Canada Post Cancels Home Delivery? Maybe Not...

Last month, Minister of Transport Lisa Raitt announced that Canada Post will be ceasing all door to door deliveries of mail.  The operations are to be suspended over a 5 year span, as community mailboxes are erected throughout the country.

Conveniently, Ms. Raitt made said announcement days after Parliament ended for the Christmas session, effectively ending any form of debate on the issue.  I suspect, the announcement was also made as close to Christmas as possible, to minimize media coverage as well.  However, it seems as though the Conservative Government under estimated the passion of Canadians for the service.

Deepak Chopra: Mail Scrooge?

Numerous MP's returned to the Parliament for an emergency session, and simultaneously hauled in Deepak Chopra, the CEO of Canada Post to explain his rational for why ending home delivery was necessary.

Chopra came up with a series of fantastic answers to the MP's grilling session.  At one point, he suggested that the feedback he had been receiving from Canadians was positive, and that Canadian seniors have told him they welcome the opportunity for more fresh air and exercise by walking a few blocks each day to retrieve their mail. 

Chopra and Raitt indicated that the end of mail delivery to our doors was necessary, as Canada Post is facing a $100 million deficit for the year, and the projections for the next five years look even worse.  Not surprisingly, Chopra dodged a series of questions in which he was asked point blank if he received a bonus in the last year, and exactly how much his bonus was.  The closest he would get to providing an answer, was to say that his salary is "a matter of public record".

Well I agree!  His salary SHOULD be a matter of public record.  However, it is not.  Most Canadians would never have known that Chopra's salary is nearly $500,000 a year, or that his bonus was paid out at 33% for an additional sum of close to $200,000 unless NDP MP Paul Dewar hadn't stated so during this parliamentary committee meeting.  In fact, in 2012, the Toronto Sun filed an access to information request for a number of bonus payouts to Canada post employees over the previous four years.  They also asked for a breakdown of how much was paid out to 23 members of the executive committee.  All of the individual payment numbers were refused based on "issues of privacy".  What they DID find out was that 7,402 Canada Post employees were paid some sort of bonus during the time period, including all 23 members of the executive board.  Clearly his salary and bonus is not a matter of public record.  It should be noted that Canada Post posted a net loss before taxes of $327 million in 2012.  A significant portion of which came because of a 25 day strike by postal workers.

I find it rather objectionable that anyone received a bonus when the company is bleeding money.  While good personal performance should be rewarded, it should not be done so when the company is hemorrhaging money.

A number of ways Canada Post could increase revenues was suggested by the parliamentary committee, including offering banking services at its branches in remote locations, or small towns where regular bank branches do not exist.  A wise suggestion.  The Swiss Postal service implemented this service several years ago to great success.

While the Conservative Government seems intent on ramming through the end of mail delivery as we know it (the first communities to lose this service are scheduled to be announced this summer), there may be some hope after all.

Thomas Mulcair: Defender of the Post

Thomas Mulcair, leader of the NDP, and Olivia Chow, Transportation Critic are set to introduce a motion in the house tomorrow declaring home mail delivery an invaluable service to Canadians.  They will force a vote on the matter, which should be an interesting political stone to throw.  An election will be held next year.  Forcing MPs to effectively vote for or against mail delivery will no doubt come to haunt some MPs who find themselves in tight electoral races in their own districts.  And you can bet, the NDP will make it very public come campaigning time which Conservatives voted to kill off their constituents delivery.  

It will all play out in the Commons tomorrow, and it should be interesting to see if Stephen Harper cracks the party whip, or if he lets MPs vote on their own.  I would suspect that independent voting will mean that the NDP motion will pass, which will likely see the plan of killing mail delivery dead on the floor.  If the whip is cracked... well... I guess we will see who will survive re-election.

Patriot Games: The Conservative Majority

So through the last 35 days of Canada's 41st election, pollsters were in a frenzy to release the most accurate seat projections they could. They polled citizens endlessly hoping to be the most accurate pollster in the nation.

And yet, with the exception of an occasional blip, almost no poll predicted a Conservative majority government.

So how did it happen?

The Conservative party captured about 40% of the votes cast in this election. That was up about 5% from the 2008 election. But that extra 5% in vote secured an additional 24 seats for the party, leap-frogging them past the magic 155 seat count which is required by any ruling party to obtain the majority of seats in the House of Commons.

Ontario was the winning battle ground for the Conservative party. Throughout the election Campaign, the numbers from Ontario, the most seat-rich province in the country polled the Conservatives at a reasonable lead over their rivals. EKOS for example, suggested that the Conservatives were trending about 39% support in Ontario, while both the NDP and Liberal party were tied at 26%.

With these numbers, it would be reasonable to expect that the Conservatives would win 42 of the 106 seats up for grabs in Ontario (roughly 40% of total seats in the province), and the Liberals and NDP would split the remaining 64 seats between them.

But, with Canada's First-Past-The-Post system, this was not the case. The Conservatives actually won 73 seats in Ontario (69% of the seats). Total vote count or "Popular Vote" does not really count in Canada. All that matters is that 1 candidate in each riding gets more votes than any one single competitor.

A great example of how this works is in the Bramlea-Gore-Malton riding in the Greater Toronto Area. In this riding, the Conservative Candidate won the seat by securing 19,907 votes. The NDP candidate in this riding was close behind with 19,369 votes, and the Liberal candidate came in at a close third with 16,401 votes. Other parties running in this riding tied up the remaining 2,119 votes.

Since the Conservative candidate came ahead of any other single rival with 19,907 votes, he wins the seat even though 37,889 constituents did not vote for the Conservative candidate. This phenomenon, known as "vote splitting" occurred in dozens of ridings in Ontario, giving the Conservative Party an additional 31 seats in the province, and thus, securing them a majority government.

This is not the first time this has occurred in a Canadian election. It also allowed Jean Chretien to form a Liberal majority government in the 1990s.

While vote splitting can create a stable government for a 4 year term by allowing 1 party to have a majority government, it often does not sit well with the public. This is because although 40% of Canadians voted for the Conservative party, 60% did not, yet more than 50% of Canadians are now represented by a Conservative Member of Parliament.

In the past when vote splitting has occurred resulting in a majority government, it often brings about calls from the people demanding the electoral system be changed to provide proportional representation. More often than not these calls go unaddressed by government. However this year may be different, as this phenomenon has never occurred immediately after 3 successive minority governments. It will be interesting to see where this will lead our electoral system over the next 5 - 10 years.

Patriot Games: The Dust Settles

As the dust settles from Canada's 41st Election Campaign last night, political pundits ponder the strange events, and how it all happened.

The big prize went to Conservative leader Stephen Harper, who finally got his long-coveted Majority Government. The Conservatives took 167 seats of the 308 available in the House of Commons.

The NDP's Jack Layton, however, celebrated a huge victory of his own last night. The NDP went into the election with a mere 38 seats (quite respectable, considering the party's highest seat count prior to 2011 was 43). By the end of the vote counting, the NDP had decimated the Bloc Quebecois and the Liberal party to end up as the official opposition with 102 seats under their belt. Jack is reportedly already measuring curtains for his move into the Official Opposition leader's new home at Stornoway.

It is likely today that (former) Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff is packing his things, as he has been given an eviction notice to vacate Stornoway as soon as possible. Both Ignatieff and Bloc Quebecois leaders Gilles Duceppe were defeated in their own ridings last night, and will be in the unemployment office this morning.

All of this occurred as a small ray of hope beamed down onto the Vancouver Island riding of Saanich-Gulf Islands, where Elizabeth May triumphed in becoming the first Green Party member ever elected to Parliament.

Stay tuned for an in-depth analysis of how these events unfolded, and how this drastically new Parliament will or will not change Canada for the next 4 years.

Patriot Games: Ekos Predicts Elizabeth May Will Win

Elizabeth May: The Green Wild Card

Over the last two weeks, Canada has watched the 2011 Federal Election campaign unfold into the most dramatic bout of politics in the last two decades.

The most prevalent topic du jour has of course been the meteoric rise of the NDP in nearly all regions of Canada with the exception of Ontario and Alberta. In fact, as of May 1st, the eve of the election, EKOS pollsters show the NDP have now taken the lead in BC, which has staunchly been a conservative base for the bulk of the last two elections.

But another game changer has burst onto the scene tonight: Elizabeth May. EKOS predicts the Green Party will indeed earn their first ever seat in the house of commons tomorrow. Granted, the pollsters did not specify May's riding specifically, but realistically she is the only candidate high-profile enough to be considered a likely winner.

True, it is only 1 seat of the 308 up for grabs in Parliament. But the Greens will now have a high profile member in parliament, and more importantly, getting regular face time on TV throughout the next sitting of Parliament. Moreover, in the next election (god forbid it be any time soon), Canada's Media Consortium will have no legal leg to stand on to prevent May from getting into the televised leadership debates.

The question looms however, should we somehow end up with an NDP-Liberal coalition government that lasts for a year or two after the votes are counted tomorrow, how will May impact the left of centre vote in the next election? It's hard to imagine that the NDP's Jack Layton and Elizabeth May will become fast friends, as their parties tend to share a lot of the same voters.

If you think this election has been full of frothy excitement, I think we may be in for a real wild time the next go around.

All eyes will be on BC tomorrow night as the votes are counted. The NDP and the Conservatives are neck and neck throughout the nation, and British Columbians stand to be the King Makers in Election 41. If EKOS is wrong, and May loses her riding, the conservatives will retain an all important seat. If EKOS is correct and May wins, Conservative incumbent Gary Lunn will be out of a job, the Conservatives lose a seat they desperately need, and Jack Layton will no doubt be hatching some sort of plan to nip the Green Party in the bud.

More info to come.

Jack-Attack: Will Jack Layton Change Canada On May 2?

Fierce: Gearing Up For The Jack-Attack!

Jack-Attack comin atcha! Or so say the latest political polls.

Jack Layton & his NDP are rising meteorically across Canada. Late last week, a number of political polls from reputed pollsters such as Nanos, Ipsos-Reid and Ekos showed a shocking trend, suggesting that Jack and his party are gearing up to make a major derailment in the train that is the Liberal campaign.

The polls show NDP support higher than the Liberals in several areas of the country. Especially in dire straights is Gilles Duceppe and the Bloc Quebecois. For the first time in years, the Bloc is trailing in popularity in it's own province to a rival. And who would have guessed that rival would be the NDP?

Currently, the NDP holds a single seat in the 75 seat province of Quebec, and naturally that seat is in a multi-lingual section of Montreal.

These revelations have prompted mass panic from The Liberal, Conservative and Bloc camps, with all parties launching all out attacks on Jack Layton and his party over the Easter weekend (not very love-thy-neighbor, is it?).

All of the pollsters cautioned on Friday, however, that while the NDP has slowly made gains in popular vote since the beginning of the election campaign, things may not be as they seem. Political polls tend to have fickle outcomes in general, but can be even more so prior to a weekend. The pollsters urged Canadians to wait until after the Easter break to draw conclusions as to the reality of the numbers.

Well, the Easter break is over, and the numbers are in again. And they are higher than they were last week. This is shocking news. Ekos predicts, that if the election were held today, the NDP would take 100 seats in the house of commons, second only to Stephen Harper's conservatives with 131. The Liberals have been projected to scavenge off the remnants with 69 seats.

And that's not all. If these numbers hold true, the entire landscape of Canada would surely change. With the NDP taking so many ridings in Quebec, the Bloc would be reduced to fringe party status. Additionally, this would reduce the Conservatives stronghold to only the prairies and Ontario, forcing the two to unite. No more of that "Western Canada - Vs. Ontario" argument. But it doesn't stop there either.

With this Jack-Attack, it would be difficult to imagine a Conservative minority government surviving for long. All opposition parties stated prior to the election that they would not support the budget put forth by Stephen Harper. And Harper himself has stated that after the election, they would present the exact same budget to parliament. This does not bode well for Harper's continued residence at 24 Sussex. It is unlikely that the same budget would pass, which would either trigger another election, which is not likely to occur. The other most likely option would be for the Governor General to ask the leader of the Official Opposition (Jack Layton) to form a government. Of course, Layton would require the support of the Liberals to make such an option work.

Of course, Michael Ignatieff, the Liberal Leader could choose not to support the NDP, and throw his support to Stephen Harper instead. However doing so would likely drive even more of his supporters to the NDP.

The ironic part is, after two elections of Layton proclaiming that he was "running for Prime Minister", it seems he proved he was telling the truth!

There is still 1 week left in the campaign, and as the Jack-Attack proves, anything can truly happen in a week. But for the mean time, we will have to wait until tomorrow, as the pollsters are furiously working through the night to determine if Canadians are suffering with a bout of mass-hysteria, or if the love of Jack is strong and true.

Patriot Games: Election 2011

Not even a week has passed since Canada's ruling government was toppled, and already political posturing and scandals abound.

Last Friday, in an historic move, the Conservative Government was found in contempt of parliament on scandals of hidden costs of military jets and corporate tax cuts, to lying cabinet ministers and document doctoring.

Not 10 minutes after the final session of Parliament wrapped up did Stephen Harper's attack dog, John Baird, begin his annual fear mongering session on national news magazine's cameras declaring a conspiracy by opposition parties to form a coalition government that would throw our country into economic and political fires of Hell.

Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff did his best to answer reporters questions about the possibility of a coalition government with the NDP without actually giving a yes or no answer. He did this for a couple of days then finally broke down and gave a resounding "NO!" to the question.

Michael Ignatieff Plays Dumb: "What's a Coalition?"

This likely indicates that the Liberals will be running an all-or-nothing campaign on the election trail, as I believe a coalition had being enthusiastically discussed prior to the government falling. Now that Ignatieff publicly stated that no such agreement would occur after the election regardless of the results, it seems likely that his career would be quickly eviscerated should he go back on his word.

Since coalition is out of the question now, this puts the Liberals in a pressure cooker to perform drastically better than the last election, if not actually form a government. It is unlikely that Ignatieff would be allowed to keep his job as Liberal leader if the party fails to gain a significant amount of seats in the House.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper seemed to be sitting pretty for the first few days of the campaign while the heat was on his arch-rival. Until Sebastian Togneri turned up like a bad penny again.

You may remember Togneri's name. He was a high ranking government aide for many years until he was forced to resign over allegations of interfering in several requests for government information made under the Freedom of Information Act.

Very recently, even Conservative Minister Rona Ambrose had no choice but to call for an RCMP investigation into Togneri's interference with the requests for information. (Though, I find it odd that the RCMP were called in a year after Togneri's resignation). Unfortunately for Stephen Harper, the request for an RCMP investigation coincided with a Parliamentary inquiry into Minister Bev Oda's alleged altering of government documents.

Well, now Togneri's name was in the media again, as some lucky reporter discovered that he was working on the campaign for Conservative hopeful Ryan Hastman in the Edmonton Strathcona riding.

Linda Duncan: A Little Orange Fish In A Big Blue Sea

Hastman has a somewhat uphill battle in front of him to begin with. In the 2008 election, NDP candidate Linda Duncan wrestled the riding away from Conservative incumbent Rahim Jaffer (after Jaffer himself suffered several political scandals). From all accounts, Linda Duncan, a long time Edmonton Lawyer is well liked, and has been made high-profile by the NDP since it was the first time an Alberta riding has been anything but Tory blue since the Anne McLellen days.

Unfortunately for Hastman and Stephen Harper, it doesn't look good having a disgraced government aide currently under police investigation helping out with a new Conservative candidate's campaign.

Things turned from bad to worse for both Stephen Harper and Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff the last two days as Green Party leader Elizabeth May burst on to the scene in a blaze of controversy, fighting for her political rights.

Elizabeth May Is Going To Debate Your Ass Off. Deal With It.

You may remember from the 2008 election, when the Green Party was just starting to gain credibility and a lot of media attention, that the Canadian Broadcast Consortium (basically a handful of executives from Canada's 4 main TV networks) decided that May would not be entitled to participate in the electoral debates. This prompted a huge public outcry, and a chance for all party leaders to look like the good guy on national television by stating that they believed May should be included in the debate. Finally the consortium relented, and May had her day in the spotlight. (She actually did quite well- check out my review of her performance here.)

This week, for some bizarre reason, the consortium again decided that May, despite being the leader of a national party that received 6% of all votes in the last election (that's 1 million votes - more than the Bloc Quebecois received) and that runs a candidate in every riding across Canada, was not worthy of participating in the debates because her party does not have a current, elected MP.

Let's not bother taking into account that the Reform Party and the Canadian Alliance Party, which are now both known as the Conservative Party, did not have elected MPs either during their first elections, but were still allowed to participate in the debates.

May has since launched a very public battle against the Consortium, and has retained a high profile lawyer to argue her case to the courts to sneak her way in to the debates.

This is particularly bad news for both Ignatieff and Harper. Partly because May seems to be very good a debating, and neither man likely wants her there. That being said, since Harper endorsed her presence in the last election, he can hardly say that she isn't entitled to be there for this election. He has since said he is open to her being there, but that all parties should submit to the rules put forth by the Consortium. Ignatieff on the other hand, has his barrels firmly aimed at Harper, and the more people included in the debate may lead the public to decide that there are other voting options rather than just the Liberals or the Conservatives, as he has been trying to prove in the media all week.

Foolishly, after May made her public tirade about not being included in the election debate, Ignatieff stated he was most keen on having a second debate televised solely between himself and Stephen Harper. Harper seemed keen on the idea as well, and all but issued a public challenge to his rival. Ignatieff then ran in front of the nearest camera and said it was on. However, as media attention intensified around May and her rhetoric of the debates being anti-democratic for shutting her out, Harper quietly back-peddled on his two-man debate idea. This gave Ignatieff an opportunity to call Harper "chicken", but also gave the impression of him being an elitist.

So to recap, in the last two weeks or so, we have had the government charged with contempt, allegations of creative bookkeeping, Ministers engaged in doctoring documents, police investigations, candidates receiving help from disgraced government aides, finger pointing at undemocratic television execs, threatened legal action, political threats and challenges, and a good deal of back-peddling from most of the party leaders. And we've just gotten started. Imagine where we will be in another 4 weeks!

Patriot Games: A Canadian Election For A New Generation

Oh, it's on, baby.

So last Friday, (March 25th) the Conservative's minority government was toppled when a confidence motion tabled by the opposition parties found the ruling conservatives in contempt of parliament.

The Look Of Contempt: Stephen Harper

This is intriguing for two reasons.

First, since the beginning of March, it was widely assumed that Prime Minister Stephen Harper would be forced to dissolve the parliament, but it was assumed that the motion of confidence that would be the downfall of the ruling government would be the Conservative's proposed budget. Not a decision that the government was in contempt of parliament.

Secondly, it's important because never through all of the political scandals or outrageous diatribes of the 144 years of parliament in Canada, has a ruling party found to be in contempt.

There were several reasons why the Conservative Government had been found in contempt. Firstly, there was the matter of 65 new F35 fighter jets that the government announced it would purchase for a reported $9 billion ($18 billion once a maintenance agreement was signed). The purchase announcement was made in July of 2010, but recently, the Parliamentary Budget Officer went public with his estimation of nearly double the cost to a whopping $30 billion.

Needless to say, this caused a frenzy on Parliament Hill, with the opposition parties attacking the Conservatives like rabid dogs on a lame rabbit. The opposition demanded to see numbers on paper, and their requests were repeatedly rebuffed. At the same time, it had been implied that the government was similarly down playing the expected costs of tax cuts being proposed for big corporations.

The second and more bizarre catalyst was the inquiry into International Co-operation Minister Bev Oda's document tampering scandal.

Bev Oda: Document Doctor

In 2009, a church based aid group known as Karios applied for renewal of it's international development grant. Oda stated publicly that the decision was actually made by the Canadian International Development Agency. However, upon digging up documents on the matter, it was discovered that the CIDA actually signed a note recommending the approval of the grant. And, that the note in question had actually been altered when the word "not" had been manually written before the word "approved".

Bev Oda later admitted in front of a committee that she had been the one who ordered the alteration of the document (if not altered it herself). And of course, no sooner had the admission left Oda's lips, were opposition MP's calling for her head to roll down the aisle of the House of Commons.

Predictably, after the committee wrapped up on Oda's case, the information that had been gathered on the F-35 fighter jets and the corporate tax cuts were all wrapped into one bundle of government-toppling joy. The final bow that had been attached to the bundle was the fact that the Liberal party intentionally stalled on voting on the Conservatives proposed budget, so they could bask in the glory of toppling the government on charges of contempt, rather than the budget.

And so, on March 26th, 2011, Stephen Harper was forced to seek the Governor General's approval to dissolve parliament, and presto! Election in May. So far from what we have seen, all of this political manoeuvring and scandal will just be the tip of the iceberg.

London Bridge is Falling Down

Well, not yet anyway.

Thousands of students took to the streets of London today to protest austerity measures enacted by the British Parliament, which will see tuition caps raised from approximately 4,700 pounds a year to nearly 14,000. In other words, tuition will be tripled.

The increase alone would be enough to incite riots, but one particular sore spot is the Coalition Government is currently made up of Conservatives and Liberal Democrats. In fact, the deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg, a Liberal Democrat, actually signed a pre-election pledge to oppose any tuition hikes.

The Liberal Democrats are typically a popular political party with students, as they have more progressive societal views and tend to lean more heavily for social programs and more universal education.

Today, students made public their thoughts on the government's decision. Sit ins and demonstrations were held across the nation, and central London was flooded with students waving banners, beating on drums and chanting.

The protests turned into riots in some part of the city. Small groups of protesters began throwing flares and paint bombs, tearing down police barricades and scuffling with officers. At one point Prince Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles car was being punched and kicked as they tried to get to a social engagement.

But lets look at the logistics of the British Government's plan. I'm not sure I quite understand it myself.

To be fair, Britain is actually the second UK country to massively increase tuition this year. A few weeks back, Ireland also tripled the cost of post secondary education, as part of their mandated requirements to receive their bailout package from the EU. Harsh to be sure, but when the country is on the verge of veritable insolvency, harsh measures are required.

As for the UK, one of two things has occurred. Either the nation is also on the verge of bankruptcy, and has just done a much better job of keeping it quiet, or the Coalition government has just suffered a moment of colossal stupidity.

If the former is true, then the UK obviously has no intentions on asking the EU for a bailout, or we would have heard about it long before now. I don't think this is a very likely scenario. Which leaves us with, drum roll please, the latter.

Granted I am not an economist. But from what I remember from my business studies, if the economy is in retreat, the best way to correct the problem is to increase the median salary of the nation. Increasing the median salary means people are making more money and also spending more. It also encourages investment and increases the size of income tax contributions directly to federal coffers.

Sounds simple, right?

So what is the best way to increase median salary? Typically this is done by creating more highly trained specialists (who automatically command large salaries) and by increasing the number of entrepreneurs (who in turn pay more taxes and hire lower skilled labor).

And what is the best and easiest way of creating more highly trained specialists and entrepreneurs? Well, by making post secondary education more accessible of course!

So, since the government has chosen the opposite of the above example, what is likely the long term outcome?

Every 10% increase in tuition means less and less people can afford to access education. Since the tuition will go up nearly 300%, this means vastly less people will get the education they need. This provides the government a very small window of time to find other ways to save money and reverse the tuition rates. If the government fails to reverse the tuition costs, within 5 - 10 years, Britain will have a much higher unskilled workforce (who naturally make less money) and a much smaller skilled workforce. Thus creating a downward spiral in their economy for decades to come.

And of course, there is the potential long term damage done by continuing rioting.

The eyes of the world are on the British government now. I urge them to use this as only a temporary measure and come to their senses soon.

John Baird Returned To Environment Minister

John Baird: Angry Finger-Pointer or Environment Minister?

Upon the recent proverbial happy pill that Canadians received when MP Jim Prentice announced he was leaving politics to sell snake oil to, uh, sorry, promote CIBC and its services to corporate clients, we have all just been handed our inevitable downer pill.

John Baird, currently Canada's equivalent of Minister of State as been again handed the Environment portfolio. This comes almost two years to the day when he had been removed from the same post after his very public media Crucifixion resulting from his performance (or lack thereof) during the Bali Summit on Climate Change.

John Baird, arguably the loudest and often most obnoxious of MPs, has an environmental batting average that makes Rob Deer look like a superstar.

While it should not be a surprise to anyone that Stephen Harper's Conservative Government cares not about environmental issues, Canada is one of the world's most influential governments, and the Conservatives should at least try to look as though they are moving forward.

Handing this portfolio back to Baird, even if temporary, displays the arrogance of our current government, in the fact that they clearly don't care about public appearance. Obviously they are willing to continue to bully themselves around simply because they currently have the slight edge in the number of sitting MPs to do so.

Much like Finance Minister Jim Flaherty's opinion on numbers, maybe it's time to change them.

Harper Prorogues Parliament

So Harper successfully managed to petition the Governor General to prorogue Parliament until the end of January.

I have difficulty believing that this is in the best interest of the Nation, rather than the Conservative Party of Canada.  How, when Canada is facing an economic crisis, is it worthwhile to STOP working for two months, rather than let a coalition of people get to work and deal with the problem?  

This is purely a move on the Conservative Party to retain power, rather than to help the Nation.  

And shame on the Gov. General for bending to the will of Harper.  Granted the Gov. General position is primarily figurehead status, and has little real power in our current political system.  But considering that this is probably the first time in nearly a century that the Gov. General had a decision to make that actually effected all Canadians, she should have taken a different course of action. 

Since this was relatively uncharted territory in the History of Canadian politics, the Governor General SHOULD have consulted the British Monarchy for advice on how to proceed.  After all, that is her job.  She is a representative of the Queen.  Do not mistake her position as a Regent.  She is not to rule, but rather to represent the Queens authority.

Not only did Governor General Michael Jean NOT consult the Queen when making her decision, but now she has set a very dangerous precedent for future minority governments.  By choosing to prorogue Parliament, she has allowed any minority government to halt parliament whenever they may risk falling to a motion of confidence.  This gives almost any minority government an inexcusable amount of power.

So now, we wait another two months while the Conservatives wage a multi-million dollar propaganda campaign against the coalition, and the economy will continue to crumble.

I would like to be able to sit in a room with Stephen Harper for just 10 minutes, so that I might begin to understand his line of thinking.  The Conservative economic update not only lacked a stimulus package for Canada, but also included eliminating the right of Unionized public servants to renegotiate their contracts (granted I think most of them are already over paid, but they should still have the right like everyone else does), and limited the ability of women to sue for pay equity, but it also eliminated the political subsidies provided by Elections Canada to all of the political parties.  

Regardless of whether or not you feel the political parties should receive subsidies to help them focus on working, rather than fundraising, Harper had to know it would cause a political backlash.  And to save $26 million?  It's a drop in the bucket compared to the billions the economy needs in investment.  I have a hard time believing that Mr. Harper sat at his desk, feverishly looking for an area where he could save a few pennies.  I have a feeling it had more to do with the ability to potentially cripple his opponents under the guise of 'cost cutting'.  I think he expected it to go over better than it did.  But, if I am correct and that was his real motivation, I think the man is too stupid to be allowed to be Prime Minister!  Forcing your political competitors into virtual bankruptcy does not show good faith.  Especially to voters that you haven't convinced yet to agree to your way of thinking!

I would strongly suggest removing the man from leadership of the Conservative Party before he causes more political fallout.  Oh, that's right.  We can't.  Parliament has been suspended!

The Canadian Coalition?

This week, the Liberals, the NDP and the Bloc all stated publicly that they would NOT support the Federal Conservative's economic update.  They claim multiple reasons for this, including the fact that there is no sign of any type of economic stimulous included in the update, the fact that the Conservatives are trying to take away any public servants ability to go on strike (or effectively renegotiate their contracts for their own benefit) , and the fact that the Conservatives would do away with the subsidy provided by Elections Canada to the political party.  

As you well know, all three parties voting against the Conservatives bill would bring down the minority government.  That leaves us either with a Coalition government or another election. 

So the Conservatives seem to be on their way out, and the Liberals and NDP in.  Interesting turn of events considering we Canadians just had an election 6 weeks ago.

I hear people bitching on both sides of the matter.  Those with Conservative view points tend to think that it's mutiny at best - as a whole, the Cons won more seats than any other party, and therefore, should lead the government.

Those on the Liberal or NDP side of the fence point out that not only did the Cons not win a majority government, but they also only had 35% of the votes.  So why not let a coalition of Liberals and NDP, who together received 50% of the vote run the country?  These people argue that at least this way, more Canadians will be represented in government.

Personally, I think there is merit to a coalition.  Not because of a numbers game, but simply because it will force the majority of our MPs to work together and compromise whether they want to or not.  Either they co-operate, or we go back to the polls again.  

Going back to the polls would likely not sit well with the bulk of Canadians, who are pretty much 'electioned' out.  We have had 3 federal elections in 6 years.  Add to that the overwhelming media saturation of the American election for the last two years, and that's a hell of a lot of politics.

I say bring on the damned coalition and get back to work!  Be done with it already.  We are in the midst of an economic crisis, and political instability is the last thing we need.  Aside from racking up a costly bill, another election within 6 months would likely see us back in the same situation we are already in.

Canada is ready for a new type of government.  There has not been a coalition since the 1920's.  I think that they Canadian People's political views are diverse enough that the bulk of Canadians would support a coalition government.

Just don't let Stephane Dion play Prime Minister.  There are at least two other men available who would do a much better job.

Rainn