Although the Conservatives are short of the committed support necessary to form a majority government, Stephen Harper has a clear advantage over Liberal Leader Stephan Dion. Forty-two percent of Canadians choose Harper as the best PM followed by Dion at 17%, Layton at 16%, Duceppe at 7% and Elizabeth May at 4% (the rest chose none of the above or were unsure). At this point in time Stephen Harper personally may be in majority territory but his party is not.
What is emerging is a situation where one leader is ahead of his party (Harper) and another leader trails his party (Dion). Of note, Harper is the second choice as the best PM among committed Liberals, New Democrats and BQ voters and the first choice as Best PM in the province of Quebec.
As shown in the previous research conducted with CPAC, Harper does well on leadership factors. From a polling perspective, Liberal ballot box support is being maintained by entrenched party support. The Conservatives are more likely to be encumbered by residual concerns on social issues (code - abortion/same sex marriage etc.).
Even with these numbers, one should exercise caution. Perceptions of leaders can turn quickly. All it would take is for one attack ad on Dion to go too far to potentially turn the numbers and change the environment.
Here is the question - Of the following individuals, who do you think would make the best Prime Minister? [Read and Rotate]
- Stephen Harper 42%
- Stephane Dion 17%
- Jack Layton 16%
- Gilles Duceppe 7%
- Elizabeth May4%
- None of them 7%
- Unsure 6%
The detailed stats by region and party affiliation are in the Support Materials Box on the right.
Interesting times. I still think things are volatile. You have to remember, In our first past the post system, with 40% support winners take all. With numbers like these we may see more of a “Harper Government” and less of the “New Conservative Government”.
Cheers,
NJN
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
Yes, I would agree that Harper is in control, appears to know where he is going,... more
Tom Good (British Columbia) 10 Apr 00:43
Blah blah blah blah.... people have been saying the same or similar fear-mongeri... more
TorontoCrawler (Ontario) 10 Apr 09:16
These kind of questions are pretty meaningless. We do not have any idea what va... more
Ken Chapman (Alberta) 10 Apr 11:10
Yes Tom, the man is travelling...Have military will travel. Tom, I do not always... more
blossom (Québec) 12 Apr 01:00
Right on, Tom. I have been following that SPP deal but it's hard to get anythin... more
Bernie (Ontario) 10 Apr 08:37
"Libs.........shift back from the left" WHAT? Why do you think they were vot... more
Bernie (Ontario) 11 Apr 08:18
Comments
Tom Good
Yes, I would agree that Harper is in control, appears to know where he is going, is the picture of the Chairman of the Board and CEO rolled into one, a good tactician but I do not like the company he represents. If the general public gets wind of the Security- Prosperity- Partnership, (SPP), which is the North American Union by stealth and secrecy whereby Canada and Mexico become subserviant to the interests and laws of the United States if we wish to trade with our neighbour, then the electorate will become more distrustful of the "company" Harper represents. Our press is very quiet about these ongoing meetings attended by the CEOs of the largest companies and senior government officials. I do not believe ordinary Canadians wish to become a resource colony for the benefit of the US----do you?.
Another factor that may well change the minds of Canadians regarding their political leadership is the ongoing Afghanistan war------six more deaths of young Canadians in a war not of Canada's making-----surely Canada's role change from PEACE KEEPER to war maker, as a partner of the US, has to be in the cards for the upcoming election.
[updated Tue Apr 10 00:43:44 EDT 2007]
10 Apr 00:43
46 replies so far. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
Bernie
Right on, Tom. I have been following that SPP deal but it's hard to get anything on it. The press is hopeless in that respect The covert operations going on is scary.
I heard this mornig that our TV networks re hockey broadcasts are subject to the Americans.
Egads, our national pasttime controlled by the US. Sovereignty? Autonomy? Independence?
10 Apr 08:37
Tom Good
Hello Bernie:----CPAC has had some good programmes and you can get their broadcast schedule via the internet by clicking on and requesting the same.------Scary, well Canada is self sufficient in regards to patroleum resources BUT with NAFTA we have to export over 50 % of those resources to the US whether we have an emergency in Canada or not. Formerly we maintained a 25 year supply but now we are exporting more than we are discovering and are down to an 8 year supply. Those exports are raw materials with NO secondary processing in Canada thus high paying skilled jobs are exported too. Shameful and I suppose water is next.
10 Apr 10:36
Bernie
Thanks, Tom. Actually I watch CPAC and get their schedule.
I am not a big TV viewer. I am very selective in my viewing. Most of what I see is on CPAC, CBC, TVO and the American PBS.
I am very disappointed in CBC's programming especially in more recent years. They are not living up to their mandate and I've told them so on several occasions. I would like our government to triple their budget and get rid of advertisiong completely.
I listen to radio a lot, usually American NPR and CBC. CBC's radio programming is better than their TV; and I read a lot.
I agree with your comments re oil. And only a very strong outcry about the water issue prevented them from taking control of that too.
The biggest problem is that the discussions are going on behind closed doors. If they wouild bring them out in the open we could make intelligent choices on which way we want to go.
However most times the agreements are signed before we know they being even discussed.
Where's the democracy in that? Who gives them the right to make such decisions without our consent? I thought all Canadians OWN those resources, not a few who sign those.agreements
Who gets the benifits of those signings? A select few?
11 Apr 08:03
TorontoCrawler
Blah blah blah blah.... people have been saying the same or similar fear-mongering statements since 2004... guess what - it doesn't work! The only way for the Libs to come back is to have their own positive message and to shift back from the far left direction they've been moving in lately since Dion became leader, and towards the centre.
10 Apr 09:16
anvil
Good mornig Toronto Crawler.
Is this SPP phenomenon a reality or is it something that does not exist? If it exists, could you tell me what is its purpose and why our government is involved with this assembly of people?
Now regarding your comment about the liberals, I tend to support your theory that the party has to shift a little to the center and I think it will happen when Dion and the party will start publishing their policies. I do not agree though that the party has gone further left with Dion but instead believe that Martin pushed the enveloppe in that direction. We do not really know what Dion will bring to the party yet and we must wait until the real battleground of an election is played out.
No doubt Harper is more popular given the actual political atmosphere that we are living at this time. He also made sure that Dion's image and the liberal's image would not be an alternative to his government by producing ads and making comments in the HOC that were very negative and with this clear purpose.
I guess we will have to wait and see when the wrir falls what and who will be tha most popular. One can only remember Brian Mulroney!!!
10 Apr 10:25
Bernie
"Libs.........shift back from the left" WHAT?
Why do you think they were voted out of office?. The latter part of Chretien's reign they were moving too far right, largely pushed their by Paul Martin as Minister of Finance. Then when Martin took over he moved farther to the right and forgot where most Canadians sit, that is, in the middle or a little to left of centre.
Their message has been nothing but positive and if Dion moves them back to centre of left I may even consider voting for him.
11 Apr 08:18
blossom
Which means that we shall be on the same side, with an added asset, Liz May.
14 Apr 03:30
ronmack
I have to wonder why the response is so often an attempt to put a negative spin on a positive outcome. So, you wonder if the SPP deal is going to hurt Canada and so hurt Harper's leadership. It does sound suspicious but the news is out there and lots of Canadians are aware of what is happening. It doesn't appear to hurt Harper.
As for Afghanistan: We all grieve the loss of six fine young men. Our thoughts and prayers are with their families. But we must not use this heartbreaking loss to make political hay. Freedom has never come cheaply. The ultimate price has been paid by these men and their families. This investment in freedom and justice will pay large dividends even if it takes a long time to be seen.
As for it hurting Harper, I think you are seeing something that is not there. Sure there are some Canadians who think this is a wrong war in the wrong place. However, the fact is that many strongly agree that we are doing the right thing in the right place. Freedom for Canadians is not separate from freedom for others.
Ron (Ontario)
10 Apr 10:29
Raging Ranter
The whole SPP thing is a red herring, and people are over-reacting as usual. The talks have been going on for years, under the previous two prime ministers as well as Harper. In fact, John Manley, former deputy prime minister to Jean Chretien, was one of the Canadian representatives at the latest meetings. Does he sound like someone who would sell is country up the river?
The SPP talks are simply about improving the flow of trade and commerce across North American borders. Right now, despite NAFTA, there are still thousands of silly little regulations regarding numerous arcane matters that could be harmonized or done away with to ease cross-border trade. That, in large part, is what the SPP is about.
As for NAFTA forcing us to export over 50% of our oil to the US, it does nothing of the sort. What NAFTA does is guarantees that no Canadian government will step in and direct exports away from the US. There is no 50% quota or any other targeted amount. Canada is not obligated to sell ANY energy to the US under NAFTA. Our obligation under NAFTA is to refrain from dictating where the energy exports go, period. That is left up to the market, as it should be. Since the US is the world's biggest energy consumer, and since they are right next door, the majority of our exports will go to the US. Alberta lobbied very hard to have that clause included in NAFTA, as a means of preventing any future federal government from stepping in and crushing the provincial economy as they did in 1981 with the NEP.
10 Apr 11:22
Tom Good
Hello Ranter: Here is something to consider..... 1.) The Americans are the best merchandisers in the world and they drive a hard bargain always on their terms.....2.) With the present position of the current US administration, that is, "you are either with us or you are with the terrorists"...one has to play by their rules since 9-11. To improve, as you say, "the flow of trade and commerce across North American borders" Canada now has to impose identical "homeland security" measures as the US. Canada has to impose the American made rules and regulations and did we say sovereign Canada???If you want to play, "harmonize" the American way ! ! ! ...3.) Under NAFTA, Canada cannot reduce the current VOLUME of petroleum flowing to the US or Canada is in violation of the treaty. We do not have energy sovereignty but 75%+ of the world's known energy resources are sovereign.....4.) The Security-Prosperity-Partnership, SPP, is almost unknown to the general electorate in Canada. We are becoming a resource colony for our neighbour who developes highly skilled , well paid American jobs with those resources. Stealth and secrecy prevails......5.) China tried to buy the big American Petroleum company, I believe PEMBA or something like that, but Congress stepped in and "persuaded" PEMBA to accept a lesser American offer. Free trade or protecting their energy sovereignty? Do we dare do that in Canada today ?....6.) When we think of our neighbour to the south, think about the Canadian Softwood Lumber issue over the last five years. I understand this is back again into the American courts. Canadian oil is wanted, Canadian water is wanted, Canadian electricty is wanted but not that bloody Canadian softwood. (Remember the Pacific salmon dispute of a few years ago---who hit us with the big stick/) Might seems to be right and we are letting our neighbour pick and choose generally to the detriment of Canada.
I did not agree with Chretien on too many points, but when he said....."I believe we are still a sovereign nation" in response to NOT going into Iraq, he went up in my estimation.
Yes, we have to trade but let us not become just a doormat.
10 Apr 19:16
Bernie
We don't know if SPP is a 'red herring' because we don't know the nature of the discussions, since they are in secret we have every right to be suspicious. Open up to us and maybe we can reach an agreement.
John Manley, hee hee hee. He's the guy who wanted the taxes of families making 20 or 30 thousand to subsidize hockey players making millions.
I guess he is a lobbyist for some corporation now. I saw him on a TV talkshow a month or so ago. He hasn't a clue of what's important to the average Canadian.
The Americans control how much oil we sell and how much we sell it for and whether we can sell a Canadian oil company to a foreign coiuntry, like China.
Under NAFTA a small US company can override the policies of our municipal, provincial, and even federal governments.
NAFTA took away part of our sovereignty.
11 Apr 09:16
blossom
I would agree on the peacekeeping mission in Afghanistan, with a plan, and renewed
positive action against Pakistan...The borders are wide open between those two
Countries, and the narco plantation has spirelled to new hights !!! They need more boots
on the grounds, and even though the Harper gov't news is good, ask other Countries
what they are saying. The Navy just recently has said that it is getting far worse.
Just as it is in Iraq, it's getting worse in Afghanistan...The news is just starting to get
fresh off the press about the real situation out there. Give it a little more time, when
the taliban comes out after the winter, This is not a conventional war - if we pursue
this course, it's a lost cause. Inside those leopards, it gets to be 125 degrees for those
soldiers...The warlords are gaining, and the government is totally corrupt. The South
has already been discounted. This is leading to more fallen heroes, and it is time for
us to hear what they have to say about it all...We know that they go back, because
their buddies "brothers" are still fighting out there, and they care about them, but what
to they really have to say, and think about this mission?
bloss
11 Apr 08:45
Bernie
Ron, Only a select secretive few know what's going on with SPP., and they are not telling us. Not only do lots of Canadians not know that, many Canadians know little or care little about political issues, even purely national ones.
It's not hurting Harper because they don't know, but that's not important. It's what may hurt Canadians that we are concerned about.
I don't think anyone is so low as to make hay out the deaths of six of our citizens.
However those deaths, as well as near 50 others, were caused by our government, first the Liberals and now the Conservatives However, it makes me sick to see on TV how hypocritical they are grieving for them and their families. If I lost a son (or daughter) over there, it would be God help Harper, O'Conner, or Hillier if they tried to contact me. In fact, I would be hard pressed to control myself if any of the media came near.
They are not over there for "freedom", "security" "national interests" not any of those terms thrown around by the communication spin doctors.
Canadians are brain washed to believe those things, just as Americans were brainwashed to support the invasion of Iraq. And the media complied.
11 Apr 08:55
blossom
Bernie, this is true. Just this eve, missed the former Iraqui something, but said that
the US "MUST' talk to Syria, Iran, and that Saudi Arabia is going to lose its hold on
the Middle East, and that the US gov't knows that they are inciting more violence out
there, and that the US has to get out ASAP...Unfortunately, too much info for me to
remember all, but on Charlie Rose, PBS if anyone can pick-up this conversation, on his
web-site. It's not the first alert that I hear about it, and I am now convinced. Afghanistan,
if not kept as a peace-keeping mission, must get out of there also...it is only recently
that I have really lost faith in this war. The principal, is that no democratic Country should
attack another, unless in self-defence. It is all about interests out there! Soon, we may
have clatamistic proportion sized natural events, and we shall have to deal with these.
The narco trade in Afghanistan should be converted to medicinal purposes, etc...
Bernie, give it a few weeks, and I have a feeling that there is a lot of sad/unknown
truths which are going to be published, and before soon. We are going at heck-tick
speed on some kind of collision course, and I even falter S.Harper about distracting
everyone about an election, as possibly a gimmick to keep us occupied, while other
serious matters are really happening. This is my own personal sense, that something
is up, and we don't yet know what it is??? Quite frankly, I do not understand the
medias - they are controlled, and often talk their jargon - they have no choice. Don't
forget that we are all controlled!
bloss
12 Apr 00:45
Bernie
Hi Blossom
Generaly speaking, when people get informed, when they know the truth, they make the right decisions. When they know the truth they do not allow their leaders to make bad decisions on their behalf. Voting, per se, does not bring about democracy. Informed voting, based on truth, does.
A good example is the current American situation. After 9/11 support for George Bush went up to 90%. When Bush announced that he was going into Iraq he had;( I can't remember the exact figure), I believe it was about 80 %. Now Bush's personal is down to 27% and support for the war 18%. That's an unprecedented turn around in public opinion. What caused this? Well, it's obvious they learned the truth.
Long before Alqaeda or Bin Laden or 9/11, the US planned to go into Iraq, they did consider other countries but finally settled on Iraq. You don't have to take my word for it or that of some journalist or writer. The proof is in a document produced for their foreign affair, a strategic plan for the future written by Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld, Richard Perle, Paul Wolfsson, Lewis Libby and some others I can't recall. That was in the early 1990's They spent the following years trying to built up support for their plan. It was slow jogging, and they were not meeting with a suitable degree of success. They saturated their citizens with misinformation, half truths, then lies, lies and more lies. Finally 9/11 came along, To them it was a god-send. In fact some believe it was set up, many more believe they knew about in advance. Personally I don't, I don't go in for conspiracy theories. I need substantial proof before I have beliefs.
Of course right after 9/11 , the propaganda machine went into high gear. Not to garner support to go after the Bin Laden, but to go with their original plan, to go into Iraq.
The Americans, normally a good decent people fell for those lies. I guess they were in a state of shock, also like many Canadians, they take little interest in politics, being too busy with daily living. They were not aware of the grand deception. The media, who describe themselves a safeguards of democracy, were complicit with that deception.
Now the chickens are coming home to roost. Now finally the American are seeing how they were tricked. Now they are getting information, in otherwords seeing the truth. Now we can see how information and truth can change opinions and beliefs. Of course you can't change everyone. Some, once they believe something, will never change no matter how many facts are but before them. They will ignore the facts because they are afraid to admit they were wrong.
They are so insecure that they think that being wrong (when they had the wrong info) is a sign of weakness, of something. Anyway, It's good to see that 60 or 70% of American citizens are now willing to admit that they were wrong. I only wish it didn't have to take them so long to wake up. I'm afraid Canadians maybe going down the same road. That is; not getting involved, digging below the surface and finding out what's really happening.
Getting the information and seeing the truth means having the right opinions and making right decisions. And for those who are insecure they won't have be concerned with deciding to admit that they were wrong, if that's a problem for them.
Sorry for being longwinded, I find I have to be, to be able expresss myself more clearly and not be misinterpreted.
12 Apr 08:53
blossom
Hi Bernie,
Boy, did I love reading your article - terrific! Yes, not very long ago I did hear (not all)
but yes, this had all been planned, and long before, and even Viet Nam, it has
been revealed, was a "lie".....I loved to hear when you said that even with the truth
before our eyes, when confronted, we can still refuse to change our perceptions...
This is why history repeats itself and the world is at war - which will never change
anything. We have to restructure, rebuild societies, communities for their needs,
and government is led by a few elite who can change the course in extraordinary
ways - not for the best, and to their interests. I admire the extraordinary people
who are out there trying to change the system, but unless we listen, nothing will
change, and be more of the same. I do not see that things are getting better, and
we swallow a lot of what is being said. Although I do blame the press, they have
certain boundaries which they can not cross because too much is at stake! One
has to learn whom one can trust. As you pointed out, there is so much to learn,
and so little time in one day, and we aren't being briefed. I was just listening to
a reading about Thomas Payne, Benjamin Franklin and the first Printer in Mtl,
after 1775, and the one year battle with the US...first thing I know, someone
is talking about le Qc libre, quoting from de Gaulle!!! I tuned-off !!! Sorry if I side-
tracked, but I could not see the connection with the first conferencier and the
second. In order to really be well-informed, one would have to read and not just
one author, but all of them, unless you're johnny on the spot. I remember reading
an old biography and going for newer thesis on the same subject, and could not
even recognize same person or his life. I liked your longwinded opinion, because
there has been a lot of discussion, and the truth is coming out more and more.
A lot of books being written about this subject, and yet, as you say, it is those
who dedicate their lives to studying these matters who delve with the truths.
Have to run, but want to thank both you and Tom. I find it always rewarding to
read both your thoughts on all subjects.
12 Apr 13:44
blossom
Bernie,
Just re-read your article and hope that Nik puts it on the Highest rated board -
You deserve it for this very honest and somewhat professional writing. I congratulate
you on this one and keep going at it. You are documenting well, and I have also
heard a lot of what you are saying, which is coming out more and more.
I shall look up the authors name for you next time, however, an economist just
wrote a book entitled "The Occupation of Iraq" - winning or losing?Apparently,
he has it right. If you are so enclined to read this book, you might want to document
us on it.
Take care,
12 Apr 22:42
Bernie
Hi Blossom, Thanks for the kind words. I just ry to express my opinions as best as I can. ometimes it doesn't come out exactly as I would like. I don't know how others receive it. Some who have opinions somewhat close to my own accept what I say, others who have had different experiences see it differently.
Yesterday there were three great columns on the Opinion page of the Toronto Star. Not often we see three of that quality on the same page. I'm generally critical of the newspapers. In fact I was going to write them about their Editorial in Wednesday's paper. It was critical of Danny Williams position and favouring Ottawa. They obviously are unaware of some background and underlying issues. I was hoping to straighten them out.
13 Apr 08:14
blossom
Hi Bernie, and I mean it... Actually I do the same, and it's a manner of communicating
with other people, sharing values and opinions which one could not do, perhaps,
otherwise. It's all about telling it as we perceive it, and getting feed-back. Some,
are very knowledgeable, because of their professions, some have more detailed
information, and without necessarily changing one's total views, it teaches us
to have a more open mind about issues, different values, and understanding
what makes people tick. It teaches us the art of debating, without being
offensive to others...respect. It's a great way to communicate with people
across our Country, and feel less isolated. I like your thoughts on the last
paragraph also, about bringing clarity to the issues. Less breaking news,
and more profound depth into the issues. Lately, I have had less time to
inform myself, and have come to the conclusion that I have possibly said
all that I have to say, however, after glancing at your thoughts, I just had
to respond. I encourage you to follow your good intuition, and you are really
on the right track.
Thanks,
bloss
14 Apr 23:31
blossom
Hello Tom,
Well said. He's been called a lyer (I have to say alledgedly), but Danny Williams did not!
Those who voted for him, voted for a Conservative gov't, however, since the election, and
more and more, it has become a one man show - the Harper gov't!!! God talks to 'bush',
and I am wondering who is calling on S. Harper?
11 Apr 08:16
Tom Good
Yes, Blossom, Harper is rather a one man show and those who choose the strong man position also get all the blame or all the glory. Seems to fit Harper's persona. I must say, though, Harper is the only Canadian politician to ever get farther north than Ottawa and I appreciate him drawing attention to the north and the Arctic Archipeligo last summer. I doubt most Canadian politicians could put their finger on the map and point to where Canadian Forces Base, Alert is located but Harper was there. Cold as it seems, the Arctic is critical for Canada's future and it is a treasure house of resources----a positive for Harper , in my opinion. You know my opinion concerning other "thrusts" of the current government.
11 Apr 13:52
blossom
Yes Tom, the man is travelling...Have military will travel. Tom, I do not always want
to be disparaging, however, our waterway is under dispute, whereas the Russians, and
the US also want a claim on it - However, he could also start helping the Inuit population
and give them the monies promised so that they can survive their poverty, and their
way of life, which they have lost. At least, he could redeem himself out there. The
resources are great out there, but are we also going to destroy one of the most scenic
coutry out there? I presume that you are referring to the pipeline out there, which was
quite controversial? Perhaps you could expostulate a little more on this...possibly
you mean concerning our securing our waters? Not sure?
Regards,
bloss
12 Apr 01:00
Tom Good
In response, Blossom: I have always felt the Arctic is our store house not generally recognized by the myopic population that seems not to see outside that 200 mile ribbon, clinging to the southern border, from the Atlantic to the Pacific and generally described as Canada. The sovereignty of the Arctic will be disputed, especially with the US, and the western boundary particularly so as it is felt there are vast petroleum resources underneath the sea as a continuation of the north slope which has proven resources. I assume resource revenue in the Yukon, Northwest Territories and Nunavit will fall to those jurisdictions but those jurisdictions and their people need help now----true. Help has to be creative and practical and it is not a case of throwing money at the issue or making sure everybody is on a generous dole / welfare system. The goal has to be a self sustaining system for the people in the long term. Militarily, the Northwest Passage must be secured as a waterway under Canadian sovereignty which is not what the US wants. Harper is right when he says there has to be an effective Canadian military presence in the Arctic with an ice free deep water port to be established probably on Baffin Island. The Arctic Rangers, all Inuit, with equipment, training and rewards, worthy of a third world nation, have been our military presence to date.. I have no problem with the proposed MacKenzie River pipeline (s) asssuming all evironmental concerns are addressed and the royalties will flow to the local jurisdictions. Presently air transport must serve the outposts, for example, to get equipment in and the goodies out-----ice highways have their limitations but they are vital today. One could go on for days about the Arctic, the neglect of the people there and how and what development should look like for the future. Global warming will effect the Arctic markedly but doubt future generations will rush to buy recreational lots on Devon Island----not quite cottage country---Ho Ho.
12 Apr 02:44
Bernie
Tom, what you say about the Arctic is true. They never heard of the Arctic in Ottawa until it was brought to their attention by corporations who saw an opportunity to make big profits. Now our politicians are all excited about it. Unfortunately for economic reasons rather than people reasons.
I don't have a fixed position on the Mackenzie pipeline. If the local population goes for it then it's OK, unless they are having the wool pulled over their eyes.
To the political decision makers, I guess the value of a place diminishes in porportion to its distance from Ottawa.
12 Apr 09:10
Tom Good
Ho Ho Ho----Bernie, tell us in the west about the distance from Ottawa no matter what party is in power-----we have been a colony for years and, I believe we continue to be----we are somewhere beyond the head of the lakes ! ! !
12 Apr 13:54
Bernie
Tom I know an Australian who came from the hot country and married an Inuit and lives in Nain (the most northerly community in NL. Don't ask me how he was able to adjust but he has for about 25 years. Why I'm telling this is because he says the same thing as you and has the same opinions of Ottawa politicians.
13 Apr 08:19
Tom Good
Hello, Bernie-----Looks like all of 7 buildings in Nain----that is isolated-----bet Danny Williams has never set foot there !
13 Apr 15:06
Bernie
Yes, I think your bet is quite safe
13 Apr 16:04
blossom
Hello Tom,
Both you and Bernie have described what I have heard - Your exposee reveals
to me that you are very much aware of the situation, and the positive point
entailed, however, Bernie also seems very conscious of the exploitation that will
be used against the communities affected in those areas, which is a sensitive
point for me. We have already caused the major problems that the people are
experiencing, and they need sustainable help, and yes, not just monies to buy
them out. They were exploited and abused. Their caribou will become extinct -
They live in shacks, no form of ongoing education for most. I suspect though, Tom
that I am getting the two territories mixed-up? I would need to read-up on those
issues, but have seen documentaries and it was pitiful for those people who were
co-erced with little in order to gain their territory.You seem to have first-hand
experience.
Thanks, and shall re-read you article.
bloss
12 Apr 13:18
Tom Good
Blossom, The aboriginal peoples of Canada have suffered for years under federal paternalism and general indifference. The treaty process is frustrating but it is heading in the right direction, If the Indian Act is repealed, can you guess how many bureaucratic jobs will be lost-----the bureaucracy has a direct interest in keeping the status quo----that is a major part of the problem and has been since the inception of the Indian Act.
12 Apr 13:47
blossom
Tom, No, I did not know...I have heard that the $5million promised is there, and
I believe that they need to get rid of the gangs - chiefs - however, that they
should have the right to govern themselves, and to make their decisions. Paul
Martin faught for this cause, and to give due respect, I believe, that Jim
Prentice is trying to do justice for the aboriginal people of Canada. I think that
before the "House" closed that a Bill was passed in Parliament, to the effect that aboriginal women have "property rights" when they divorce. Tom, I think that we have a long
way to go before the issues of this world are properly settled.
12 Apr 22:30
Tom Good
Blossom----To me the reserve system, where there are only communal rights and no personal property rights, is another gross abuse of the individual's rights. I strongly believe the "reserve" should be organized as a municipality with those in charge publically accountable to their electorate and their transactions annually audited and the results published. Municipalities address the service issue for their electorate rather than Ottawa.Further, I believe all band members should OWN their home and the piece of land it sits on------sale of that home should be restricted to band members. For the non-treaty bands, big daddy---paternal Ottawa----provides those homes and they are communal property-----an individual has no right of tenure. Property rights are likely to foster pride of ownership which appears to be lacking today.
13 Apr 01:06
blossom
Tom, I believe that this is what I was trying to say, but not knowledgeable
enough on this subject - meant that yes, I believe in property ownership,
but native women had no rights to a property settlement when they divorced
and lost everything...now I believe that lately the Bill was passed, and that
this law has been changed. I din't mean for them to be dependent on the
government, but to govern their own communities, but also by their own
responsible and accountable leadership. Seems I am having trouble expressing my words
on this one! And, this already exists, that the sale of a native property, in
even a town, if owned by a native person, has to be sold to another
native person. Definately, property rights will foster pride of ownership.
Happy that you disentangled this one for me!
13 Apr 23:13
blossom
Hi Tom,
Just heard a Dutch Ambassador this eve who says that they do not question this mission,
etc...Since they needed 2500 more soldiers, 6,000 more have been added. Not even enough!
I do!
I also saw a documentary on soldiers in Iraq (same medical needs and families) as
Afghanistan, and when you see the rehabilitation process, which is so weak, underfunded,
and not enough personnel, it's makes one cry. The US estimates the cost of one such
soldier at $7-$8million/year - 40 yrs $400billion. The families are not getting the required
help, and can't, not even with monies that communities are donating to help. It is stifling
to see this reportage. If one has not lived to see the results of wars, or members of
afflicted families, one can never realize how horrible/dreadful, and living hell it is for them.
This is why, there has to be a "debate", and that people are divided about Afghanistan.
We have no resources to help Darfur, Sudan, and this is an ongoing genocide for the last
four years. Just as Katrina was a stark look at what the cost and damages for those
people, many displaced and have lost everything, we may have to have our soldiers to
help our own devestated countrymen, and we have to look at the longterm effects of
what we are presently engaged in. Afghanistan is getting worse - so say all the reports.
They are not sending another 100 tanks, borrowed from the Dutch for nothing. It is a
terrible conflict, and one of good conscience, that we want to help the Afghans, but
Canada must keep a peace-keeping role in the world, and not a military one. Iraq should
be teaching us a lot of lessons about hopelesness!!! I agree that Canadians are not
worriors, but brave soldiers who deserve more than just our respect.
Bye,
bloss
12 Apr 22:18
Tom Good
Blossom: The deaths of Canadian service personnel is completely unacceptable and their families deserve the most generous support. As bad as this war is for Canadians, just think of the devastation it has caused thousands of Innocent Afghanis who have had their lives snuffed out and the tens of thousands of their dependents who are left behind. I would suggest this will be a breeding ground for what we do not wish to see just as the displaced Palistinians of the last 40 years have provided a breeding ground for the radicals in the Middle East. Peace keeping and reconstruction are commendable but war is deplorable. We must be blind and stupid.
13 Apr 01:23
blossom
Ok, I see where I put (I do)...it should have been after I said we have to question this
war!!! debate Canada as a "peace-keeping" Country, and agree wars will engender
more wars. What I was trying to describe are the consequences of the medical process after Iraq, will be the same with Afghanistan. The lives of those devestated
soldiers and families will be ruined forever. More tanks, represent an upsurge in the
war, and casualties. The reconstruction process is worse than starting from scratch.
The problem is that this peace-keeping mission was an accomodation to the
'bush' adminsitration, after 9/11, so they could invade Iraq. But how do you turn back?
13 Apr 23:31
Tom Good
I agree with you Blossom but we can never rewrite the past---that is history,---The carnage of war is always frightful for all participants. ---We have an effect on the present and we can determine our future. One can never turn back but Canada can end its NATO commitment in 2009. At the moment, the Government of Canada has said it is going to continue the course of action likely beyond 2009 which we, and, I believe the majority of Canadians, oppose. Canada must return to its role as peace keeper rather than war maker.--- I believe the continuation of the Afghanistan war has to be a major issue in the upcoming election. With the Doin-May announcement today, that election maybe sooner rather than later.
14 Apr 01:00
blossom
Tom, my last statement meant to say that in order to better our "trade relations" with
the US, Jean Chretien agreed to go in a peacekeeping capacity, which gave the
US the number of boots to invade Iraq - and based on lies! Tom believe me, someone
took me to see "Saving Captain Ryan, and within the first five minutes was so
nausiated that I had to get out of the theatre. I was horrified!
I agree that S.Harper commited up to 2009, within 6 hrs,
without accomodating all parties to have discussions, about mapping out a plan.Some
Liberals could hardly not vote in favour, but where not happy about this outcome -
meaning that were asking for debates, before voting for it. No we can't look back -
but we can for the future, and another extension, without knowing all the consequences,
would be another mess like Iran. Today, I heard someone say that the military does
not call for a war; that Countries do, and must carry the burden of casualties. This
gov't is comitted to the cause, and call it Harper's war. The Brits have already
comitted to getting out soon. There are (6) necessary steps which have to be taken
in order to gain the trust of the Afghans, and especially start reconstructing,
yesterday, enforce law and order by the police, and Karzai gov't, and stop the
taliban from crossing back and forth from Pakistan. More tanks does not get to
the hearts of the people, although while our soldiers are there - they need those
new tanks for their greater protection - but it's not a winnable war. They are
all related somehow, and stick together, and dissipate with the regular
population. Liz May and S. Dion was no back-room deal. Ms May had already
discussed this with (Ibelieve Peter Mansbridge on CBC), and comes as no
surprise. I was really hoping for this to happen, so that she gets a seat in the "House",
and well deserved, for she is intelligent, and dazzling on issues. On other of her party's
issues I differ.On the environment, which is no longer a subject of debate, she
and S. Dion are visionaries. Jack Layton doesn't want Harper, yet, he always
sides with him, and would not compromise even for all of our benefit, and his.
What surprised me most, was all of the theories that so many had, and differed,
and both May and Dion, pleaded to keep politics out of this issue, but for the
good of our planet. Should we have natural catastrophies, we won't have any soldiers
for emergencies. I hope that voters see the light, and go with the sound reasoning
of this entente between them, and don't look for negative political motives. They
asked for our trust, and I feel that both are honourable individuals, whom I am
lending my trust to.
14 Apr 03:25
Tom Good
Blossom, I am sure Harper and Bush cannot transpose the analogy of "How To Win Friends and Influence People" with their foreign policy initiatives. Obviously Bush has not read "The Ugly American" where lack of empathy and understanding led to disasterous diplomatic results-----I suppose Bush subscribes to "might is right" but it certainly does not make friends-----rather like the school yard bully who usually gets his just due in the end.
In all war situations, we get a lot of "controlled" reporting which is one sided, to say the least, if not downright dishonest----would this be akin to propaganda ? I am equally sure the Karzai government is providing all the photo ops possible with their hand out for all the dollars possible and saying how much they need the Canadian assistance and NATO forces generally, to help their "democracy"-----a word they do not understand but it is the catch word our government throws about. Yes, the Pakistani border is as leaky as a sieve but the country wants those American dollars that have been thrown their way----really cannot blame them but it is obvious where their sympathies rest.
14 Apr 04:02
Bernie
Hi Tom, books I read 40 years ago. You have good tast in reading.
The Afghan, Pakistan border is an artificial drawn by westerners. It means nothing to the people living there.
14 Apr 10:04
Bernie
Blossom you have a great understanding of the issues. I wish I wish you had voice to address all voters and help them all see the light.
14 Apr 09:58
Bernie
Sorry to butt in. I agree with both of you.
Tom, you mentioned NATO, one of my pet peeves. When the Soviet Union broke up and the Warsaw Pact dispanded why did not NATO dispand too. Or at least Canada withdraw from it. It is an adjunct of and controlled by the US. We ought not be part of it. It's not needed any more . Actually it expanded to Russia's doorstep and kept Russia from being on more friendly terms and has encouraged them to seek coalitions elsewhere.
We should get out of NATO and also out of Afghanistan.
14 Apr 09:51
Tom Good
Bernie, I agree that Nato has had its day. Like all bureaucracies, there is a huge techno-military comlex in a supporting role behind it. The threat of disbandment would effect a massive dependent arms industry. Now, knowing how our governments tend to function, and if you were a CEO of a company dependent upon the flow of government contracts or a high up military person, what would you do under threat ????? Do you imagine lobbyists being extra busy bending the ears of politicians and how about a subtle or not so subtle advertising campaign. What proceded the Iraq invasion????certainly not truthful FACT. Being cynical, the invasion was a bonanza for particular sectors of the economy and who said that industry had any moral fibre---they have bottom lines and those bottom lines generate fantastic annual bonuses for the captains of industry. NATO does not move as fast as an Iraqi invasion but there there is a vast supportive mechanism with a vested interests behind it. NORAD possibly serves a purpose closer to us but it is all intertwined with the industrial-military complex.
14 Apr 13:33
fuzzy
Tom,
Excuse me for butting in on your friendly and agreeable conversation with Bernie, but I think you both have let your dislike of a "techno-military complex" (whatever that is) colour your judgement.
I do believe that the need for NATO is a strong now as when it was formed. The original purpose of NATO was to form a defence association to protect member countries from attack by an aggressor nation. The main threat at the time was the USSR. The end of the "Cold War" with the USSR was in a large part was a result of the economic situation in the USSR and the Russian economy could no longer support the armed forces and maintain the huge military infrastructure.
In the past few years the Russian economy has been booming, driven in a large part by oil and natural gas sales to European nations. Part of this energy boom money could finance the Russian military complex to update weapons technology and that could put Russia in a competitive position with the Eu and the USA military strength. This could bring about the same situation we had in the Cold War; Two sides with powerful atomic weapons on unfriendly terms.
So far the battle has been limited to some unfriendly words from President Putin, but the threat could become real in the future. Russia has been clamping down on democratic opposition to the government and the gofernment appears to becoming more autocratic. The threat to world peace could become very real, possibly in the next decade.
NATO may help in protecting its member countries from attack by an aggressor nation and in doing say may deter the aggressor and prevent a possible atomic war. No country has ever been attacked because it was too strong, the reverse has usually been the case.
16 Apr 00:13
Tom Good
Good point Fuzzy-----Distance is really not relevant in the world today for the major powers and their exploding devices and neither do they wish to engage in an old fashioned hot battle and risk mutual destruction. The economic dominance route holds much more promise with the emerging China as no paper dragon and you are right about Russia with their new found wealth. Putin seems to have his hands full, though, trying to stop further breakup of the country which is a losing situation especially when those regions have oil wealth. Of course, North Korea or Iran may do something impetuous with their bombs but people there can think too so I rather doubt there will be much more than the rattling of swords which gives them a better bargaining position on the world stage. The world certainly notices North Korea and it has brought them US dollars.
I do believe the later involvement of NATO in the Afghanistan situation is a bastardization of the original treaty terms------it appears NATO has lost its claim as a defensive organization and there has been a deliberate attemp not to involve the United Nations. I believe the EU should have its own defensive organization for its member countries and Canada does not belong in that organization. The United Nations must be the prime organization for the countries of the world.
16 Apr 01:19
Bernie
Fuzzy, as far as I am concerned, you are welcome to butt in at any time, Even if your argument is fuzzy, even if your think a viewpoint different from your own,, is "coloured"
Seriously tho, I would dislike a techo-military complex (whatever that is or might be)
I still see no need for NATO, and I certainly see no need for Canada to belong to it, if it continues to exist. I don't see any organization to belong to oither than the United Nations.
I am well aware of the growing strength of Russia and of Putin leaning to a less democratic form of government. The action (or lack of it) of the US and the West following the breakup of USSR was instrumental in Rusia going the way it has.
I don't see anything to fear from Russia for a very long time. Most of the food (and other necessities) produced in parts of the old USSR are now in the EU. The EU is a much more powerful organization.
Previously Europe was comprised of competing countries Now these are united and so miuch larger. They have nothing to fear from Russia.
I don't see anyone attacking Canada in the near future or far into the future for that matter. The only one then most likely would be the US. In another 30 or 40 years China may be in a position to , but that's very remote. They would have to contend with the US and many UN nations.
Personally I don't see any threat to our peace or world peace. No threat that cannot be handle by the UN if they would drop the veto power and if the US would support the UN for a change.
We have no need to mave a military alliance with any other nation. No one nation will ever be too strong and history has shown what happens to those who think they are or could be.
16 Apr 09:13
These kind of questions are pretty meaningless. We do not have any idea what values and issues are driving the choices and they are less than hypothetical in a non-election time. Answers are usually pretty normative...like most people say "fine" when asked how they are but that gives no iuseful nformation as to how they really feel.
Better to ask a set of questions on specific issues and rank the leaders in terms of trust, knowledge and capability to handle them. That is infomation worth having. This poll barely quaifies as providing any approaching useful data.
10 Apr 11:10
6 replies so far. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
e guye
Nik I feel a lot more comfortable with this poll than the last one. It's a great cross-section of opinion and as a loyal Tory pleased to see Mr Harper rated as having the highest approval rating as prime minister with I think all participants other than other party members - obiviously the Liberals, NDP etc will choose their own leader.
Regardless of region, gender or age - and the results are not at all skimpy - good solid leads.
As Canadians come to know Stephen Harper they have come to trust him, and to respect his leadership qualities.
Now I hope that he is given the opportunity to govern in this minority parliament for at least another year - that the opposition will not be too quick to overturn his government. Mr Harper has been given a rocky ride by the opposition and the media - with the overwhelmingly negative media reporting it's a miracle he has achieved this level of support across Canada, from Coast to Coast.
10 Apr 15:49
No replies yet. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
bas1809
I think this echoes the kind of conversations I hear and take part in. Harper has earned a fair bit of respect for two things: (1) doing what he promised to do, for the most part, and without a lot of delay [how many years did Liberal Governments promise child care?] and (2) standing his ground whether we like the message or not. You can respect both of these even if you disagree with the policies and the positions. This is what I am hearing and feeling on the streets.
Layton's an interesting character. He is also recognized for not giving up his positions (for the most part) but considered to be in the wrong party. So, for Harper, consistency and delivery coincide with the possibility of doing so again tomorrow.
As for the Liberals, their disarray hurts Dion. Sure, there are many things we could say about the man and how he has come across so far - but there's also an expectation that he's a sacrifical lamb, and that the real race comes next year. So why back a dead horse?
Duceppe and May represent special cases, no comment needed.
[updated Tue Apr 10 18:31:12 EDT 2007]
10 Apr 18:31
9 replies so far. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
Regina Beach Boy
The entire opposition is yelling " The Conservatives wants an election", we know the reason, surprise, none of them want one, they're simply not ready at this time.
Now where I come from, when I see three opponents that don't want to get in the ring with me, I'm going to assume it's because they think I'm going to win.
The conservatives should not underestimate their ability to grow thier numbers on the campagn trail, maybe the opposition feels this as well.
The truth of the matter is the minority Government situation is not working well as some would have us beleive, you don't have to watch "Question Period" everyday to know this, its uniquely poisonous on parliament hill and everyone shares the blame, everyone.
You have the Liberal party who actually really do beleive in thier minds that they and they alone can govern the country, and the Conservatives who have finally got to the top of the mountain are absolutely and intensely protective of their new found fortunes. This hightened degree of desparation between the two parties is both amazing and pathetic to watch.
A majority Conservative government deserves the chance to govern in a majority enviornment, the overstated worries about Stephen Harper are nothing more than carefully crafted oppostion tactics. They can't afford to screw up, they're being watched closer than someone on death row.
[updated Tue Apr 10 18:32:24 EDT 2007]
10 Apr 18:32
5 replies so far. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
hollinm
It is great to see that PM Harper is being recognized for his decisive leadership. While the party still lags behind the prime minister I am certain should an election be called that the Conservatives will win a majority. When compared to Stephane Dion who has turned out to be a weak leader who really still wants to fight the last election by continuing to talk about daycare and the Kelowna Accord Mr. Harper is busy putting forward legislation in a number of areas including crime, environment, reforming the Senate, reforming the way judges are picked to name a few. Canadians, from this poll, in all groups including women are getting more comfortable with Mr. Harper as prime minister. Harper's speech at Vimy was truly inspiring and shows he is growing into the job each and everyday. In the meantime the Liberals are shooting themselves in the foot by continuing to harp on the environment. It is now to the point that everybody is saying is this guy a one trick pony? The answer is yes. Watch for their platform. There will be nothing new but a rehash of old policies. With these leadership numbers it won't be long before there is an outright rebellion in the Liberal ranks. It is alrighty happening with leaks to the press but it will come bursting out very soon particularly if no election is called this Spring.
10 Apr 23:15
No replies yet. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
blossom
Hello Nik,
You have said it all, and in an unbiased way...in your last statement.
As far as I am concerned S. Harper has already gone too far in his attack ads on
S.Dion, and as his recent budget has caused so much reaction from 4-5 Premiers,
with retaliatory ads, and even going so far, as to discourage voters of those Provinces
not to vote for a PM who would renage on written commitments; S.Harper has big
problems, and is asking for them in his audacity, and obstinate misbehaviour, and
non-relenting assault on all, to win a majority, and at all cost. He knows that time
is running against him, and wants to run to the polls before his mesmorized
audience wakes-up, to what is really going on behind those closed doors.
Afghanistan is coming to a boiling issue, and navy general coming out with why,
if Harper doesn't change course, we are going to lose Afghanistan - it's getting worse.
At Vimy, Harper, din't make the link between the 1st, and 2nd world war soldiers,
with those of Afghanistan??? Why do you think? And why do Canadian tax payers have
to pay millions to malign a new opposition leader whom they do not yet know? Imagine
putting those millions on health-care, education, where it would be beneficial to all -
Canadians do NOT want another election. Why is Harper fussing so much? Why is
he trying to distract us so much?
Lots of questions, and I hope that some bring us honest answers.
Cheers,
blossom
11 Apr 08:10
2 replies so far. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
paulalex
I think the most interesting result in your poll is how exteremely unpopular Dion is in Quebec, much more so than anywhere else.
I think the second most interesting is how popular Duceppe is amongst young people.
Also interesting is that Harper is second choice for NDP voters, and first choice for Green voters!?, while Dion is the favourite for only 40% of Liberal voters.
I think this poll augurs well for Harper if he has the good sense to go to the polls sooner rather than later, because I know many people talk about voting for the leader rather than the party, saying things such as "I voted for Paul Martin" for example.
Perhaps you could do a poll on whether people's choice of vote is based primarily on the leader, the party, or the particular candidate ... ?
I think to get a good glimpse of an actual election result we would have to average out the polls for party preference and leader preference.
18 Apr 03:20
No replies yet. Join this conversationHide this conversation.