Infrastructure Funds:Getting it right

The Gagnier scandal at the end of the campaign brought back some bad memories. It is lucky for the Liberals that the story did not break before Thanksgiving when the election was likely decided.

These are exciting times. I would have loved, for example, to have been at the department of Foreign Affairs as Stephane Dion, an intellectual steeped in the great Canadian traditions of dialogue and multilateralism, came through the door.

But the novelty will not last and Liberals will eventually be judged on their record. The signature economic policy of the campaign was a promise to increase infrastructure spending to spur growth.
But accounting for big government projects in Canada has not always been complete and funds have often been diverted to some questionable ends.

If the allocation of infrastructure funding is not done transparently, the old misgivings about the Liberals that could have fueled the Gagnier scandal if it had been timed right, will return with a vengeance.

What I am trying to say is: I'm really glad the Liberals are back in power but don't disappoint me again. Let's get it right this time.

New Beginnings

Liberals are back in power. I had come to accept being unhappy about the government to the point that I was not longer aware of it. So it was surprising how relieved I felt listening to the announcement of the new Liberal cabinet today. I needed to pinch myself to be sure it was real.

Knowing Stephane Dion is now Minister of Foreign Affairs is especially sweet.

I'll be posting again from time to time with a focus likely on the signature Liberal promise of increased infrastructure spending.

System Error; Reboot

Before moving this blog back to issues that drive my interest in Canadian Liberalism, here's my own analysis of what has gone wrong recently. Its pretty much the same as I wrote after the 2008 election.

This is grossly simplified but the intention is to highlight the structure of the party and how I suspect this affects the outcome. It goes like this. There are three mutually reinforcing elements in an electoral win: the campaign, the strength of the party base and luck. You need some of all three to win.

The Liberal campaign was good. It ran smoothly, the events were well-organized, and there were no major gaffes. IMO Ignatieff did a superior job on his first attempt. Much better than I was expecting. And I think he would have improved in a second election. I don't blame him. The people at the top ran a good show. But 1) they had bad luck when Quebec broke for the NDP which no one could have predicted. And 2) efforts to engage the base have not gone far enough.

If you have a small base, the likelihood that a good campaign will resonate is decreased. By base I mean people who reliably vote for the party and just can't bring themselves to vote strategically. These people vote, donate money, volunteer and, perhaps most importantly, move the opinions of their family and friends. You need to have a base to even begin to be taken seriously. The federal NDP have suffered from this problem for 50 years. The Conservatives have a formidable base that is the result of years of effort. And the Liberals have seen their base shrink.

A strong Liberal base would have also generated the money needed to respond to the massive Conservative media buy. The Conservatives created a negative image of Ignatieff that, like Dion, he was unable to overcome. Unsurprisingly, advertising works. If the Liberals hope to compete, they will have to raise an equivalent amount of money from their supporters.

Although Ignatieff's country-wide tour was a step in the right direction, I suspect the emphasis was more about preparing him for the campaign and building his leadership (top-down) than about a more radical change in the dynamic of the party (horizontal connections between individual members) that would I think reinvigorate the base. A leader can only shake so many hands. The historic strength of the Liberal base has permitted a culture in the head office that focuses on 'the campaign' rather than base-building. I don't doubt the intelligence and sincerity of the people leading the party. These are good Liberals. And I think there has been some effort to try new approaches at outreach. But it has not yet begun to address the problem adequately.

Scrap the per vote subsidy

The loss of the per vote subsidy will likely force an important and long needed shift in the organization of the Liberal party. The per vote subsidy allows the central office to spend money in the name of the voters without the need to ask for their input. The subsidy in effect insulates the party leadership from interacting with the grassroots.

Now if the head office hopes to pay the electricity bill, it will have to wholly engage the membership. The party will become intimately familiar with the aspirations of the membership or die.

Its anecdotal evidence for sure but members of my family who live in four different regions of the country and have a long history of donating bucks to the party receive more cold calls from the Conservatives than calls from the Liberals. The Conservatives have taken every opportunity to reach out: radio, television, leaflets in the mail, cold calls. But a simple call from the Liberals to all its past donors? Not so much.

A Strong Conservative Mandate

The Conservatives have won a strong mandate tonight to follow through with their crime agenda, scrap the hated gun registry and decrease the corporate tax rate. I think Canadians tend to prefer the tough guy when choosing a PM. We have clearly chosen Stephen Harper for the next four years.

If the left hopes to win eventually against Stephen Harper there will need to be some reorganization. The Liberal party won't gain much support if all it stands for happened in the last century. Although I have a sentimental attachment to the party, I am uncomfortable with the idea that it must be preserved because it is some sacred institution that Canada cannot survive without.

There needs to be a discussion with the NDP. Whether I personally could support the results of that discussion is an open question. There has always been something about Jack Layton I don't like but can't quite put my finger on. I am certain Stephen Harper will help me figure out exactly what that is.

Until recently the sudden rise of the NDP seemed as improbable as me voting Conservative in the next election. Now alot of things seem possible.

Predictions out the window

Alot of people think that the NDP surge in Quebec indicates that the separatist movement is failing. But its not that clear to me.

A significant number of Quebec voters (more than enough to swing an election) are willing to vote for a federalist party in the Canadian election and then turn around and vote for the PQ in the provincial election. Its happened before and will likely happen again this year.

But maybe I should hold back on predictions. Who would have predicted a week ago that the NDP would poll first in Quebec? I didn't. You didn't either. And if you couldn't predict what would happen this week, why would you think you can predict what is going to happen next week?

The Liberal campaign has gone far better than I expected. Its been really solid. Ignatieff has been hitting all the right notes with me. And I really like the Liberal platform which puts families before jets, jails and corporate tax cuts.

If you believe in the Liberal vision and want to stop Harper, its time to come out swinging. Its time to fight for the country you want.


Image license information:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/deed.en

Jim Travers

I always enjoyed reading Jim Travers. It was surprising to hear that he had died this week. He will be missed.

Government cover-up of interogation by torture?

A Globe and Mail editorial comes close to stating the obvious question about political involvement in alleged war crimes when they write:

"The torture issue is all about the Canadian government’s willful blindness, an incuriosity that strains belief."


Were cabinet ministers in the Harper government involved in decisions that led to the torture of Afghan citizens?


Why has the Canadian Forces National Investigative Services not investigated allegations of torture?

"The military used the NDS as subcontractors for abuse and torture"

The Globe and Mail reports disturbing allegations that innocent Afghans were knowlingly handed over for interogation by torture. This is a war crime under the Geneva Convention.

Select quotes from the article:
“I saw Canada’s military intelligence sending detainees to NDS, when the detainees did not tell them what they expect to hear. If the interrogators thought a detainee was lying, the military sent him to NDS for more questions, Afghan style. Translation: abuse and torture .... the military used the NDS as subcontractors for abuse and torture."

[...]He said he interviewed the detainees and determined none were Taliban. However, all were handed over to the NDS.

“None did anything wrong except to be at home when the Canadian Forces murdered their neighbour,” Mr. Malgarai recounted. “Yet Canada transferred all these innocent men to the NDS.”

Dion the Rebel

At a certain level of detachment, a leader is a vehicle for the type of policies that you want enacted. And I believe Michael Ignatieff will be a good vehicle for the aspirations of Canadian Liberals.

For the last two years, I have supported Stephane Dion as leader of the party because I believe he is a man of integrity and great intelligence. A great Canadian who has devoted himself to the country and the party. As a consequence, he has suffered many attacks. He led the party in the aftermath of the sponsorship scandal and was villified by Harpers political machine.

Michael Ignatieff will eventually face the same type of attacks. In my small way, I will help to defend Ignatieff and promote the party. And I hope that he is able to rise above the personal smears in a way that Stephane Dion ultimately was unable to do.





Dion worked effectively under both Jean Chretien and Paul Martin as a highly competent minister. They gave him difficult tasks (the Clarity Act, the Montreal Climate Change Summit) which he accomplished with impressive skill. And for that also the party and Canada owes Stephane Dion our deep respect and gratitude.

The linked video is not one that I would have featured when he was leader, but what the heck.
h/t Garth Turner

We love you, Stephane.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsIBtKRmjM8

Conservative Manipulation of the Media

The rumours and misinformation circulated freely by Canadian newsmedia this week is worrisome.

Ottlibs thoughtful post yesterday on conservative media bias and comments by readers might make you wonder what the news should sound like.

What are the alternatives?

Here is an example. (It starts with a 15 second commercial for RealNews by Danny Glover)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DI9vtBYOsqE



I don't know much about RealNews.

But it makes you wonder whether the Internet might ultimately provide the answer (or corrective) to media concentration and its abuse by wealthy conservatives.

The Conservative use of its base as a instrument to attempt to sway talk-radio and flood message boards with party doctrine also needs to be addressed.

Cool Down Period?

The media are claiming that the prorogation is a "cool down" period.

Well think again. Brace yourself for the attack ads.

Is there anyone who seriously thinks that if Harper gets to the other side of this he will suddenly be chastened and act responsibly? Really?

When/if the coalition is off the table, Harper will destroy the opposition.

Parliamentary Democracy thwarted

The power of the Prime Ministers office over the elected House of Commons has been reinforced today. And the airy ideals of the former Reform party (which resides now in the present Conservative party) for greater democracy have been voided and revealed as empty rhetoric.

The precedent set today is also a strong argument against minority parliaments and any reform to the electoral system that would favor minority parliaments. It is a commitment to more elections and their abuse. Good thing if you are a political junkie I guess, but bad for everyone else.

Will the coalition hold? The Conservatives would like to think not.

I do not blame the Governor-General. She should not have been put in this position.

Do you want a Prime Minister who is willing to say anything, generate any crisis to retain power?

Harper's Destructive Path to Power

This is no joke. We are in an international economic crisis.

But the Canadian government is caught up in the worst political crisis since the 1995 referendum.

And who is at the center of it? Stephen Harper.

Albertans are talking about separation. And Harper is stoking the separatist fires here in Quebec by suggesting that elected representatives of Quebec are not legitimate.

Harper is wielding the Conservative party like a weapon against the constitution and parliamentary democracy. And he will stop at nothing to get complete power.

Harper is likely the most divisive politician in Canadian history at a time when we need to be drawing various factions in the country together to meet the economic crisis

To resolve this crisis, Harper must be removed. That is the minimum condition.

Scott Brison on what will happen

Scott Brison gave this interview to the Globe and Mail today on what will happen in parliament.

I just took a look at some Blogging Tories sites and I am shocked by their weak understanding of Canadian democracy. Don't they teach this stuff in school anymore? I guess the Conservative's understanding of Canadian civics is only matched by their understanding of the economy.

There are 305 elected members in the House of Commons. In our democracy, you either find the support of more than half of those elected representatives to form a government and pass legislation or you do not and are defeated. There is not alot of ambiguity about that.

You have to work with the other parties in a minority. Harper chose not to. What I find bizarre about all this is: the Conservatives seem surprised.

Regime Change

In the current economic crisis which Stephen Harper has likened in potential scale to the Great Depression and in light of a recent election, it would be irresponsible of the Governor-General to dissolve parliament at this time if the current ministry is defeated because of its unwillingness to bend to the will of the House of Commons.

It is clear that the current ministry does not intend, or is not intellectully able, to introduce the measures necessary to diminish the impact of the coming recession. In fact, the Harper government seems to be so fully occupied with cheap political gamesmanship that cooperation in the current session appears highly unlikely.

And yet the Liberal minority government led by Lester Pearson was one of the most fruitful legislative periods in Canadian history.

Its time for regime change.

Structural Weakness

If there is a structural weakness in the Liberal party, it is due, I think, to factional infighting. It takes time to build a winning coalition and if Liberals want to affect the direction of this country (on health care, on the economy, on our role in the world), that's what the party should be focussing on now.

We need more money first off. By my estimate the next round of Harper attack ads will come out before Christmas. Will we be able to respond?

Also, there is, I believe, a remarkable potential for growth in Quebec. But that will require alot of patient effort, working the ridings and building networks and friendships.

None of the things which we need to do to win the next election will happen if the factions are allowed at each other again. I can only imagine that another leadership contest would exacerbate the structural weakness of the party in many and unexpected ways.

How long after such a contest would it be before "Senior Anonymous Liberals" of the losing factions start telling an emboldened CTV(spit)that the new leader is incompetent and not in control of caucus? How many more Libloggers will regurgitate Conservative talking points and openly disparage a new leader during the next campaign? How many Liberal partisans will sit on the sidelines until their "guy" wins.

These contests are emotionally divisive and the party will look incredibly weak during the minority parliament (feeding the NDP narrative). If we seed bad faith now, we will harvest some ugly twisted fruit during the next election.

Dion ran a good campaign without gaffes. And at a certain point last week, alot of Liberals started to think that we just might be able to pull off a victory. In the last few days the tide turned. I think the most effective use of the party's emotional and intellectual resources would be to figure out what changed in those few days. How do we mount a better campaign next time.

This definitely involves analysis of the Green Shift. We may need to drop the carbon tax because the envrionmental movement is fickle and undisciplined. If there is going to be a serious engagement of environmental issues, we'll need to Will it into being within the framework of our own party. But no one is going to come up with the policies that will unite the party if we head into a leadership contest now.

So, if I were Stephane, my first instinct would be to tell the champions of division where to stick it (diplomatically but firmly).

I am a Grit, though. But I think Stephane Dion is one too.

Hope and Patience

I want action on the environment. I want to decrease child poverty. I want a responsible government that brings together the best minds in the country to solve our economic and social needs.

There are many people in the country who want the same thing as I do. We now have to consider what is the best way to deliver the intelligence and good will of Canadians to this end.

Its been a long campaign. We all need some time to withdraw and in a few weeks soberly consider the way forward. I am proud to be a Liberal. I believe in the issues that the party has forwarded in this election. We should never be ashamed of our aspiration for a better Canada.

Why I am Voting for Change

I care about the environment and I want more doctors and nurses.

I want Canada to get away from the neverending Conservative "War on Terror"

And I want Stephen Harper replaced tomorrow.

As Elizabeth May has said, Stephen Harper's "plan" to reduce greenhouse gases that cause global warming is a fraud. If Harper remains as Prime Minister, Canada will do nothing. Worse the Conservatives actually sabotage at international meetings the efforts of countries that want to do something about this crisis.


The Conservative response to global warming. A grease spot attack ad. Here is a spoof.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AI6HaoVde4I





The Liberals Green Shift plan brings together scientists concerned about the environment with the brightest Canadian minds from the field of economics. All working together to develop the best long-term strategy to create a sustainable economy. Providing industry and individual voters the incentives and investments they need to really make a difference.

The Liberals also have an ambitious plan to decrease child poverty as well increase the number of doctors and nurses at a time when aging Baby Boomers will be putting the Canadian Health system under increasing stress. The Liberal platform.

And then there is the expensive and violent Conservative War on Terror.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7xyd_IRgGs





Stephen Harper wanted Canada to invade Iraq.

He said so in a speech that he plagiarized from the right-wing Prime Minister of Australia.

Fortunately it was a Liberal government at the time who said, NO to George Bush's war of aggression.

We will get nothing we want if Harper gets re-elected. Nothing but more wars, more prisons, and more poverty.

It is time to replace Harper with a progressive Liberal government.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzmI3XrF0f0

Tremendous Disappointment for Harper

The immense room reserved for Harper's big end of campaign booster rally in Quebec City was almost empty today (organizers scrambled to get the fewer than 500 partisans who showed up in the aspirational "heart" region of the Conservative Quebec strategy). Read about it here in LaPresse.

"Mauvais messages, stratégie contre-productive.

Mais il y a plus. Le chef lui-même n’est vraiment pas inspirant.

Ses discours sont ennuyants, son sourire est forcé et le contact avec les gens restent pénible.

Plus de quatre ans après avoir pris la tête du nouveau Parti conservateur, M. Harper n’a pas réussit à se rapprocher des électeurs. Au contraire, il traine même la réputation d’être indifférent aux préoccupations de ses concitoyens."

(translation mine; read the original)

"Bad messaging and a counter productive strategy.

But there is more. The leader himself is not inspiring.

His speeches are boring, his smile is forced and the interaction with people is painful. More than four years after taking the leadership of this new Conservative party, Mr. Harper has still not succeeded in reaching the voters. To the contrary, he drags behind him a reputation for not caring about the concerns of the people."

See also this insightful analysis of the Harper disaster in Quebec. Harper was supposed to have this election in the bag, but Quebeckers see clearly his hard right wing agenda. More wars, more prisons, no action on the environment and a poor record of economic management. Plus he's a jerk.

We need to replace Stephen Harper with a progressive government.