student, and a mother with a child in a provincially-run daycare, I can see myself in many of the campaign promises each of the parties is making.

But Stephen Harper lost me when he trotted out the Tory savings to the "typical" Canadian family. In his world, that family earns $87 000 per year with one spouse making $52 000 and the other $35 000. Is it just me, or does $87 000 seem like a lot of money?

Maybe I'm being naive, but I want a government that spends more time and effort helping the poor and marginalized in society than the middle-class. It would be refreshing to see a politician visit the home of a family really struggling to make ends meet, rather than one benefiting from some minor tax incentives to make their middle-class lives a little more comfortable. (This is not a personal slight to the Huang family whom Stephen Harper visited on September 8th.)

How about heading out to a First Nations community, where many people live in Third World living conditions (or worse)? It's one thing to apologize to Natives in the House of Commons and have everyone come to you, but it would be refreshing to see politicians getting out of their comfort zones a little more often.

It may make for a less perfect photo-op, but it would give me a sense of what the leaders really care about -- and help me find myself and the issues I care about in the government I want for my country.

More entries on: Election 2008

September 18, 2008

A Carbonzero campaign

Posted by Dominique Jarry-Shore at 01:18 PM ET | Comments (3)

NDP candidate Nicolas Thibodeau with his bike
PHOTO DOMINIQUE JARRY-SHORE

While the party leaders have all (except for Stephen Harper) made very public efforts to run a carbon neutral election campaign, it's safe to bet the hundreds of lesser-known candidates running in ridings across the country have not.

Running a campaign office and getting to and from events represents a significant portion of a campaign's carbon emissions. In fact Kate Holloway, the CEO of Carbonzero, estimates that 50% of a party's total greenhouse gas emissions comes from the activities of candidates.

(You may recall that Carbonzero is the company offsetting the carbon emissions of Stephane Dion's campaign -- and they must be raking in the dough considering the plane he's flying.)

Carbonzero recently launched an online calculator for candidates to tally their carbon emissions. According to Holloway's numbers, each candidate produces about 5 tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions. At $22 per tonne, the campaign can be offset for a mere $110.

But Nicolas Thibodeau, the NDP candidate for Mount Royal here in Montreal, won't be paying any money to offset his campaign. He rides his bike to and from party events and says he already has a carbon zero campaign. You can check out his blog here.

So, what about your local candidates?

More entries on: Election 2008

Let's Talk Transit

Posted by Lindsay Kneteman at 10:43 AM ET | Comments (0)

It's been a busy week, with the election and the stock market drops and the announcement that Britney will put out a new album in December, so it was easy to miss the Tuesday release of a study commissioned by the Canadian Urban Transit Association, a group that represents the public transit industry, that looks at what needs to be done to improve transit in this country.

You can read the executive summary here but long story short, billions and billions of dollars need to be invested across the country in order for transit to become something that drivers will regularly consider taking. The feds should contribute a good chunk of this cash via the existing federal gas tax and should also create a long-range national transit strategy. In other words, this study echoes the same recommendations that countless transit advocates have been asking for for years.

So now that those ideas have been "legitimized" by a large U.S. engineering consulting firm, are our federal leaders taking them seriously?

Well, like I said earlier, it's been a busy week. So far, I can't turn up any reaction on this study from any of the four national party leaders.

Now to be fair, the NDP did announce its plans for transit back before the study was released (and the election even announced). Those plans revolve dedicating one cent per litre of the existing gas tax to transit as well as a portion of the revenue that would result from the party's proposed carbon emissions cap-and-trade plan.

Not surprisingly, the Green Party also has something to say about transit in this country. In their party platform, released on Wednesday, the Greens declared that if we vote them into power, they'd boost the GST back up to six percent and then send that extra percent to municipalities to pay for improvements to infrastructure and public transit.

As for the Liberal and the Conservatives? A search for "public transit" on the Liberal site brings up five results, none of which are that recent. The Conservative website doesn't appear to have a site search but a quick look through Google News doesn't bring up anything promising other than the Tories' announcement that they'll cut the tax on diesel, a fuel favoured by many city buses. Well, maybe those two parties are saving their plans for public transit for later in the campaign.

After all, public transit is no longer one of those issues that can be ignored or addressed with token acts such as offering tax rebates on monthly passes. Earlier this month the Federation of Canadian Municipalities and the Canadian Urban Transit Association released the results of a survey that indicates that public transit will be transportation of choice for many Canadians if gas prices continue to stay high. In fact, 20 percent of respondents had already switched over to using transit because of gas prices. Another 60-something percent would be more likely to use it if service was improved but given the current state of Canadian municipalities, that's not going to happen without some cash and support from Ottawa.

More entries on: Election 2008

Stephane Dion is not a leader? Is Harper either?

Posted by Daniel Tseghay at 10:34 AM ET | Comments (0)

I once remember Andrew Sullivan, that tireless blogger and commentator on American politics, distinguishing government from politicts in a very interesting way. Government, he said, is an incremental process involving detailed legislation and backroom negotiation. Politics, on the other hand, is something more theatrical and personality-driven. It is about convincing people to share in a certain vision for the country, province, state, or town, and moving them to action. This is usually accomplished with a combination of rhetorical sensibility, admirable character, and a healthy balance of populism and independence of thought. The master of Politics is what we might call a leader.

This brings us to our current election, where the Prime Minister has the reputation of being a strong leader. The Conservative Party continues to brand Stephane Dion as not up to the task of leading, while describing Stephen Harper as being unquestionably prepared for it. And a large part of the country seems to agree. Andrew Coyne of Maclean's had something to say about this in a recent column and in a blog post:

"But is that all there is to it? What do we mean by a strong leader? Strong in what sense? Leader in what sense? The word "leader" suggests someone who will lead us to something or somewhere. Yet Harper's whole time in office has been spent reassuring the public he has no plans to lead them anywhere, that under a Conservative government nothing much would change — they would govern much like the Liberals, only without the corruption. His message so far in the campaign has been much the same. There's been little sense of where he would take the country if re-elected, and little likelihood of one emerging. Indeed, he is at pains to emphasize his belief that the election will probably return another minority Parliament — the very one whose dissolution he had lately demanded."

So why do we persist in accepting this definition of Harper? Could it be the lack of real competitors to the title; our low standards; a dispiriting mix of the two?

More entries on: Election 2008

Death by a thousand inappropriate comments

Posted by Melita Kuburas at 07:53 AM ET | Comments (1)

I spent the earlier part of this month blogging about celebrities, kind of hoping those in town for the Toronto International Film Festival would drink too much, say something stupid and get in a fistfight caught on a cellphone camera then put up on Youtube for everyone to see.

Turns out members of the Conservative Party are so much more belligerent this election than LiLo or Paris could ever be. Except it's not booze that gets them behaving badly but long work days and stressful meetings. And instead of calling their nemesis fat or slutty, they wish them dead and makes jokes about a national outbreak that has the elderly, ill and pregnant women fearing for their lives--all during a conference call with a lot of important people.

Does anyone remember when Stephen Harper had tight control over his communications department? Come election time he clearly lost it. Even his communications director Ryan Sparrow, who was removed from his post for suggesting the father of a fallen soldier criticized Canada's war strategy because of partisan ambitions, began contacting reporters with conspiracy theories so often, some felt it "bordered on harassment," wrote Jane Taber, for the Globe and Mail.

The election is evidently an exciting time for Conservatives who were perhaps muzzled for the last two years, but please, before you speak, design an ad, or criticize the opposition, ask yourselves: could this in any way be considered "clearly inappropriate" "insensitive" or a "remark that is hurtful and wrong?"

More entries on: Election 2008

September 17, 2008

Canadian Politicians Clearly Listening to This

Posted by Robert Near at 02:30 PM ET | Comments (0)

On Sunday I decried that the election so far had focused on political foibles, not policy. Three days later, it's clear that the politicians have been reading the This blog.

Yesterday Layton pledged $100 million in skills training; Dion said he'd pay $900 million over four years in pharmacare; Harper thought that self employed workers should get parental benefits; and today the Green Party announced its entire policy platform. Their pledges include income splitting at tax time for couples and restoring the GST to 6 percent in order to fund city infrastructure needs.

Cynics will decry the the announcements as political pandering. I agree that it's more than a coincidence that politicians are giving hundreds of millions of dollars away at election time. But some of the ideas offered are progressive; they get me damn near excited about voting on October 14th.

They should do the same for you. If they don't, go out and make sure that there's something you're voting for. A politician's ear is never so open as during a candidate race.

More entries on: Election 2008

David Miller says "Vote Toronto" (read: "Greens")

Posted by Daniel Tseghay at 02:00 PM ET | Comments (1)

David Miller indirectly endorsed the Green party yesterday when he praised their national transit plan and their promise to increase funding for municipal infrastructure. Although he did not officially endorse the party, he did say it had the best plan for cities in a radio interview yesterday.

He also contrasted this thinly-veiled endorsement with some strong words for Stephen Harper, due, no doubt, to the latter's tendency to leave cities in the care of their respective provinces without a second glance.

"The prime minister always says cities are not of national importance," said Miller. "They are. And all of the parties should be speaking to that."

Although David Miller seems to be alone among mayors who opine on the federal election, perhaps the rest should take his example. It would be nice to have more democratically elected officials give their constituents an honest opinion.

More entries on: Election 2008

CMAJ blames Harper, but Dion should choose words carefully

Posted by Melita Kuburas at 10:02 AM ET | Comments (0)

An elderly New Brunswick woman who died last week is the 17th person whose death has been linked to the listeria outbreak, it was confirmed late Tuesday--the same day that the Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ) published an editorial blaming the Conservative government's change in policy for the severity of the listeriosis outbreak.

"Listeria is the biological agent, cold cuts the vector, but the ultimate cause may be risky government decisions," the editorial states.

This brings the issues of public health and pandemic preparedness, which have been looming over the elections campaign, to the forefront. But opposition parties need to use this information carefully. They need to accentuate the failure of self-regulating policies; of the reduction of influence of the Public Health Agency of Canada; of the lack of a true, arm's length investigation--without appearing as though they are exploiting people's deaths for political gain.

When Liberal Leader Stephane Dion made the promise to spend $50-million to improve federal food inspections at a Walkerton high school last week, Canwest's Don Martin wrote that a teacher told him they were sick of being "poster kids for poison products." He added local reporters "winced" when told Dion would make the safety announcement instead of his Green Shift plan.

The decision to hold the announcement in Walkerton was probably a turn-off for other voters too, as it took advantage of a perhaps relatable but still very different tragedy.

CMAJ offers published evidence in the form of a leaked document of the government's ambiguous, inadequate, actually ludicrous policies on food regulation in a time of a coast-to-coast outbreak. Although tempting, the opposition needs to refrain from any tacky attempts at laying the bodies on the doorstep of the bulletproof Harper.

More entries on: Election 2008

Pick A Number, Any Number

Posted by Lindsay Kneteman at 09:07 AM ET | Comments (0)

Let's play a game - guess the voter turnout for the 2008 federal election.

First, let's take a look at the voter turnout from the last few times we hit the polls (for more numbers, stop by Elections Canada):

November 21, 1988 - 75.3%
October 25, 1993 - 71.8%
June 2, 1997 - 67%
November 27, 2000 - 64.1%
June 28, 2004 - 60.9%
January 23, 2006 - 64. 7%

So what happened in 2006 that resulted in at least a few more Canadians voting? Were we starting to care once more about democracy? Or perhaps they just really wanted the Liberals out of power after their ten-plus-year run? Whatever it was, it certainly makes this game more interesting. Will voter turnout jump up even further in 2008? Or will it return to its downward spiral?

To answer those questions, we need to take a couple other big factors into consideration, the first being the timing of the election. In addition to being a Jewish holiday, October 14 is also the day after Thanksgiving. While some Canadians will likely be taking advantage of that stat holiday to take a vacation, others will spend Tuesday scrambling to catch up on work. Though many Canadians certainly consider voting as their civic duty, others see it as something to squeeze in after work and before dinner. If those individuals have to stay late at the office, the store or the factory, voting might just be squeezed out all together.

The other big faction to consider is of course the atmosphere that surrounds this election. As everyone and their dog have pointed out, the only Canadian who wants this election is Stephen Harper. We are a country that simply is not currently interested in going to the polls and the lack of a defining issue, charismatic personalities and fresh but digestible policies aren't helping matters.

True, it's only week two; there's still plenty of time for drama and scandal to take place. And maybe if the media discovers Harper's plans for world domination or that Layton drives an import, Canadians will get fired up about this election.

Also, I suspect that if week five poll numbers put Harper within a striking distance of a majority, we'll see a rush of ABC Canadians heading out to vote on October 14.

So what kind of registered voter turnout does this all add up to? My guess is 62.9. What's yours?

More entries on: Election 2008

September 16, 2008

The Price of Propaganda

Posted by Graeme McElheran at 02:41 PM ET | Comments (2)

IN EDMONTON

Things political start to stink when they stagnate.

Conservatives have typically had a lock on fiscal prudence, portraying the other mainstream parties as tax-and-spendthrifts who cannot be trusted with the public purse. Canadians have long accepted the presumption that Conservatives would keep tighter control of public finance than any other party.

Those days are over, or should be, and I'm not just talking about Stephen Harper's most recent budget that has a war to pay for - call it what it is - on top of some things Canadians need, as well as a few they want.

It seems the Conservatives have been in power too long - in Alberta, at least. They've lost touch with their grassroots. The Reform movement that Harper and many of his cohorts were parts of - that gave rise to the current government - had a tightfisted ethos. One of its mainstays was for government to cut spending, and strict accountability for spending that could not be cut.

I wonder what Preston Manning would say about political advertisements for incumbent Conservative MPs being paid for not from Conservative party coffers, but with taxpayer funds.

The "non-partisan" Canadian Taxpayers Federation - traditionally a Liberal-bashing, Conservative-extolling lobby group with links to Manning, Reform and the Conservatives - clearly disapproves of taxpayers bearing the cost of campaign advertising. The CTF filed a formal complaint with Elections Canada over perceived Liberal indiscretions of this vein in Beaches-East York, saying a Liberal MP's pamphlet "amounts to election advertising and its cost should not be borne by the taxpayers of Canada."

In Alberta the CTF made similar comments - but alas, filed no grievance - when Conservative campaign propaganda circulated during the weeks just prior to and now following the election call.

The black-and-white format, featuring either Harper or the local candidate, is always the same, the message always similar: your neighbourhood is not safe; previous Liberal governments are to blame; Conservatives are taking Real Action!

Leaving aside the touchy issue of playing up public fear and outrage at a lax justice system in order to court votes, there seems to be an essential hypocrisy at work here. Surely the Conservative power base would not approve of MPs using taxpayer money from their expense accounts to publish election campaign material. Surely this is one of those areas where Conservatives are much more accountable than those Liberals scoundrels.

Well, maybe a bit. According to the CTF, Liberals are worse when it comes to using public funds for partisan political purposes (lest we forget the Gomery inquiry). But Conservatives are also spending public money this way - a departure from their fundamentals.

The parties that trade governance of Canada back and forth are both guilty of this practice. It has become the norm, and we're expected to buy the Conservative evasion that the Liberals spend public money this way too, only more of it and more often.

Canadians, I sense, are weary of the politics of could-be-worse. Unfortunately were stuck with such a deflated attitude because so far there's nothing really inspiring about this election, no new ideas, nothing dynamic to get behind. The Green Shift is a flop. Nothing and no one has galvanized voters or kindled their faith. Parties are sticking with tried and true strategy: 'Pick us over the other guys, because they'd be worse than us.'

So, you know, we'll pick one of them. But it seems a return to fundamentals is in order, for all parties. They should be offering Canadians something better than could-be-worse. Isn't that why we elected them in the first place?

More entries on: Election 2008

September 15, 2008

Anticipating Alberta's Apathy

Posted by Graeme McElheran at 12:10 PM ET | Comments (1)

IN EDMONTON

Hello? Can anybody hear me?

Probably not. According to the political compass test I just took my politics are libertarian-leftist, which apparently puts me in the same camp as Nelson Mandela, Gandhi and the Dalai Lama. I have no idea what that means in our national election climate, but in Alberta it means I am in the weeds. Directionless. Disenfranchised. Without a voice, representation or any hope of political vindication, simply because I don't vote Tory.

Remember in 2006 when the Harper Conservatives came to power? For the first time in recent memory the entire voting block of Alberta went Tory blue. Nothing new, really; for almost four decades in Alberta, political leanings towards anything but Conservative have always been seen as a bit of a joke. This is the heartland of Reform, Stephen Harper's home turf, where right-wingers still decry Trudeau's National Energy Policy of the early 1980s (even as they consider the same idea in a different context today). To paraphrase one rural voter who summed things up nicely during Alberta's apathetic provincial election last March: "I don't like the NDP, and I don't vote Liberal because I'm born and raised in Alberta, and I dont vote Liberal."

Whew. With such rhetoric as the prevailing ethos, what's a non-Conservative Albertan to do?

Not much, according to Dr. Chaldeans Mensah, an Edmonton-based political scientist who recently told the Edmonton Journal that the Conservatives' only vulnerabilities in Alberta are to be found among Edmonton's eight (out of Alberta's 28) parliamentary seats. He's probably right; still known derisively as 'Redmonton' in certain circles, the capital city has a waning reputation of opposition to the status quo. But it's a thankless opposition fewer and fewer are willing to admit, let alone support or champion.

The real crusher will in all likelihood be yet another low voter turnout in Alberta. People vote for different reasons, but they don't seem to bother when Conservatives are a lock.

Which is a shame. Alberta is facing a crisis of political issues, not the least of which is the oilsands development that's causing some international hullabaloo. Despite being one of the most controversial energy schemes in history, growth of the oilsands projects is only going to increase. Regardless of whether you're for or against exploitation of the resource, no one can deny that oilsands extraction creates a huge environmental footprint that extends dimensionally beyond Alberta's borders, or that the product is destined for US markets and does nothing to lower energy prices in Alberta. Jack Layton, Stephane Dion and Elizabeth May are talking about all this, while Harper defends the oilsands; but only the Liberals have thus far announced a candidate in Fort McMurray to oppose the Tory incumbent, who won in 2006 with 65 per cent of a 48 per cent voter turnout.

Oh yes, there's plenty to talk about in Alberta. Too bad Albertans aren't doing it.

More entries on: Election 2008

Nobody likes a tattletale, Mr. Layton

Posted by Melissa Wilson at 09:18 AM ET | Comments (4)

While no election campaign would be complete without a good amount of badmouthing and near-defamation of one's opponents, it's looking like this election is going to include nothing but, at least on the orangier side of things. New Democratic Party leader Jack Layton has seemingly abandoned the age-old campaign tradition of promising (ahem, "promising") change in favour of taking on Big Brother Stephen.

When he's not proclaiming that our Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper hates women, poor people and children (Harper probably hates baby pandas, too, right Jack?), Layton is taking it to the streets with this vague campaign slogan: "Stephen Harper can't be trusted."

The motto also appears on every chapter of Layton's PM plan, which is laden with "What a jerk!"s and "Look at me! Look at meeee!"s. In fact, for the most part, each chapter of Layton's plan follows the same formula.

From his plan for protecting the average consumer:

1) Talk about how bad things are in Canada ("Families like yours are struggling to make ends meet")
2) Blame it on Stephen Harper ("[He] has abandoned you")
3) Draw attention to Harper's "$50-billion tax giveaway to those price-gouging drug companies, cell phone giants, big banks and big oil"
4) List reasons why Harper can't be trusted (Basically, he doesn't care about you or your loved ones)
5) List reasons why Liberal leader Stéphane Dion won't do the job right
6) List things that he, Layton, has done in the past to do right by us Canadians ("Promoted a plan to phase in universal prescription drug coverage to protect you and your family from soaring costs")

That's all well and good, Mr. Layton, but umm . . . what do you plan to do for us now? Are you going to sit around playing solitaire if elected, or don a pair of red boots and a golden lasso and save the world? I can't tell by reading your plan.

Considering the NDP is currently poling at around 15% according to yesterday's Canadian Press Harris-Decima poll, and there is less than a month until the Big Day, I think it's about time Layton steps up his game and leaves all these childish antics behind.

In conclusion, if any of you readers would like a front-row seat to the gong show that is the Stephen Harper is a Meanie tour, Jack Layton will be bringing the gospel to Halifax and Dartmouth, N.S. today. Check out the Toronto Star's briefing for all your PM-candidate stalking needs.

More entries on: Election 2008

September 14, 2008

Week 1: More Policy, Not Politics

Posted by Robert Near at 08:08 PM ET | Comments (0)

One week into the election and it's all been about personalities. Dion in snowshoes; Harper at the piano; Layton the charismatic potential PM; May the scrappy women's lib champion.

And it's all been good for Stephen Harper: his popularity has surged, largely due to the perception within the Canadian electorate that he's a 'strong' leader. Sweaters and breakfast tables, apparently, go over well in the True North. (So, too, do unbuttoned shirts, Mr. Coyne).

What was supposed to be the biggest issue of the election - the Liberal's Green Shift - has largely been ignored by the media. The same goes for other key issues such as Afghanistan, health care and the economy. Instead, headlines about Dion's fishing abilities and puffin poop abound. The election still has four more weeks. Hopefully, things can focus more on the policies, not the politics, of the the parties.

More entries on: Election 2008

September 12, 2008

What is Stephen Harper Reading?

Posted by Dominique Jarry-Shore at 01:00 PM ET | Comments (1)

(Okay, so that's my messy bookshelf, not Stephen Harper's.)

Yann Martel is a determined guy. You'd think that after sending 37 books to the Prime Minister with only one very pithy reply, he would have given up. But in a recent interview Martel said he is continuing his "guerrilla book club" with Mr. Harper, even as the award-winning author travels around the world.

Martel is trying to start a dialogue with Harper about the importance of Arts funding. So far though, it's been a one way conversation and Martel has been met with "dead stony silence."

This summer, while Canadians were distracted by the Olympics, more cuts by the Tories were made were made and in what seemed to be a polarizing issue in Quebec, artists wasted no time mobilizing and protesting in the streets.

Given the reaction, I'm a little surprised that other Parties aren't making a bigger deal about the cuts. When I asked the NDP's Anne Lagace-Dowson about this, she said it was because "it's a given" that the NDP are going to support the arts. Fair enough. (See here, and here for more.)

In the meantime, we can always hope that Stephen Harper will open up a book from Martel's suggested reading list, and develop policies that support and promote literature and the Arts in general.

"I think we expect our elites to be well-informed and I don't think Mr. Harper is well-informed in terms of literature at all. I'm guessing he's a man who hasn't read a book of literature since high school... Life is about way more than how we are administered. Life comes down to how we relate, how we think of the universe, how we inform ourselves about life. And one of the key ways to do that is through books." -- Yann Martel

So, if Stephen Harper's not reading literature, what do you think he is reading these days?

Yann, if you're reading, drop us a line...

More entries on: Election 2008

Facebook vote swapping: Clearly it's time for PR

Posted by Graham F. Scott at 12:11 PM ET | Comments (1)

The sudden appearance of a Facebook group called "Anti-Harper Vote Swap Canada" has me torn. Frankly, I'm opposed to strategic voting: it distorts an already distorted-enough electoral process and mostly it doesn't work. Vote swapping is meant to allow people to vote strategically while still voting their consciences. You agree to hold your nose and mark the ballot for a candidate you don't truly support, with the agreement that someone else in another riding will do the same, with the common goal of influencing the larger party-level results. Let's leave aside for a moment that this works (or fails to work) entirely on the honour system, and that people may not actually follow through. What this movement really illustrates is the need to scrap our perverse First-Past-The-Post electoral system.

Vote swapping is just a symptom of a deeper problem: for most people in the country, it doesn't matter a whit who they vote for. At the riding level, their votes have no effect on their parliamentary representation, because MPs are routinely elected after receiving just a third of the votes cast. People are trying to find their own ways to game the system so that their votes actually have an impact, and vote-swapping is one of those ways. But it's not a real solution. What we need is a well-thought-through proportional voting system that produces a parliament that actually represents the opinion of the voters. There's a Faceboook group for that, too.

More entries on: Election 2008

Green Party to forgive student debt

Posted by Melissa Wilson at 10:07 AM ET | Comments (1)

Students! Unite! Elect Elizabeth May and she will keep the loan collectors at bay!

At least she says she will.

During a pitstop at St. Francis Xavier University in Antigonish, N.S. yesterday, the Green party leader announced that if elected she will forgive 50 percent of student debt upon completion of a degree or certificate program. The Greens also plan to initiate a Canadian National Student Loan and Bursary Program.

A Green vote could mean an end to ramen noodles unless May's plan to ease students' "debt sentence" is little more than an empty promise appealing to young voters' beer funds.

I've got to give her credit for trying to tap into the student market though. Young adults don't typically rush the polling booths on election day, and with the Blues and Reds focusing on economic issues (who's going to cause a recession today, I wonder?) May might actually earn a seat or two by preaching to the tuition-broke.

What do the other parties have planned?

Conservative Party: Stephen Harper is still handing out $100 each month to preschoolers, but he doesn't list education as a key issue for the 2008 election.

Liberal Party: If it's not the Green Shift, I don't think Stéphane Dion is interested.

New Democratic Party: Jack Layton is spending more time badmouthing his opponants than laying out a solid education plan. He promises to "bring education opportunities up and costs down." That's certainly a plan students can take to the bank.

Bloc Québécois: Gilles Duceppe is offering $3.5 billion for post-secondary education. (For what, though? Separatist studies?)

More entries on: Election 2008

September 11, 2008

Layton visits Quebeckians

Posted by Dominique Jarry-Shore at 10:36 PM ET | Comments (3)

A big orange bus rolled into the tony hamlet of Westmount this afternoon. It was a brief pit stop on a day that saw three, count 'em three, party leaders descend on Montreal.

Jack Layton was here to put in an appearance with star NDP candidate Anne Lagace Dowson, a former CBC radio host and likely the NDPs best hope to win another seat in Quebec.

Inside her headquarters a Buddha sat on the mantle next to a pile of End ATM Fees stickers. Perhaps a little Zen would be welcomed. Lagace Dowson had been running in a byelection before the general election call meant extending her campaign another five weeks.

Here is how things unfolded:
1:10 pm - The Layton travelling road show unloaded and set up.
1:20 pm - Lagace Dowson walked in bearing a bouquet of gladioli, orange of course.
1:49 pm - A party organizer was overheard asking "Where are all the people? This is not enough people."
1:50 pm - A bus bearing media and party organizers pulled up. Suddenly there were a lot more people.
2:10 pm - Jack Layton arrived to much fanfare. The guy is charisma personified.

Once inside, among chants of "Layton Premier Ministre," Layton promoted his environmental plan which had been unveiled earlier in the day.

There was plenty of back patting for Quebeckers, whom Layton referred to as leaders on the environment. And there were the requisite references to his childhood growing up outside of Montreal. (Many federal politicians like to play up their connection to Montreal, it gives them street cred.)

I will write more analysis about the environmental policy in coming posts. For now, here are a few photos from the event.

PS: The money sound bite:
"It look likes the sweater has come off. You cannot cover up an agenda with something fuzzy like a sweater." That was Laytons response to a reporter asking him about Harpers charm offensive and somewhat less than charming behaviour of the past few days. Reporters in the scrum did not take kindly to Harpers use of force to remove them this morning.

More entries on: Election 2008

September 10, 2008

Elect a Tory, kiss net neutrality goodbye

Posted by mason at 01:11 PM ET | Comments (0)

In a statement published on international peer-to-peer news site p2pnet.net, the NDP's Charlie Angus has brought the net neutrality issue into the federal election campaign. He begins by outlining what he calls the ruling Conservatives' ignorance toward digital innovation and the recent axing of the New Media Fund. The Harper government falls into line with the pro-free-market U.S. administration when it comes to copyright legislation, he continues, before extolling the virtues of his party as the only one defending Internet freedoms in the House of Commons.

"There are key urban ridings across Canada where the issue of copyright and Net Neutrality could spell the difference in winning or losing the riding," Angus writes. "This provides a unique opportunity to the arts, education and innovation community to get active and organized. The Conservative party needs to know that the digital community will push back against their corporate agenda."

Full text of the statement here.

More entries on: Copyright/left | Cultural industries | Election 2008 | Harper Index | Interweb

Layton: Canada will decide Afghan Politics

Posted by derek at 10:07 AM ET | Comments (1)

While criticizing Taliban plans to influence the Canadian federal election, Jack Layton threw in this unintentionally hilarious and arrogant soundbite: "...we'll decide our own policies right here in Canada with regard to the war in Afghanistan." Umm, shouldn't it be up to Afghans to decide policies related to the war in their own country?

More entries on: Election 2008

September 09, 2008

NDP and Tories should be embarrassed by the Green Party shutout

Posted by Graham F. Scott at 12:21 PM ET | Comments (4)

The decision not to allow Green Party leader Elizabeth May into the upcoming leaders' debates is a shame. As I wrote last week, while there are legitimate reasons for progressives of all stripes to be wary of the Greens' boat-rocking on the centre-left, including them is the right thing to do.

The Green Party has hired Toronto-based lawyer Peter Rosenthal and will deploy him against the networks, but as the Law is Cool blog points out today, political parties haven't found the courts sympathetic in the past when they tried to sue their way into the studio. Both the National Party of Canada and the Natural Law Party tried and failed on that count. The Greens have more credibility than those two fringe parties, but the courts are very leery of mandating what private media should and should not cover, and it seems the party will make little progress on that front.

Now, suddenly, the Greens are enjoying widespread and sympathetic media coverage (like this blog post, of course) because of this unpopular decision by the broadcasters. And the decision by the Conservatives and the NDP to peevishly boycott a Green-inclusive debate is unbecoming for both. The current uproar over the mechanics of the debate and who's-boycotting-who is just a distraction from a real discussion of envrionmental policy which is desperately needed, and formally including the Greens in that discussion is a no-brainer.

More entries on: Election 2008

September 08, 2008

Recommended reading for Election '08

Posted by Graham F. Scott at 10:16 AM ET | Comments (1)

We're still getting up and running with our blog-based election coverage (check back soon!) but there are plenty of other places online to get your daily fix of electoral indignation. Our good friends at Rabble are running a great election blog with a stellar lineup of writers, at election.rabble.ca.

We're also fans of Maisonneuve magazine's MediaScout blog, which does daily dissections of the country's mainstream media outlets and does the kind of critical analysis of news coverage that seems sorely lacking in, well, most newsrooms.

I also wanted to alert you to this report from the Public Policy Forum, which compares the demographics of Canada's most recent parliament to the British parliament and the U.S. Congress. Interesting tidbits:

• 68 percent of Canadian MPs have a university degree;
• The average cost of running as a candidate in Canada is just over $61,000 ("The cost of running in an election has a direct impact on who can run — High cost of entry means candidates need to be independently wealthy or well-connected," says the PPF );
• 64 percent of Canadian MPs worked in private business before being elected, compared to 15 percent coming from either public service or non-profit backgrounds.

(Thanks to the always-excellent Slaw.ca for the heads-up on the PPF report.)

More entries on: Election 2008

---

 Subscribe to the feed

---

Blog This Must-Reads

---

---

---

Blog This Archives

November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
March 2000

---