Too many election risks

I think the Liberals and Bloc see the need to hold an election this spring as they feel the Tories are vulnerable in both major provinces.

Dion is gaining traction although slow, but steady. The NDP may not follow through with their budget vote threat as thy are particularly weak in several areas.

If the economy tanks or is perceived to be tanking the Election will be a breeze for the Liberals.

[updated Tue Jan 22 20:04:22 EST 2008]

Election this spring is unavoidable. Harper has tied his baton to George Bush and will beat him to the finish. The liberals will not miss this opportunity and Jack Layton will reap the rewards for his alliance of smear with his friend Stephen.

[updated Tue Jan 22 20:57:09 EST 2008]

I agree that the political environment is much too risky for someone with PM Harper's penchant for "message discipline and issue control" (I'd have said "being a control-freak", but you're much more eloquent) to be wanting an election.

The Harper government wanted the next campaign to be on leadership, but increasingly, it seems the economy will be the main issue. Not an advantage as the Liberals, thanks to their deficit-fighting legacy, are still perceived as strong on this issue.

As well, Conservative management of the economy, in particular the decision to cut the GST, is coming back to bite them in the you know where. It seemed like a good idea so long as we didn't have an economic downturn. Now that this is the case, complaints of lost wiggle room on the budget are surfacing.

Recent events have made it so that the Conservatives are on shakier ground than ever on the leadership front as well.

The Conservatives started the downslide by outsourcing big decisions to "experts" such as Dr. Johnston and the Manley panel. If outside experts are making the decisions instead of the politicians, for what reason do we then need the Conservatives?

The Conservatives are also taking hits on leadership with regard to:
1. The appearance of trying to sabotage global envionmental efforts -- if everyone has to go before they sign on, logically they will be last, or else how else could they vefiry that everyone has indeed gone first;
2. The constant attacking and blaming of public servants, and others, for their misfortunes -- THE biggest boneheaded move a politician can make when he/she messes up is to attack the public service. Public servants (and they vote) considerably outnumber Conservative MPs and slipping a brown enveloppe under a door is SO easily done...

Since taking power, the Conservatives have had "issues" with, among others, the Ethics commissioner, the Privacy Commissioner, the Chief Electoral Officer, the head of the Canadian Wheat Board, the media, and now alleged Liberal party-hack Linda Keen. Canadians are wise enough to know that when a party seems to be having "problems" with everyone, maybe the party IS the problem.

The Conservatives are showing they don't care about checks and balances if they get in the way of, or slow progress on, their agenda: Can't get the vote you want on free market policies? Hold a three option referendum and combine two answers to get the desired percentage. The Senate is in the way? Make a big scene and conclude that it therefore it must be abolished. Dont like the decisions made by those who are to ensure rules are respected? Tarnish their reputations and remove them, even in the middle of the night.

Not exactly the kind of leadership that Canadians would consider "Canadian-like", now is it? Canadians are speaking out more and more about their displeasure and distate for such tactics.

The Conservatives are starting to come across as paranoid and seized with a siege-mentality. They see enemies (Liberals) everywhere hiding in the shadows. They lash out at anyone who is the least bit contrarian. If this was the typical behaviour of a person in your household, someone would be calling for a psych evaluation!

PM Harper is well aware that his personal political future depends not only on him winning the next election, but securing a majority. A Conservative loss or minority will only ensure the holding of what will surely be an unfavourable leadership review.

Harper enjoys being the PM (and having a soapbox upon which to stick it to Liberals) way too much! If he senses there is no way he can get a majority before the fixed date in 2009, he's going to dig in his claws and try to hold on as long as possible. If risk remains at this level or increases, should there be an election before 2009, PM Harper will be dragged into it kicking and screaming.

[updated Tue Jan 22 21:52:08 EST 2008]

You are right Nik...oh what topic to cause an election on. With the nutty professor and his pronouncements on a daily basis he can't make up his mind. All the professor knows is that at 30% in the polls and even weaker numbers for his leadership there really is no issue that the Liberals can call an election on because it is all about Dion's leadership abilities. His pronouncement last week about invading Pakistan is a critical blunder. Look for more of these in an election campaign. I guess it will be more sitting on the hands when the next budget is presented.

The Liberals are making a big deal about the Chalk River issue. They have no credibility on the issue given that AECL has been a problem for at least 10 years. There is no magic wand that can be waived to fix the issues. They will take time. Linda Keen was irresponsible in her decision to keep the Reactor closed. She must have cold water running through her veins to not consider the lives of Canadians. The issue between AECL and the CNS was a back up pump that was not installed in a timely fashion. It was a pissing contest and anybody who has worked in the private sector knows no executive has the ability to make decisions without considering all the consequences of their actions. She deserved to be fired.

The Liberals have hurt their credibility in the Ethics Committee given their collusion with the CBC in planting questions unrelated to the mandate of the Committee. This will go a long way to confirm in the minds of Canadians that the CBC is anti Conservative and pro Liberal. The committee will be finished its work by the end of Feb. The inquiry will begin but most Canadians are smart enough to know Stephen Harper is no patsy for Mulroney.

I would suggest that Harper anticipated the potential slow down of our economy last fall and put forward tax cuts to help industry cope. There is no appetite to pick winners and losers in the economy. I would rather have a PM with a PHD in economics running the economy in a slow down than a professor of political science who has no experience running an economic portfolio. Dion's answer is to help industry by proposing a $1billion fund to help industries develop green technologies. Companies fighting to survive are not interested in developing technologies. They are worried about the next payroll.

On Afganistan, watching Dion today was sad. There he is saying that he wants to cut and run from the fighting in 2009 while former Liberal deputy prime minister is saying that's the wrong approach. Training the Afghan army and police requires going outside the wire not conducting class room lessons. Deaths are still going to happen.

So there will be no election this year because the Liberals have thrown their principles to the wind and will suck it up and support the government until such time as their poll number improve.

[updated Tue Jan 22 22:03:18 EST 2008]

I can't see an election this spring, unless some huge "bonehead move" hits either the Conservatives or Liberals. Both have reason to be leery - though I think Harper has more to fear. It seems he almost takes delight in slighting Ontario - refusing to address the concerns of Canada's largest city; planning to shortly gerrymander seat distribution in the Commons to make Ontraio the ONLY province NOT to have 1 MP for every 100,000 people (for Ontario it''ll be 1 for every 200.000); and displaying a flippant, seemingly "who cares" attitude to the new, devasting world challenges now being faced by Canada's manufacturing sector (which is overwhelmingly centered in Ontario). Harper's playing a dangerous political game with Canda's most populous province which I'm sure will come back to haunt him big time. This gamemanship is only exaserbated by the Conservative's tumbling numbers in Quebec. Earlier, I thought Haper would build his much sought after majority on the backs of rural Quebecers and the West (primarily Saskatchewm, Alberta and the bible belt of BC's interior). Perhaps he did too - but as things stand now that's more of a political pipe dream than real possibilty.

I don't see the Karlheinz Schreiber affair doing any more damge than it already has as its terms of reference have now been realeased and it is ONLY to examine their relationship AFTER Mulroney left offfice. The REAL scandal would be found in what transpired just before and while Mulroney was Prime Minister. (I'm interested in exploring how he got money and logisitical support from the right wing former Bavarian premier Franz Josef Strauss of Germany to help him dispose Joe Clark and claim the leadersip of the PC Party). And, although he may not have DIRECTLY received any of the millions in "commisions" paid by Schrieber for the Air Canada airbus purcahse did he, in fact, get some from Frank Moore's lobbying firm Government Consultants International (GCI)? Seems we'll never know. The old Montreal Boys Club has seen to that.

Spring '08? More chest thumping, poltical hyperbole and frustration. But no election.

[updated Tue Jan 22 22:41:12 EST 2008]

In my opinion, the governance of Canada over the last several years has defined narcissism. Who said political parties had principles------all of them have subverted principles to a game played out in a place called the House of Commons where all players have on earphones listening to pollsters. In the past, one understood what political party stood for what but not today. The current guru is "numbers" and, seemingly, to hell with governance for Canadians. Obviously, protecting political backsides takes precedence over principles.

[updated Tue Jan 22 23:04:13 EST 2008]

No Risks, We got rid of the trouble maker and incompetant, the Liberal appointment Linda Keen, Who else needs to be fired in this on going trouble making Civil Service!

[updated Tue Jan 22 23:55:06 EST 2008]

Nik, that seems to be an accurate observation of the situation as it exists today. However I have a strong feeling that there will be an election.
I'm sure Harper does not want an election. There will be a budget and I can't see Dion or Layton supporting it. Maybe if Harper sees that they may not he will throw in so many goodies that they may have to. I don't know what Duceppe will do but I feel that he is ready to retire and would probably like an election. If his party did well he would 'go out a winner' and if he did poorly he'd go anyway.
Besides the budget there may be confidence votes. Both Dion and Layton will find it necessary to vote against the government so as not to look weak to their soft supporters.
Harper will not reach his 2009 fixed term without an election being forced upon him.

[updated Wed Jan 23 08:51:51 EST 2008]

Hi Nik, I agree that an election soon is unlikely, despite the readiness of Layton and Duceppe to pull the plug. The fly in the ointment remains the Liberal Party of Canada. I get the sense that Mr. Dion is willing to go, but he faces serious opposition within his own party, and unreconciled divisions , especially on the Afghanistan question, exacerbated by the Manley Report.

On the economy, in light of the uncertainty in the markets and job picture, I have not seen an effective strategy from the Liberals (or anyone else for that matter.)

The environment remains a wild card issue, with both the Liberals and more particularly the Conservatives vulnerable. It will depend on how bad the economy story gets to determine how important Canadians will consider the Environment.

The two immediately impending opportunities to bring down the Government will be the extension of the Afghan mission, and the tabling of the budget. I think the Libs will end up going along with the extension, so all will depend on how skillfully Harper crafts his budget (and which outcome he prefers) I disagree that things will get better for Harper in 09. I think his best chance (slim) of getting a majority will be this spring.

[updated Wed Jan 23 09:35:34 EST 2008]

Hi, from Lloyd MacIlquham

No time to comment on everything.

Afghanistan:

Before Harper, or anyone else, does anything there may be an issue that requires clarification.

I am referring to The Scott Ross blog posting: “The Manley Panel Plagiarized, And Possibly Lied”, 22 Jan.’08:

http://thescottross.blogspot.com/2008/01/did-manley-panel-make-up-or-plagerize.html

I think anyone interested in the Manley Report should read the postings at that Blog.

FYI:

My post was:

Hi Scott Ross,

What you are setting out is quite shocking.

It appears this has all been an exercise in crass political manipulation of the public on Harper’s part – surprise, surprise!

Harper should be brought to task on this

Manley should be given an opportunity to explain, if, indeed, there is an explanation.

It would be very interesting to find out whether the remainder of the Panel raised this issue. Given the quality of the Panel it is difficult to see them letting this stand as it is, unless they were not made aware of the previous article. If that were the case the quality of their investigation may be seriously thrown into question.

Oh, great work, by the way - can’t wait till this goes mainstream!

8:12 AM

[updated Wed Jan 23 15:13:29 EST 2008]

The Latest News: Canadian Police Facing Many Perjury Charges, How To Sovle The Problem: No 1 just put them in Jail without a Trial, That should wake them up to tell the truth and stop protecting their buddies. Time to put and end to Police Unions.

[updated Wed Jan 23 20:32:35 EST 2008]

Hello Nik,

I agree that the numbers will not give S. Harper his majority. The Manley Report was not very enticing for S. Harper either. It pointed at him directly. As for the 1,000 boots on the ground - not enough to make a difference. 30 to 35,000 would be about right! I think that LLyd Axworthy and Bob Rae defined what Canadians expect from this mission, and that it should be reviewed every two years.

Both the NDP and the 'bloq' can vote against the budget and Afghanistan; that's what they are there for: parties of protest.

M. Dion is hawkish for an election; but until Parliament resumes, no one can decipher the probability of this happening. The climate-change agenda is not off the table either. If our economy dipps, and job losses increase we will get voter attention. Job losses affect people.

All in all, if the medias and press retaliate with the Harper gov/t, at the way that he has treated them, and rile the voters, we could see an election soon. Canadians on the hole are not looking for another election; especially since we have been in suspence ever since this minority gov/t has come to the helm, and the US presidential race is turning ugly within the Democratic party, and tends to divide this party. The Republicans have not yet found their aspiring leader; let alone inspiring, just as our present gov/t.

Cheers,

[updated Wed Jan 23 21:54:32 EST 2008]

Now the whinning Liberals are asking for a review of Liberal appointment Firing, move on she is fired, Something the Liberals could not do for 15 years, fire their own appointments and wasted taxpayers money which is the only thing their good at!

[updated Thu Jan 24 19:09:05 EST 2008]

The only Good Liberal is the One that is not Elected! This is not a National Party like they claim it is a Central Canada and Quebec Party only and always has been!

[updated Thu Jan 24 19:40:21 EST 2008]

What Is More Fun Than Stirring The Pot! Watching All The Liberals Whine!!!!!!

[updated Thu Jan 24 21:56:32 EST 2008]

Hum Who Should I Vote For Now Lets See: Dion NO Layton No Duceppe No May No Chretien No Mulroney No Martin No Turner No Stockwell Day NO Who is there?

HARPER best for the West

[updated Fri Jan 25 14:41:59 EST 2008]

Hi Nik

I agree that there will be many risks for any political party that forces an election. This being said I firmly believe we are going into an election this spring.
Gilles Duceppe is on his way out of federal politics and needs a reason to do so, an election would provide him with this. He would prefer to go out on a winning note, but win or lose he is leaving.
Jack Layton cannot prop up the conservatives, he diametrically opposed to their position in Afghanistan, has criticized the liberals for abstaining on confidence votes of the Throne Speech, the budget, etc... He certainly cannot change his course without looking even more foolish, then when he brought down Paul Martin on a budget that had 10 billion dollars for Kyoto, the Colona agreement….
The liberals cannot afford to be seen supporting or allowing the conservatives to continue with their policies. Although Dion was ready to go to an election on the throne speech, but was convinced by members of his caucus to hold off. The liberals cannot afford to this again.
The Conservatives will go into an election because it is better for them to go now than to wait, it is not getting any better for them. Stephen Harper is having problems managing the entire government apparatus from his office and it is starting to show.
We will have an election this spring; the results will be a liberal minority government, Canadians will prefer being led by Stéphane Dion, even with his poor English to Stephen Harpers secretive one man show.

[updated Sun Jan 27 09:48:59 EST 2008]

Today was the first day we got to see how the Conservatives were going to handle the explosive Afghan detainee issue in the House of Commons and it seems that it is business as usual for the PM (aka President's Monkey) and his merry bunch of ball-droppers.

The Conservative line of the day to everything is: The fact that a credible case of torture was revealed is indicative that the new agreement is working where the previous one failed (yet last March, weren't the Conservatives using the O'Connor-Red-Cross-lie to justify that there was no need to replace the previous agreement?). Shame on the Liberals for putting the lives of our military at risk (...by simply just doing their job as an opposition and informing Canadians they had information that let them know beyond any doubt that the Conservative Party of Canada was lying to Canadians)!

There's just a few glitches with that line:
1) Whether the new agreement is working or not is NOWHERE NEAR being the issue at hand (Conservative Communications Strategy Step 1 -- First, deflect the issue onto a whole other subject);
2) The decision of the Conservative Party of Canada to not disclose to Canadians that the Afghan detainee transfer practice on the ground had changed was in response to questions posed to them by opposition parties in the House and NOT in response to the credible claim of torture of which they were made aware (Conservative Communication Strategy Step 2 -- Deliberately link the new subject to the old issue in a attempt to confuse it, which will only insult the intelligence of Canadians).
3) The decision to do the right thing and change the practice on the ground, it seems, was that of the military, so no credit should go to Conservatives who now are, or soon will be, trying to claim it (Conservative Communication Strategy Step 3 -- Find a way to appear as having exerciced strong leadership)
4) As much as the Conservatives would like Canadians to believe that Gen. Hillier kept us in the dark and that Mr Dion & Mr Ignatieff put our soldiers' lives at risks by blowing the whistle on the Conservative lie, it was the government itself that was forced to make this information known as part of disclosure in a court case. (Conservative Communication Strategy Step 4 -- Should a situation arise in which the truth absolutely has to come out -- as it always eventually does -- change the channel by needlessly tarring the reputation of others -- and/or blaming them for the problem AKA Get caught in lie and whilst running away from the media with pants afire wrapped around ankles, proceed to slip on banana peel; whoops!).

The latter point begs the question: If the information was too sensitive for Canadians to know, why was it not too sensitive to released to the court with some caveats against public disclosure of the information. Either this confirms the lie or it is yet more proof of incompetence.

[updated Mon Jan 28 18:20:33 EST 2008]