Home › No Post Budget Bounce for Tories (Nanos Poll Co...
No Post Budget Bounce for Tories (Nanos Poll Completed March 12th 2010)
The latest research indicates that there is no post-Olympic, post-Throne Speech or budget bounce for the Conservatives. In terms of the Olympics, it’s unlikely that Canadians associated positive national sentiment toward the Olympics with the Conservative government. Likewise, the “stay the course” budget had little in it to break the deadlock between the Conservatives and the Liberals. (34.7% for Conservatives and 34.6% for Liberals).
All federal parties remain steady. The NDP (17.8%), the Bloc Quebecois (7.7%) and Green Party (5.2%) remain steady.
Based on the current situation, an immediate election is unlikely in the short term unless there is a new political revelation which could rock the government or the Liberals. The next realistic election windows include the Fall or early 2011 prior to the next budget.
The detailed tables and methodology are posted on our website along with regional breakdowns. You can also register to receive automatic polling updates.
Ballot Question: For those parties you would consider voting for federally, could you please rank your top two current local preferences? (Committed voters only - First Preference)
The numbers in parenthesis denote the change from the last Nanos National Omnibus survey completed between January 29th and February 4th, 2010.
National Committed Voters Only (n=804)
Conservative 34.7% (-0.9)
Liberal 34.6% (+0.7)
NDP 17.8% (+1.4)
BQ 7.7% (-0.8)
Green 5.2% (-0.4)
Note: Undecided 19.6% (-2.3) of total voters surveyed
Feel free to forward this e-mail. Any use of the poll should identify the source as the latest “Nanos Poll.”
What do you think?
Cheers,
Nik
Remember to rate the views of others - to allow us to recognize the opinion leaders in our national conversation.
Individuals with the top ratings make it to Nik’s Leaderboard.
|
Most Read Comments
Highest Rated Comments
it would appear the Libs need to go after middle of the road NDP voters in order... more
QCG (suspended) (Ontario) 16 Mar 04:28
Thats a pretty big house effect you have on the green party. I've been averaging... more
cdnpoll (Ontario) 16 Mar 08:14
If someone tried to create a methodology which would produce this type of result... more
Big Bad (Nova Scotia) 16 Mar 12:34
Zachary, That's the wonderful thing about being leader: you get to decide thi... more
RonaldODowd (Ontario) 17 Mar 16:22
Ronald: Here is my take on the horse race whenever it may be called. Cons... more
Tom Good (British Columbia) 18 Mar 02:27
Tom, Excellent analysis. This government's majority if it happens (and I seri... more
RonaldODowd (Ontario) 18 Mar 09:07
Comments
QCG (suspended)
it would appear the Libs need to go after middle of the road NDP voters in order to grow their vote into majority territory. They have mantained their lead in Ontario and continue to grow in Quebec where the thinkers conference will be held. the Libs need to get the NDP back to around 10% something that is quite possible to do if they focus on it
Its very obvious the Tory government is clearly out of ideas and with some scandals brewing it will be a very uncomfortable spring and and an extremely hot summer for them.
The Lib strategy of not forcing an election immediately is now paying dividends as we watch the tories start to self destruct something that is very evident in minority governments trapped into doing what the opposition wants and not getting their own agenda out. Harper is no Pearson and has no Trudeau type successor to keep the flame alive. A morally and ethically bankrupt party is what we now have managing our Country.
The attack ads will be coming hot and heavy this spring.
[updated Tue Mar 16 04:28:01 -0400 2010]
16 Mar 04:28
48 replies so far. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
RonaldODowd
QCG,
I won't rehash all our internal Liberal shit again. But I will state what I said recently: much will depend on what comes out of the Montreal Conference -- if it's another round of pablum, let's just say I won't be too optimistic.
I get back to another of my major arguments which Liberals need to hear again and again: waiting for the other guy to botch it or self destruct won't do it for us, or more importantly, for Canadians. Again, hello!
You win elections with middle-of-the-road voters (centrists), not the left. If MOR NDP were going to come across in large numbers, they would have done so when Dion was leader. The platform, such as it was, was much more to their liking than what can be expected next time.
As usual, we agree wholeheartedly on the attack ads. The Conservatives may reach new spending records on them. It's our job to prove them wrong. Will we be able to do it? I hope so.
[updated Tue Mar 16 11:17:53 -0400 2010]
16 Mar 11:17
Zachary Smith
Ronald,
Just a little counter balance to your concern about attack ads from the Conservatives.
I understand that the Liberals have been using Government funded websites to release attack ads on the Conservatives and are using those sites to raise money again and that these acts contervens a number of rules that are in place.
If you have been following the debate on the 10% in the house, you will have heard that mentioned.
The other point, is that with a better organized base, the Conservatives are able to raise the money required to counter the attack ads paid for by the Liberal Party as well as the media inspired attacks.
I would also include those attack ads paided for with the taxpayers money on the internet and the 10% and as to who releases the first attack ads, well it would appear that it was the Liberals once again.
[updated Tue Mar 16 15:57:15 -0400 2010]
16 Mar 15:57
GaryOlsen
Oh please with the partisan spin CRAP. The Harper government has shamelessly abused the 10%ers a thousand fold more than all the other parties put together. They have been disgraceful on this issue by the waste of money and the viscious nature of their attacks. So please stop covering up with "the Liberals did once too" garbage. No one is buying that lame line anymore.
Harper is in deep trouble and you know it. So does Maxime Bernier.
[updated Tue Mar 16 20:20:30 -0400 2010]
16 Mar 20:20
Zachary Smith
Interesting POV and wellcome to the board.
Hopefully, Nik will nip this in the bud before the board is highjacked again as I see that the one day wonders are back with all the down side that they bring.
.
[updated Tue Mar 16 21:28:08 -0400 2010]
16 Mar 21:28
QCG (suspended)
Downside...with two aliases here at least? Need we say more?
[updated Tue Mar 16 22:53:46 -0400 2010]
16 Mar 22:53
Zachary Smith
QCG, the three most recent polls from Feb 25th to March 12th show the following.
Nanos has the Conservatives at 35% moe 3.1%; Ekos has them at 32%, moe 2.0% and Harris Decima at 33% moe 1.8%
Nanos has the Liberals at 35% moe 3.1%; Ekos has them at 30%, moe 2.0% and Harris Decima at 29% moe 1.8%
Nanos has the NDP at 18.0% moe 3.1%; Ekos has them at 16.0%, moe 2.0% and Harris Decima at 16.0% moe 1.8%
Considering all the boosting that the Conservatives would be in the mid twenties before the tabling of the budget and that you had predicated that the Liberals would defeat the budget and that there would be an election at this time and we would be looking at a Liberal Majority.
Looking at the numbers, it would be a stretch for the Liberals to even form a Minority Government let alone a Majority and my question is - are you still of the that same opinion.
[updated Tue Mar 16 23:36:24 -0400 2010]
16 Mar 23:36
Tom Good
Ronald: Here is my take on the horse race whenever it may be called.
Conservative fortunes have languished at the 1/3 mark of acceptance for 4 years and 3 elections all the while as the Liberals mastered the ancient art of Hari-kari setting a very opportune situation for the Conservatives.. Who or what possibly could be the "sea anchor" for the good ship Conservative???? That "uncooperative" Liberal Party has been blamed, the "biased" media has been blamed, the "leftist" CBC has been blamed and the Liberal controlled Senate has been blamed-- but the Senate will have to be dropped now. It seems the root cause for the Conservatives not gaining a majority over three elections has to lie somewhere outside the party-----I think not.
The Harper administration has given Canada satisfactory governance but, then, no government can please everybody. Harper has recognized he had to appear to move to embrace the centre and has done so, to his credit. Indeed, some pundits claim the centre is now Conservative blue ! ! ! On the other hand, this government. through the huge Office of the Prime Minister, is the most centrally controlled in the history of Canada-----a control "grab" started by Trudeau and perfected by Harper. The traditional role of Parliament has been significantly diminished but government manoeuvers of late have not endeared themselves to the ELECTORATE------Oh, and they are the ones who cast votes-----are they the beggers who are responsible for blocking the Conservatives from climbing the Magic Mountain to majority ????
I have suggested before that the MINORITY Conservatives should look at themselves in the mirror if they wish to be the MAJORITY Conservatives. I believe the Conservatives have a built-in self limiting factor similar to a governor on a machine----"a device for maintaining uniform speed regardless of changes of load". Every election time when the Conservatives should be approaching majority territory, there is, as one pundit puts it, a "recoil factor". Why ??? It is certainly not their business skills in the day to day running the country where poll after poll gives them pretty good marks and they look good, too, when contrasted to what the opposition has to offer. I would suggest it is the far right of the party that is the "governor" when it appears preoccupied with revisiting social values rather than addressing Conservative strong points of less government and less taxes. Earlier this year the Manning Centre was polling on the importance of the family, the definition of marriage, the morality of abortion-----hot button issues for the right. This week Foreign Minister Cannor said Canada, that includes me, will no longer include birth control in my government's initiative to improve the health of mothers in developing countries. In my opinion, the obvious influence of the Conservative right IN the Government of Canada is a limiting factor and I wonder what may happen in a majority situation----the "recoil" factor.
[updated Thu Mar 18 02:27:52 -0400 2010]
18 Mar 02:27
RonaldODowd
Tom,
Excellent analysis. This government's majority if it happens (and I seriously doubt that it will - after four years and counting it should have happened by now!!!...) will come thanks to the voters of Ontario. Alberta has primed the pump as much as it can. Translation: THEY can't make it happen, thank the Lord.
Lawrence Cannon should be smart enough to know that when you start playing with birth control (or abortion for that matter) you've lit the fuse tied to your own political demise. His job should be to resist the social conservatives and resist the will of this Prime Minister, if that becomes necessary. Were I in his shoes, I would resign my cabinet post if such an eventuality took place.
Progressives, moderates, centrists are not idiots. They know the thin edge of the wedge when they see it. Are we heading that way? Only this Prime Minister knows for sure. Conservatives need to remember that women are really starting to feel the stirrings of the "five-year itch"! They ignore that flashing red warning light at their peril.
All the more reason to get in front of the voters ASAP as far as I'm concerned.
[updated Thu Mar 18 09:07:38 -0400 2010]
18 Mar 09:07
Zachary Smith
Ronald and Tom,
Todays, Ekos has the Conservatives at 33.1% up from 31.9% and the Liberals back at 28.9% dropping from 29.6%.
This preoccupation with the Conservatives numbers is just a means to distract from the poor numbers that the Liberals have now received under three leaders, Martin, Dion, and now Igantieff.
To say that a party that is polling consistently higher than the Liberals over the past four years is not doing the Liberal base any favours as it provides a sense of well being that is not there.
For the Conservatives to be able to do this with all the media bias that has been shown and I will note to the unbelieving that this bias has increased each time as the Conservatives approached majority range is very telling.
Ronald,
Is this week flavour of the week to be womens issues such as abortion, as it would appear that the latest and greatest Liberal issues of the week have gone the way of H1N1, prorogation, Parliamentary Supremacy, Afghanistan detainee and the list goes on.
You write
"Conservatives need to remember that women are really starting to feel the stirrings of the "five-year itch"! They ignore that flashing red warning light at their peril."
03/17/10 Ekos has the Conservatives at 29.8% and the Liberals at 28.4%
03/09/10 Ekos has the Conservatives at 29.0% and the Liberals at 30.7%
03/02/10 Ekos has the Conservatives at 28.8% and the Liberals at 31.8%
Do you see the trend and now add that to the national trend.
Tom,
Some time again I did challenge you to find one positive story from the Toronto Star, CBC from the past year, regarding the Conservatives as a means to show that the media is not biased - strangely, you have not replied to that very simple request.
[updated Thu Mar 18 10:48:27 -0400 2010]
18 Mar 10:48
RonaldODowd
Zachary,
Let's cut through the bull...your numbers are shit and so are ours! Yes, ours are worse than yours but we aren't the sitting government. Zachary, do you seriously contend that a government that will soon be five years long in the tooth can recover to the point where it will get back to 36% and keep going? I doubt it.
Wearing the chain of incumbency will eventually do the trick for the opposition. It's not a question of if, but a matter of when. Agreed, it won't happen tomorrow. Agreed, it may not happen in 2010. But it will happen as sure as day follows night. In fact, it will happen a lot sooner when Liberals finally get our act together and stand for something concrete with unwavering conviction.
[updated Thu Mar 18 11:06:59 -0400 2010]
18 Mar 11:06
Zachary Smith
Ronald,
Yes, the numbers are poor for both parties, but consider the past year and the challenges that this Government faced and what does the Liberal party have to show for it nothing.
The Liberals have thrown everything piece of dirt and mud that they could manufacture as they brought scandal after scandal forward and I will not trouble you with the list as you are well aware of these failures.
Then there was the housing melt down, raising unemployment, manufacturers closing business, Lumber, falling and raising CDN dollar, the raising and falling National federal debt, a world wide recession, EI, Pension reform, EI reform, H1N1, women rights, the Afghanistan Detainee issue, the Documents, the Supremacy of Parliament, Prorogation, and the list goes on and now the 10% which is exploding in their face.
Ronald,
To be as terse and tight as you were, any other party that was in opposition would, not should be sitting in majority range under these circumstances and the best that the Liberals can do is 28% to 30%.
You write,
" Zachary, do you seriously contend that a government that will soon be five years long in the tooth can recover to the point where it will get back to 36% and keep going? I doubt it."
To answer your question, I do - particularly with this Leader and the current form of the party and I will tag this on from another reply to you.
Have I not always said, that one of us will always be right, where as the other will be wrong and frankly time is no your side in order to be right - however not with this current leader and with this parties current lack of policies.
Then again, there always is the chance that you will be right before I am, as that is the nature of the game and then we can just switch from offence turn to defence as the case might be.
[updated Thu Mar 18 12:02:44 -0400 2010]
18 Mar 12:02
Zachary Smith
Ronald I had wrote this to Benie, but it fits here as well.
In addition, it is equable true that the Liberals and NDP cannot sell their vision for Canada as well, but it is equable true that the Conservatives are able to convince more Canadians to support their vision that the other parties.
[updated Thu Mar 18 11:32:41 -0400 2010]
18 Mar 11:32
RonaldODowd
Zachary,
If this government is eventually re-elected, Conservatives will make a monkey out of me. If not,...!!!
[updated Thu Mar 18 11:38:43 -0400 2010]
18 Mar 11:38
Zachary Smith
Ronald,
Have I not always said, that one of us will always be right, where as the other will be wrong and frankly time is no your side in order to be right - however not with this current leader and with this parties current lack of policies.
Then again, there always is the chance that you will be right,before I am as that is the nature of the game and then we can just switch from offense tom defense as the case might be.
[updated Thu Mar 18 11:44:22 -0400 2010]
18 Mar 11:44
Tom Good
Ronald:I agree but I rather doubt that too much will come out of the Montreal Conference. I suspect it will be another placebo for the party faithful, like En Familie, and go nowhere
[updated Thu Mar 18 12:43:43 -0400 2010]
18 Mar 12:43
RonaldODowd
Tom,
As you say, the proof will be in the pudding -- and particularly in the eating!
The MC is regarded as a non-partisan event, even though many of the participants are at least Liberals unofficially. But that is neither here nor there. What is important is R-E-S-U-L-T-S.
We need a platform and we need it now.
[updated Thu Mar 18 14:15:06 -0400 2010]
18 Mar 14:15
Tom Good
Ronald: Quite agree. If there is no platform, then what the devil does one stand for. In the BC provincials last time around, the NDP opposition thought it was enough just to criticize thus re-electing the Campbell government for the fourth time---unheard of.
[updated Thu Mar 18 18:34:13 -0400 2010]
18 Mar 18:34
Zachary Smith
Ronald,
In my view, it is in this statement that lays the problems for the Liberals as you wrote, "many of the participants are at least Liberals unofficially"
It is very easy to find common cause when you engage, debate, march, sing, and dance with those who share your views and opinions and all that does is energize the converted and not the unconverted and it is the unconverted or unengaged that the Liberals need to find.
If I was a Liberal and was looking for new ideas, I would be looking for some of those partisan views from outside the party, as it is when you go out side the box that you are challenged and that is where in my view that you will find the new Liberal party, not in a rehash of previous and failed public polices that is happening in Montreal and I go back to Chrétien conference to illustrate my point.
"The MC is regarded as a non-partisan event, even though many of the participants are at least Liberals unofficially. That is neither here nor there. What is important is R-E-S-U-L-T-S."
[updated Thu Mar 18 19:22:23 -0400 2010]
18 Mar 19:22
RonaldODowd
Zachary,
What would be the point of Montreal were we intent on a rehash? I can live with it on the margins, and I do mean margins, but to go with same old same old would be stupid politics. I certainly don't expect that out of Montreal.
[updated Thu Mar 18 19:30:39 -0400 2010]
18 Mar 19:30
Zachary Smith
Ronald,
I gave you what I felt was a very unpartistan reply and that it is my view that the Liberals are setting themselves to be trapped by their own party views and that they will not venture outside of the Liberal box as the Liberals did under Chrétien.
[updated Thu Mar 18 19:53:20 -0400 2010]
18 Mar 19:53
RonaldODowd
Zachary,
Fair enough but again, we aren't that stupid.
[updated Thu Mar 18 19:59:48 -0400 2010]
18 Mar 19:59
Zachary Smith
Ronald,
Past history tells me otherwise and while I would not use stupid as the word to discribe the last five or six years, I cannot help but recall three lost elections, 3 leaders, nine COS and at last count 77 seats and 26% in the polls and there is a word to discribe it and I will leave that word or words to you.
[updated Thu Mar 18 20:05:35 -0400 2010]
18 Mar 20:05
Bernie
Tom
We can generally rely on you to post something useful to inspire responses.
Your first paragraph sums things up accurately.
You know I have a different view re "The Harper administration has given Canada satisfactory governance," Certainly not even remotely satisfactory to me. However being able to maintain the support of a third of the voters shows that that portion is satisfied and that they are consistent. But 2/3 are not satisfied enough to vote for them. No nobody can satisfy everybody but most good politicians can and so seek out what most of them want and by providing it usually win a majority.
Case in point! Conservatives in NL. I was reading last week where they had 93% satisfactory rating. I don't know how the question was asked. I found that confusing because when asked their approval for the party and the premier Williams they answered 79 % and 81% respectively.
But even 80% is unheard of anywhere else, especially after 6 or 7 years in power.
My conclusion is that he knows what the people want and is giving it to them.
Even if we get a perfect government or a perfect PM who can be assured that at least 20% will disapprove., human nature being what it is.
I'll have to;eave "central control" for another time.
Re the last paragraph: religious, or private, personal issues should be left out of government policy entirely. Government should only be concerned with issue that affect the whole country, just public issues.
[updated Thu Mar 18 10:29:05 -0400 2010]
18 Mar 10:29
RonaldODowd
Bernie,
Brad Wall is the only other premier with roses at his feet!
[updated Thu Mar 18 11:11:36 -0400 2010]
18 Mar 11:11
Zachary Smith
Bernie
"But 2/3 are not satisfied enough to vote for them."
This very old and I must say very inadequate refrain that we hear from the Coalition supporters over the past four years is well pass its due date as is the concept of that it tried to represent.
The reality is, that because one individual does not vote for one party, that they can by extension support the policies and practices of the other four parties, can be considered by any reasonable individual to be nonsensical at best.
Using the most recent election as our metric to show how nonsensical the concept really is.
Because rolling all the opposing votes in one coalition without the actual presence of that political association is not a very good metric and when polled Canadians - that 2/3 majority quickly becomes the minority even with over whelming support from Quebec on the question.
In addition, it is equable true that the Liberals and NDP cannot sell their vision for Canada as well, but it is equable true that the Conservatives are able to convince more Canadians to support their vision that the other parties.
1) We would find that 62.3% of Canadians did not support the Conservatives.
2) We would find that 73.7% of Canadians did not support the Liberals.
3 We would find that 81.8% of Canadians did not support the NDP.
4) We would find that 93.7% of Canadians did not support the Green.
From Elections Canada
Conservatives 37.7%, Liberals 26.3%, NDP 18.2%, and Green 6.8%
[updated Thu Mar 18 11:33:57 -0400 2010]
18 Mar 11:33
Zachary Smith
Bernie writes,
"Case in point! Conservatives in NL." and "No nobody can satisfy everybody but most good politicians can and so seek out what most of them want and by providing it usually win a majority."
I believe that the case in point that you choose as your example, is a valid as using Alberta as the metric, which to say that it is not - as they are exceptions to the rules and should not be used.
You also failed to take in account the fact that on the Federal level, we have a five party system, with strong tribal and regional splits, the Bloc in Quebec, the Conservatives in AB, SK and MB and the Liberals in the urban rumps of Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver.
Where as in the provincial level, which what you used as your example - there is usually only the three parties splitting the vote and not five as we have federally and even then.
I do not believe that there has been over the past 40 years many examples of where over 50% of the voters have elected a party to a majority provincial and that in most case the winning percent is in the same range that we see federally, which is from the low 40.0% to the mid 40.0% .
So to say that " out what most of them want and by providing it usually win a majority." is not correct, unless you are trying to say that they get a majority with the minority of the votes.
My favourite example is good old NDP Bob, who won a seat majority in Ontario with approx 36.0% of the vote.
[updated Thu Mar 18 11:40:09 -0400 2010]
18 Mar 11:40
Tom Good
Bernie: Danny Williams sees perfectly that the federal government is the child conceived by the provinces and not the other way around. He had the guts to call his province's MPs in and lecture them on the interests of NL and he has the guts to lecture the federal government when they step on NL toes. In my opinion, there should be close laison between a provincial government and their federal MPs who too often walk lock-step with "cabinet solidarity" and forget who elected them. MPs put party interests ahead of their electorate's interests.
[updated Thu Mar 18 12:55:02 -0400 2010]
18 Mar 12:55
RonaldODowd
Tom,
I'm with you except for cabinet solidarity -- that is essential in any government. Michael Chong is a case in point: when he adamently did not agree with the federal motion that the Québécois constitute a nation within a united Canada (note how the motion did not say Quebec is a nation -- one hell of a big difference but as usual I digress) he did the honorable thing and resigned from cabinet. The PMO had provided several "outs" but none of them rose to his threshold. Quite simply, no government can afford or permit cabinet ministers to freelance regarding government policy.
[updated Thu Mar 18 18:47:57 -0400 2010]
18 Mar 18:47
Tom Good
Ronald:---OK, should have said caucus solidarity. I strongly disapprove of MPs not being allowed to speak their minds.
[updated Thu Mar 18 20:27:41 -0400 2010]
18 Mar 20:27
RonaldODowd
Tom,
Too many prime ministers and other leaders confuse the message with the messenger. I agree with you but some MPs are known for their controversial fringe views. In these rare cases, a PMO or an OLO has to practice the fine art of what we call in French "encadrement"!
[updated Fri Mar 19 09:05:28 -0400 2010]
19 Mar 09:05
Bernie
Ronald,
I agree it would be hard for a government of function efficiently if cabinet ministers have their own policies. But the highest duty is for that member to represent his constituents. He/she does not have the right to go against his voters wishes. There should be a mechanism whereby the majority of voters in his district can get rid of him immediately when he does so.
His duty is to his voters more so than to any government or party.
[updated Sat Mar 20 07:32:20 -0400 2010]
20 Mar 07:32
Zachary Smith
Bernie, you write.
"There should be a mechanism whereby the majority of voters in his district can get rid of him immediately when he does so. His duty is to his voters more so than to any government or party."
How would you handle the following.
There is a four party system and the results are as follows, 1st - 35%, 2nd - 30%, 3rd - 25% and 4th - 10%
One week after being sworn in - the majority of the voters, which consist of the 30%, 25% and 10% that lost in the election band together to remove the elected member? and then have the elected member removed.
This strangely sounds very familiar and I am sure that the, who, what, when and where of it will come to me soon.
So what happens now, is there a new election or does the 2nd place now become the member sitting in the house, if so how does one address the fact that the majority of those who voted did not choose to vote for that individual by a margin of 70% to 30%.
Looking forward to your reply.
[updated Sat Mar 20 20:51:47 -0400 2010]
20 Mar 20:51
RonaldODowd
Bernie,
Forgive me for throwing religion into the mix but here it goes: when I think of matters of conscience, Sir Thomas More comes to mind. He died because of his views. Granted, an extreme example of principle but may I respectfully suggest that no MP should ever vote against his or her conscience.
An MP is a human being first (most of the time, in some cases, but I digress) and has to be able to look him or herself in the mirror each morning.
Don't get me wrong Bernie -- I'm all for representing the views of your constitutents -- even making it your first priority (as Reform pushed in the good-bad old days) but again, MPs have to live with themselves and their votes...
[updated Sun Mar 21 12:56:32 -0400 2010]
21 Mar 12:56
Bernie
Of course, Ronald., no argument there. By all means one has go by one's conscience. What I'm trying to say is that if I'm a MP and if my conscience cause causes me to vote in opposition to what most of my constituents want then I would resign, or at least, they would 'resign' at the next opportunity. There is no reason for the majority to have as their representative someone who does not represent them.
Of course , we have to put a weighted value on the individual issues. We would not kick out an PM for a difference in one opposing insignificant issue if he is at the same time agreeing with us in one or more very important issues.
[updated Sun Mar 21 14:17:32 -0400 2010]
21 Mar 14:17
RonaldODowd
Bernie,
I think your idea works when dealing with MPs who put representative government first. That's about 2 MPs...remember how very few floor crossers, if any, were willing to put their seats on the line immediately after doing the dirty deed.
God bless Sheila Copps -- one of the few who put her mouth where her money was (on the GST) and resigned. That took one hell of a lot of guts.
[updated Sun Mar 21 15:09:35 -0400 2010]
21 Mar 15:09
Zachary Smith
Ronald,
The other side of the story is that she was shamed into resigning and had indicated that prior to that "decsision" she refused to resign as she of the view that she had not made that claim contrary to all the
That took one hell of a lot of guts, to stand there and deny it.
[updated Sun Mar 21 16:50:16 -0400 2010]
21 Mar 16:50
QCG (suspended)
Ron, more to the point, the absolute boorish behaviour by two ministers recently should have forced both of them to resign their portfolios at least and in the case of Guergis she should have resigned her seat. Fact is the PM condoness this behavoiour because he loves it. Boorishness is his trade ins stock.
Iggy, by the way, is the opposite, and is starting to get noticed for his civility and his strategic moves on things ike the 10%'ers and other moves he has made to force harper into obeying the supremecy of the HOC. He is nicely circling the wagons on the Afghan affair and clearly has the government's unethical witholding of documents as a hammer.
[updated Sun Mar 21 17:13:35 -0400 2010]
21 Mar 17:13
Zachary Smith
Tom,
I had wrote this to Benie, but it fits here as well.
In addition, it is equable true that the Liberals and NDP cannot sell their vision for Canada as well, but it is equable true that the Conservatives are able to convince more Canadians to support their vision that the other parties.
[updated Thu Mar 18 11:33:04 -0400 2010]
18 Mar 11:33
QCG (suspended)
Not true
[updated Thu Mar 18 17:53:27 -0400 2010]
18 Mar 17:53
Zachary Smith
QCG
I had wrote this to Benie, Tom and Ronald but it fits here as well.
In addition, it is equable true that the Liberals and NDP cannot sell their vision for Canada as well, but it is equable true that the Conservatives are able to convince more Canadians to support their vision that the other parties.
As to your comment "not true", well the Conservatives are Government and that puts the lie to your "not true"
[updated Thu Mar 18 19:25:42 -0400 2010]
18 Mar 19:25
Bernie
Tom
Here's a few other comments that time and space constrained me a couple of days ago.
Where Harper lies in the political spectrum I guess depends on one's perspective. If I were to think he is near the centre then I would consider myself to the left of Karl Marx. Even Ignatieff is too far right. I don't know where Layton is. But I'm sure if the NDP ever got elected they would operate from the centre.
As for satisfactory government I can't agree with that either. But I'll have to accept that the majority don't see him as being negative enough to kick him out. So from that perspective you are right.
I agree this is a centrally controlled government, in fact, in Harper's case one man controlled. I'm not for individual , or group control., but I do like a federal government control. The provincial governments should not have so much power over those essential things that are common to all. Provincial governments get away with persuading their people that their citizens are different. that the Canadian government is different. Is there anything more divisive? When they should be stating the we are the same. That the government is us, both federal and provincial. I think we should eliminate provinces altogether. From what I read the US federal government has much more power over the states.
And I know in Australia in individual states are much weaker than our provinces. I am afraid I don't know how it works in other federal countries.
I agreed with Trudeau and with Harper to the degree that he is making it a federal government control rather than a personal one. I may as well interject here, a couple of things I agree with Harper. His sensible response to the Blackurn and Guergis incidents., and his mature decorum in the House during Question Period. A good example to those with childish behaviour in his own party and the opposition.
Now if he could only learn to tell the truth!
[updated Sat Mar 20 08:36:24 -0400 2010]
20 Mar 08:36
QCG (suspended)
Bernie, Harper and the truth are sworn enemies. Look at the flip flops this past week and the ies he told about progrogation,etc.
I don't think isuing an edict about following the laws of the land to ministers of the crown being sensible. They should both be demoted and as ministers there should be zero tolerence for those behavioural missteps. What's next? Forgiving one of them for robbing a bank because they think they are allowed to do so as ministers.
This government has alraedy delivered a low blow to honest and ethical governance.
[updated Sat Mar 20 11:33:11 -0400 2010]
20 Mar 11:33
Heasmit wife of Brusmit
QCG writes,
"This government has alraedy delivered a low blow to honest and ethical governance."
By which standard do you measure the current Conservative Government, I ask as the standard that I use to judge the Government is whether they are elected and returned to Government by the Canadian People.
It is by this support of having elected and then returning Government with an even larger seat count after removing a dishonest and unethical Liberal party from office, that is the manner by which I judge on how honest and ethical a party is.
The lie is put to rest once again by the facts and Canadians have now delivered two verdicts on how ethical and honest the Liberal party truly is.
[updated Sat Mar 20 19:00:45 -0400 2010]
20 Mar 19:00
QCG (suspended)
RUBBISH.....WE LIVE IN THE PRESENT WITH AN UNETHICAL GOVERNMENT IN CONTROL.
[updated Sat Mar 20 20:49:48 -0400 2010]
20 Mar 20:49
Heasmit wife of Brusmit
QCG,
Do you believe that shouting improves your point and if so in what way.
I see that you did not take the time to refute what I had written and to be clear I presented a view that it is the Canadian voter who determines whether or not that a political party is unethical and that they do so at the ballot box and I will add that it will not be settled on this forum - regardless of the efforts you might put forward.
You are fully entitled to your views as I am and are free to determine by any measure that you choose to determine that view, you however should be prepared to be questioned on what you write, when you post the inane.
However I will say that having any data or information to be able to support your opinion would in no short manner, go a long way to enable you to be able to convince others to your point of view.
I do stand by what I wrote,
The lie is put to rest once again by the facts and Canadians have now delivered two verdicts on how ethical and honest the Liberal party truly is.
It is by this support of having elected and then returning Government with an even larger seat count after removing a dishonest and unethical Liberal party from office, that is the manner by which I judge on how honest and ethical a party is.
[updated Sat Mar 20 21:31:50 -0400 2010]
20 Mar 21:31
Tom Good
Bernie: We hope honest people will be our representatives to government, but, once there in the system where money and power come together, we find they are not incorruptible nor, too often, are their intentions to serve their electorate sustainable as "The Party" objectives become dominant. Today we see the MPs are not even prepared to fight for the primacy of the House of Commons and they have deferred to the Office of the Prime Minister and, like sheep, dutifully pass the budget for that office without so much as a negative "baaah".
Further, all federal governments today are government by the minority whether they have a majority within the House or not. Believe the last true majority government was Mulroney. Canada must institute election reform so that to be declared elected, an MP must have 50% plus one vote in the constituency. There were a few last election and I believe Max Bernier was one but he got kicked out of government for a bad memory, which was government business, and too many hormones, which was his business.
[updated Sat Mar 20 17:17:52 -0400 2010]
20 Mar 17:17
Bernie
Tom
Yes, you are very realistic. I spend more time looking for a brighter furture and asking, "Why not?"
BTW. I read Chris Good on the editorial staff of US magizine The Atlantic. Sometimes he reminds me of you enough to ask if you were related.
[updated Sat Mar 20 18:54:40 -0400 2010]
20 Mar 18:54
Tom Good
Bernie: No relation. Have to chuckle though----was selling a collector car to a guy from Ontario who asked me if I had any relations in northern Ontario---no---he said he was pleased because there were a lot of hillbilly Goods in that part of the land----Ho Ho.
[updated Sat Mar 20 21:10:50 -0400 2010]
20 Mar 21:10
cdnpoll
Thats a pretty big house effect you have on the green party. I've been averaging Canadian polls (shameless plug: follow cdnpoll on twitter) and the other pollsters have the greens at 9-13%.
[updated Tue Mar 16 08:14:18 -0400 2010]
16 Mar 08:14
8 replies so far. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
Big Bad
If someone tried to create a methodology which would produce this type of result, the method used here is that methodology. When I go to the Simon Fraser University site, I notice that there are no results by province - the undecided in this poll are astronomical. Who funded this poll? That would probably be a hint about bias here.
In most of the other recent polls, the Conservatives are beginning to rise and the Liberals are stuck at around 30 %. No margin of error is cited either.
The poll is about comitted voters only. As such, it may mean that both major parties tend to have the same number of diehard supporters. The big question in any poll is to find out where the undecided voters will go. When 160 out of 800 called had no preference, this poll has little value except to bolster the ranks of the ABC's. (anybody but the conservatives)
[updated Tue Mar 16 12:34:17 -0400 2010]
16 Mar 12:34
3 replies so far. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
Zachary Smith
Ronald,
Headline CBC Headline; Now that Parliament's back, Michael, let's hit the road!
March 16, 2010 11:30 AM; By Andrew Davidson
And
Headline CBC; Ignatieff defends cross-country tour
Tuesday, March 16, 2010 | 9:41 AM ET
...............
I still find this strange as I once again find myself referencing the CBC on the behaviour of Ignatieff and the Liberals, and I find myself asking that after all the noise that the Liberals made about prorogation and the impact on our democracy, the first thing they do, is not to vote - strange to say the least.
Now if Ignatieff is going to make a big deal about the "supremacy" of Parliament, one would think that it would be in the interest of Canadians to see him in the house and for him to attend Parliament once it is back in session???
Or was this a Liberal theme for January and February and was just an opportunistic partistan spin to make a well used Constitutional mechanism, prorogation, seem dictatorial?
The second thing that the Liberals and their leader do, well he is off on a four-week road trip, even though Parliament is now in session. So much for saving a democracy that he says is in danger because of the Conservative, when he cannot even go to the house that he wishes to lead.
"Don't you worry. We're minding the fort back in Ottawa," Ignatieff told reporters Monday.
Oh, we're not worried, sir, and neither are the Conservatives.
And judging by yesterday's question period -- the first QP of the first full week of the 40th parliamentary session, and the first opposition day, just so we're clear -- neither is Bob Rae.
(*Brutal.)
[updated Wed Mar 17 14:01:22 -0400 2010]
17 Mar 14:01
2 replies so far. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
Heasmit wife of Brusmit
Ronald,
The Liberal party seems to be hell bent on shooting them selves in the foot, if not in the head as they continually paint themselves into one corner or the other with their talking points.
I like number three as the Conservatives can tie it to number one and then watch the Liberals argue against themselves as to what should be their talking points as they would have to argue against themselves that they are for cutting the 10% for the Conservatives but wish to keep the money for their 10% and the subsidy that the tax payer gives them.
Moreover, what happened the detainee issue and the gong show that they were running? with their questions about Jaffer and his wife - I wonder if it the reason why they stopped will show up in tomorrows polls.
1) " Later this afternoon, the Prime Minister’s official spokesman, Dimitri Soudas, said that the “Conservative caucus supports eliminating out-of-riding 10-per-centers so long as this restriction applies to all parties.
2) However, we do not have a majority on the Board of Internal Economy, and will need the support of the other parties to achieve their elimination.”
3) And the Tories have put up another challenge. “In addition to eliminating out-of-riding 10-per-centers, we renew our call on the Liberals and their coalition partners to save taxpayers approximately $25.5-million annually by ending the subsidy to political parties.”
4) “That would demonstrate a real commitment by opposition parties to saving money, instead of yesterday's political posturing,” Mr. Soudas said.
[updated Wed Mar 17 19:53:30 -0400 2010]
17 Mar 19:53
7 replies so far. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
RonaldODowd
Thanks Allan!
Yes, ladies and gentlemen, I happen to really be that full of myself and presumptuous to reprise my list of future federal party leaders. In light of Allan Gregg agreeing with one of my choices on tonight's At Issue Panel on CBC -- why the hell not run through them again:
Conservative Party - Monte Solberg;
Liberal Party - Dalton McGuinty;
New Democratic Party - Paul Dewar;
Bloc Québécois - Pierre Paquette.
How Am I Doing???
[updated Wed Mar 17 23:01:39 -0400 2010]
17 Mar 23:01
46 replies so far. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
RonaldODowd
Hey Zachary,
I'm rather disappointed. I was sure you would want to weigh in on the next leader for each of the federal parties. I find it strange that you've chosen not to contribute to the discourse. Surely, you can handicap the future CPC leadership race for us. I know I would be more than interested in seeing you lay odds on the various hopefuls.
Poor Prentice -- so close and yet so far!
[updated Thu Mar 18 11:46:39 -0400 2010]
18 Mar 11:46
7 replies so far. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
RonaldODowd
Abortion: The Issue That Will Sting This Prime Minister.
Here we go again...the pattern continues with one significant step forward in favour of women's and children's health in the developing world immediately followed by a giant misstep of the highest order: first no, no, and no from three Conservatives on contraception in the third world only to be reversed by one of the naysayers along with the Prime Minister. Can you spell rapid backtracking??!!
Canada's development assistance should not be tied to any form of litmus test -- be it on contraception or abortion. These matters are not the business of the Government of Canada. The Harper government is holding fast on its refusal to permit funding related to the question of abortion.
This Prime Minister needs to do a serious rethink. Social conservatives are already in the bag but moderate mainstream Canadian women are hardly an assured Conservative constituency.
Talk about gifting to the Liberals! Michael Ignatieff should thank his lucky stars that this has fallen into his lap. Run with it, and don't look back. The best is yet to come thanks to the serious errors in judgment made by this Conservative government.
[updated Fri Mar 19 10:33:12 -0400 2010]
19 Mar 10:33
28 replies so far. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
Zachary Smith
I am wondering when it will be, that Canadians come to understand that the actions of the Liberals, NDP and Bloc by trying to use their concept of the supremacy of parliament.
When will Canadians be made aware that the actions of the coalition is nothing less than an attempt to circumvent the election process in Canada and for these three parties to form a de facto coalition government without the benefit of having an election.
The coalition will be in effect, a Government sitting on the opposition benches contrary to all Canadian tradition and law and with no means to remove from power as they can continually refuse to declare non-confidence in the Government and can rule until Oct 14 2012 - unless they rule themselves supreme and refuse to hold elections.
An opposition that can call for money bills because they are supreme.
An opposition that can that can remove sitting members from parliament at their will and pleasure, because they are supreme.
An opposition that can by their right of supremacy stripe the individual of all their constitutional rights by using their parliamentary supremacy.
An opposition that can appoint Federal and SCoC Judges, why because they can just pass a bill to say that they can and because they are supreme.
An opposition that can appoint the future G.G. why because they can just pass a bill to say that they can and because they are supreme.
An opposition that cannot be called to account, why because they can just pass a bill to say that they can and because they are supreme.
In addition, Canadians want Government and not some secret coalition hiding behind closed doors.
Your party is playing a very dangerous game here and if your party wins at this sham - I wonder what Canada will look like in the coming years and I am sure that it will bear little resemble to the Canada of today.
[updated Fri Mar 19 19:45:18 -0400 2010]
19 Mar 19:45
8 replies so far. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
QCG (suspended)
Here's the best comment ever from the PMO...one that will live in infamy for next election ads by the libs:
"The PMO says Prime Minister Stephen Harper will issue an edict to his ministers, reminding them that they're not above the law."
Stupid stupid tories!!!
I wonder if Dimitri put it on facebook. !!!!!
[updated Fri Mar 19 21:52:04 -0400 2010]
19 Mar 21:52
3 replies so far. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
Bernie
I read three interesting pieces today.
1. leftist Tom Walkom in today's Toronto star
2. centrist Paul Wells in Macleans
3 rightist Andrew Coyne in Macleans
I was wondering if others had read them and if so what they thought of these articles.
[updated Sat Mar 20 18:35:24 -0400 2010]
20 Mar 18:35
3 replies so far. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
Zachary Smith
Ronald,
Interesting piece in today's G&M - that might cause some issues for the Federal Liberals in Quebec and depending on how they respond it may well cause them concern in the ROC.
If the Liberals are too soft with dealing with the enlightened Provincial Liberals in Quebec, they will be seen by Canadians as being soft on human rights - a complaint that they bring forward against the Conservatives often.
To hard and they run into trouble in Quebec as not understanding the Quebec nation and that the Party is run from Toronto and that is why they do not understand.
Either way this should go into the ledgers as a plus for the Conservatives and a negative for the Liberals.
John Morstad for The Globe and Mail,
Headline; Quebec's view on niqab creates fault line Ussra Hussain and Nafeesa Salar in Montreal
1) Quebec's movement to expel the niqab from much of civic life struck some Canadians as pure intolerance – a hunt more common to the pitchfork-wielding redneck anxious to preserve his cultural domination.
2) But in Quebec, opposition to allowing the niqab in government services expands far beyond the ranks of the usual bigots. In fact, the viewpoint has become the broadest social and political consensus the province has seen in years.
3) Quebec intellectuals and politicians, federalists and nationalists, libertarians and human-rights activists mostly agreed with the expulsion of a niqab-wearing student, Naema Ahmed, from French class.
4) Staunch liberals were then stunned to see the position compared to a Taliban dress code by English-speaking Canada.
[updated Sat Mar 20 21:15:56 -0400 2010]
20 Mar 21:15
1 reply so far. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
Zachary Smith
QCG has been making a number of posts that he hoped would show that Canadians have lost faith in the Conservatives and I have been responding that I do not believe that his posts are factually correct and have been providing counter points.
With poll after poll showing that the numbers do not support what he has written and that in fact the support for the Conservatives is rising and not lowering contrary to what has been implied and that the manufactured smears and scandals being made against the Conservatives the Liberals and their various supporters has not gained them ground.
Tonight's post is from Ipos reid, which I believe further supports what I had written once again.
Harper's Tories still lead Liberals: poll
Meagan Fitzpatrick, Canwest News Service Published: Saturday, March 20, 2010
1) Prime Minister Stephen Harper's Conservatives have lost some support but would still emerge victorious if a federal election were held today, according to a poll conducted for Canwest News Service and Global National.
2)The Conservatives have the support of 34% of decided voters, down three percentage points from the last poll earlier this month, while the Liberals secured 28% of voters, down one percentage point.
3)The New Democratic Party was in third with 18% of the vote; 10% of Canadians would support the Green party.
[updated Sat Mar 20 22:04:49 -0400 2010]
20 Mar 22:04
No replies yet. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
RonaldODowd
Go, Nancy, Go!
3:30 P.M. (Eastern) is the magic hour. The first vote will be on health care itself. Then will come two budget votes (one of which will include the contentious issue of a deliberate lack of federal funding for abortion, which will pass.)
Kick ass Nancy. Yes, it's the thin edge of the wedge. No wonder Republicans are severely constipated. Get it done. 35 million Americans are counting on it and tired of waiting.
[updated Sun Mar 21 13:49:15 -0400 2010]
21 Mar 13:49
2 replies so far. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
QCG (suspended)
Here's more prostitution of the election financing rules by the Tories:
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/Cowtown+Tory+cash+flows+north/2708204/story.html
"Well-off Calgary Conservatives, determined to win a majority for Stephen Harper, are opening their chequebooks, activating phone banks and setting their sights on some opposition ridings across the country.
One of those targets is Edmonton-Strathcona, where the city's newest Conservative candidate, Ryan Hastman, is getting financial help from Calgary in his effort to oust the province's only opposition member, New Democrat MP Linda Duncan.
About a year ago, Hastman, 30, came directly from a job in the prime minister's office to win the Tory nomination in Edmonton-Strathcona, the seat lost by Conservative Rahim Jaff er in the 2008 election.
Hastman has been busy knocking on doors, raising funds and helping to hand out federal government stimulus cheques with various Conservative cabinet ministers, according to his Facebook page.
Edmonton-Strathcona is one of several dozen swing ridings selected for special attention by Calgary Conservatives determined to see a Tory majority government, says Andrew Constantinidis of the Calgary West constituency, held by Rob Anders.
They also want to see Alberta's 28 seats go Tory blue next time and they've got the cash to help defeat Duncan, the province's only opposition MP, he said.
So on Jan. 23, Conservatives in Anders's riding held a fundraising breakfast for Hastman and raised $3,200 with tickets at $60 each. They also raised $8,000 for Manitoba Conservative MP Shelly Glover in an evening event, said Constantinidis, a former constituency president for Anders."
........................................
I sure as hell don't want these red necks ruling our country with their pocket books and I would assume the people of Edmonton Strathcona are wise to the plot. Edmontonians mostly dislike Calgarian business types so this may backfire very nicely.
Chretien made the new rules so that, in principle and hopefully in practice, party financing was to be an even playing field. In this scenario I would rather go back to allowing corporation donations. At least we would know who was doing what. In the current format rich businessmen in Calgary allow and urge their employees to make conservative party donations and pay them bonuses etc. for doing so. There is now more corruption of the law under the tories than we have ever seen before.
[updated Sun Mar 21 14:03:08 -0400 2010]
21 Mar 14:03
2 replies so far. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
QCG (suspended)
Duceppe is either getting desperate or he's seeing something in his polling that makes him think this language will work in his favour:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/spector-vision/duceppe-and-the-qubec-resistance-movement/article1507230/
"He said that he drew his inspiration from a text authored by the late intellectual and union activist Pierre Vadeboncoeur.
Nevertheless, he reaffirmed that sovereignty would only be possible with the work of the resistance, as was the case for the liberation of France in 1944.
“Québec sovereignty, no more than the Libération, is not possible, would not have been possible, without the work of the resistants"
[updated Sun Mar 21 14:11:41 -0400 2010]
21 Mar 14:11
32 replies so far. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
RonaldODowd
Can A Deal Get Done On Afghan Detainees?
All political Ottawa is buzzing wondering if a deal can be done on the release of documents pertaining to alleged torture of detainees by Afghan security forces.
Some have argued that influential Canadians with a clear and credible background in national security could be added to the mix in some way to break the logjam.
Will we see some form of a new Manley-inspired working group which could dovetail the examination of documents undertaken by Mr. Justice Frank Iacobucci?
If this gets traction, the Liberals and NDP will have to be onside: I can think of two obvious Liberal choices: John Manley and Senator Colin Kenny. On the NDP side, one immediately thinks of former NDP leader Ed Broadbent -- other possibles: former Saskatchewan premiers Roy Romanow or Alan Blakeney.
The genie doesn't often get put back in the bottle but this is Ottawa so anything is possible.
[updated Sun Mar 21 20:11:33 -0400 2010]
21 Mar 20:11
9 replies so far. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
Zachary Smith
Ronald,
There is a piece in the G&M by Adam Radwanski, that might interest you as it will provide what I feel will be an excellent opportunity for the Federal Conservatives to garner support for their debate with the Liberals as to how the Federal deficit should be managed.
What will benefit the Conservatives is that as the Liberals in Ontario start to sell their pfrom March 25th sell their debt reduction program, the federal Conservatives can at the same time sell theirs and when the Federal Liberals complain. well all they have to do is point to Ontario.
As I read thought the piece, I could not help be struck by how similar the provincial Liberal plan was to the one that the Federal Conservatives had put forward and I just added one or two words in brackets to show my point.
...
1. How deep, and how long?
If governments have taught us anything over the past couple of years, it's to not put too much faith in the accuracy of their deficit projections.
The $24.7-billion ($53.3-billion) that Mr. Duncan (Mr. Flaherty) forecast last fall doesn't seem too far off, but it's unlikely to prove spot on.
The 2009-10 figure, though, is really the least of the government's worries. It was inflated by one-off bailout and stimulus expenditures, and by a sudden plunge in corporate revenues.
For Mr. Duncan, (Mr. Flaherty) getting the deficit down to a more respectable number will be the easy part.
Getting rid of it entirely will be much harder.
That's why observers will be trying to figure out just how big the structural deficit really is. And it's why Mr. Duncan, (Mr. Flaherty) who's not about to announce either tax increases or deep spending cuts, will forecast a very gradual return to balance.
2. Whose belts will be tightened?
The Liberals (Conservatives) want to show they take the deficit seriously. But like most governments, they don't believe the public is ready to make major sacrifices to get rid of it. The result will likely be a couple of showy nods toward restraint, mostly aimed at the public service, which will have mostly symbolic value.
The likeliest, given recent controversies at provincial (Federal) agencies, is some form of new regulations on personal expenditures. But the government could go further, along the lines of departmental spending freezes.
The flashiest gesture - and the most significant in impact on provincial (Federal) coffers - would be a public asset sale. But while that remains a strong possibility, it won't be announced this week.
3. What about health care?
It's no secret that health costs, set to soon take up half of program spending, represent the government's biggest long-term challenge.
The Liberals (Conservatives) have only recently begun to talk seriously in public about it, floating ideas about changing the ways hospitals are funded.
But it's doubtful they'll want to do anything too controversial until after the next election.
The only immediate reforms Mr. Duncan (Mr. Flaherty) is likely to tout involve the pharmaceuticals industry. Still, there will be indicators of what else might lie ahead.
By their own law, the Liberals (Conservatives) are required to provide expenditure forecasts for three years.
The amount that projected growth is down from the 6 per cent that's become the annual standard should give some hint of the heavy lifting to come.
4. Spare some change?
Mr. Duncan (Mr. Flaherty) probably won't announce any major new expenditures we haven't already heard about.
But he'll need to elaborate on promises made in the Throne Speech - particularly on postsecondary education - which pledged 20,000 new college and university spots, more foreign students and a new online university.
The Liberals (Conservatives) don't intend to actually pay for most of those initiatives until their third term, if they get one. But they'll at least need to lay out ballpark figures for what they'll cost.
Meanwhile, the government will also have to answer a lingering question surrounding its early learning legacy project: Will it provide extra funding to avoid existing daycare centres being put out of business by full-day kindergarten?
5. What will Tim Hudak (Ignatieff) say?
This one isn't up to Mr. Duncan (Mr. Flaherty) to answer. But it will still be an important part of the story.
Under Mr. Hudak, ((Ignatieff) the Opposition has gotten much more disciplined - planning out strategy weeks or months in advance, and sticking to plan.
But the Conservative (Liberal Leader) leader also needs to show that he can think on his feet, providing smart critiques of new government policies, and this will be his best opportunity so far to do so.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/ontario/questions-about-deficit-loom-large-over-thursdays-ontario-budget/article1507711/
[updated Mon Mar 22 11:29:33 -0400 2010]
22 Mar 11:29
1 reply so far. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
Zachary Smith
Ronald,
Well it would appear that one of the Courts have spoken on process of prorogation and it does show that what the Coalition has presented to Canadians does not meet the test of the courts.
If you recall my point about the Conservatives being able to use that big stick on the Liberals and NDP after a court ruling that can be considered in their favour.
Now with courts having just giving Harper a club, to pound on the Liberals with and the Conservatives can now point to a number of Federal court rulings brought against them that have gone in their favour and by extension has gone against what the Liberals have presented in the house to Canadians.
The election Law, the in and out, on two occasions with the Military Police review and now this one and at the same time they will be able to show that each and every ruling that has gone against the Government it was a reversal of laws that the preceding Liberal Government put in place.
So I will add that I rather doubt that the Conservatives will stray from the path and that it will be the Liberals who will be doing the bending on this Documents and the Supremacy of Parliament issue or they may well find that they are broken.
http://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/en/2009/2009fc920/2009fc920.html
...
And I will quote Spector here and you can find the ruling at the link above.
"you’ll quickly see that the motion adopted by Parliament last week meets none of the tests for establishing a convention, notwithstanding Mr. Topp’s learned analysis."
"In other words, while Prime Minister Stephen Harper would be foolish to abuse again the process of prorogation as he did this year, nothing prevents him from requesting that Her Excellency prorogue Parliament for more than seven days without the approval of Parliament, as the NDP resolution would require."
"And nothing would stop him from proroguing as he did in 2008 to beat back what The Economist magazine at the time labelled an opposition “coup.”
[updated Mon Mar 22 12:09:10 -0400 2010]
22 Mar 12:09
No replies yet. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
Zachary Smith
I was just reading Don Martin over in the National Post and he has made a number of comments that would appear to show that the Montreal Convention may not be a big a success as have previous policy meetings.
...
1) But guess who's not invited to the high-profile think-tank in Montreal to envision the country's future? Incredibly, that would be Liberal MPs.
2) The entire caucus, except for leader Michael Ignatieff and chinwag co-chairman Mauril Belanger, have been told to stay in their ridings for this seminal party event, limiting their participation to Internet video linkages with the conference floor.
I disagree with Martin as I believe that the Liberals need to go out side of their party for any chance of renewal and that is where the future lays.
...
3) For Conservative zinger writers, this is a wonderful gift providing them with attack lines such as: Liberal Deep Thinkers Wanted (MPs need not apply). I can already see Prime Minister Stephen Harper's grin as he throws barbs across the Commons aisle at MPs deemed not worthy of joining their leader in this maximus cerebrius exercise.
I on the other hand see Ignatieff throwing back at Harper own words at him in the house about the need to consult Canadians.
...
4) Some Liberal MPs confide they are vexed by their exclusion, even though it saves them the stiff $700 registration fee to attend the three-day brainstorming session.
5) Perhaps the missing MPs explains the disquieting lack of buzz for a conference the party desperately needs to succeed if it hopes to reinvent itself for the next election. After all, these cerebral group hugs have always included MPs and both early editions have been a Big Deal for the Liberal party. The 1991 conference in Alymer, Que., became the defining moment for Jean Chretien, propelling the Liberals back to power armed with a Red Book of positions crafted by a balanced representation of members, MPs and invited guests.
My understanding was that this was to think and get out side the box and I am of the view that they can take what comes from this conference and then go to a conference with a short list and have a balanced debate with representation of members, MPs and invited guests.
...
5) The 1960 Liberal conference in Kingston produced ideas such as universal health care, pension reform and a new flag that became the springboard back under prime minister Lester Pearson. After each reinvigoration of the Liberal brand, the party was back in power within two years. But signs of a threepeat are not encouraging.
Fact not fiction and the current Liberals should learn from those lessons.
...
6) Whispers suggest that organizers are having trouble filling the 350 slots they need to make the conference a success financially and there's talk of some star participants as no-shows. Leaving MPs in their ridings may boost local participation, but it has dramatically reduced the event's star power and media interest. The format seems odd, as well. There will be a series of topical panels featuring a number of provocative speakers and then ... what?
I would be putting policy before dollars as it has been said that you need to spend a dollar to make a dollar, in this case these dollars can be votes.
...
7) Delegates have not received policy papers as a starting point for discussion and it's a mystery how the result of lectures and audience questions will be wrapped into some sort of coherent platform to carry the party through the next two or three elections.
Doing it this way, keeps it fresh and when people come they will be coming with a clean mind and not set positions that they have all ready set.
...
8) Still, it's important. The Liberals remain the natural government-in-waiting party and this could be a discussion that finally expands the party's vision beyond the next election. The challenges being put to the thinkers are the obvious choices -- jobs, pensions, energy and environment, the new economy and Canada's place in the world.
The Conservatives have all ready staked out these position and what the Liberal need to do is find the issue that defines them as Liberals and not just a version of Conservatives that they now represent to Canadians.
[updated Mon Mar 22 13:15:10 -0400 2010]
22 Mar 13:15
1 reply so far. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
Consertative Supporter
With Goggle moving out of China, Our government must restrict and remove any investments by China in Canada, especially the Oil Sands! We have something they do not have in China to date, we have all grades of Copper. We must increase the price to China by double.
Take note: I m a Anti - China Conservative - Reformer known a Pistol Pete named by Ronald ODowd
[updated Mon Mar 22 16:10:47 -0400 2010]
22 Mar 16:10
No replies yet. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
RonaldODowd
Le club des ex sur RDI.
I watch this every noon hour on weekdays -- you should have seen the sparks fly today regarding Gilles Duceppe's remarks! Fortunately, you haven't missed it. They plan to go at it again tomorrow.
[updated Mon Mar 22 16:16:16 -0400 2010]
22 Mar 16:16
2 replies so far. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
RonaldODowd
Today's Helpful Hint!
Get real and make the deal.
[updated Mon Mar 22 19:23:02 -0400 2010]
22 Mar 19:23
No replies yet. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
RonaldODowd
Extraordinary Caucus Meeting.
Something tells me we aren't moving toward a deal...
[updated Tue Mar 23 14:09:17 -0400 2010]
23 Mar 14:09
No replies yet. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
Consertative Supporter
Michael Ignatieff just signed his death wish to be Prime Minister of Canada in Saskatchewan, Majority of Western Canadians are totally against "Bilingualism" and "Multiculturalism" so if your looking for Votes Liberals do not come past the Manitoba- Ontario border.
As one newspaper has already stated let the "Cultural Wars" begin because we are ready to defeat you!
[updated Sun Apr 25 15:52:26 -0400 2010]
25 Apr 15:52
No replies yet. Join this conversationHide this conversation.