The Age of Iggy

Bob Rae officially dropped out of the race to succeed Stephane Dion as leader of the federal Liberals, clearing the way for his old college roommate (Google it, it's true), Michael Ignatieff to lead the way.

So, here we come to the Age of Iggy. Will it be successful? Maybe, but I think we can all say with some confidence that it will be better than the epic fail of Dion.

There are many things to be done, and little time to do them in.

The Liberals need to get a grassroots fund raising operation moving, or the next attempt to cut of public financing of political parties could simply kill them off altogether.

They have to make themselves relevant to people outside of Ontario/Quebec that are under 35, as they were basically shut out west of the Manitoba-Ontario border. There was a handful of seats, but the West is turning solid blue, and that trend needs to be reversed or at least stunted for the Liberals to have any kind of viability going into the future.

Although, there is one thing that trumps these problems, and that is the prospect of a coalition government. Not surprisingly, as it was controlled by the Liberals, the coalition proposal was rolled out very badly, and the public seems to be turning against it. Personally I think it would be better for Canada, as they would actually govern with other parties and interests in mind other than their own. That being said, the idea of Prime Minister Dion was a large part of what killed the deal.

Now that part of the equation has been erased, I'm still not convinced that a coalition under Ignatieff would be any more palatable to the public.

The Liberals have kind of backed their way into a corner with this one, and it'll be interesting to see how it plays out. Basically they have put themselves in a place where they can't really support a budget that doesn't meet their exact specifications, as they've shown the willingness to take this thing to the mat, and if they turned away from toppling the government or voting them out, it would look like the only time they want to take action 'for Canada', is when they would benefit from it. Same goes for the NDP and the Bloc.

The only thing we can hope for is Harper makes some concessions and the Liberals are at least able to credibly say it was a compromise deal. It does look like Harper is striking a more conciliatory tone in the last day or so, pledging to work with the other parties to make Parliament, well, work.

I've heard and seen this show before, so until I see a consensus budget, with input from all parties, Harper's words will still ring hollow to me.

Now, if the Liberals fail, we're looking at a Harper majority, without a doubt. If an election was held today, they would easily go over the hump into majority territory, due to the bungled coalition roll-out.

As I've written on here before, I also think that Iggy basically has the task of saving the Liberals from complete and utter obscurity, which is where they will reside if Harper ever takes the majority reigns.

The bottom line is that Canada needs to work, and every party, not just Harper, but every party needs to cooperate, and govern this land with good faith towards the other parties.

I know minorities are contentious, and the next election is always right around the corner, and policy-making in a minority situation tends to lean more towards electioneering than actual governance, but heading into a recession, and possible depression without the right steps, this is not the time to try and cut a political opponent off at the knees while (metaphorically) Rome burns in the background.

Ignatieff himself is an interesting candidate, just based on the fact that he was out of the country for decades at a time teaching at Harvard, and only returned a few years ago to run for office and the leadership.

I can see this going one of two ways, and it depends on controlling the narrative.

Harper has shown himself to be very adept at this part of the game, and the Liberals have, well, been the exact opposite, tripping over themselves and whining about attack ads when they should have been firing back with vigour.

If Ignatieff is framed as an elitist, Canada-abandoning candidate, out of touch with Canadian interests, this thing is over before it even starts.

The Liberals need to highlight that we're talking about a Harvard professor here, a very intelligent man, and one untainted by previous Liberal scandals and mismanagement.

It all comes down to the message, and if things keep on the same track we've seen, there will be Ignatieff attack ads out there tomorrow. They need to hit back hard, and right away, fighting the negative narrative wherever and whenever they can.

Dion, frankly, was a wimp, and was seen as such from almost the minute he stepped atop the party. That was because of a sustained media effort by the Conservative Party, that the Liberals could not counter for the life of them.

Harper defined Dion.

Ignatieff needs to define himself, or he'll be in the scrapheap next to Stephane and the party very, very shortly.

I Know It's Been a While...

It's been a while since I posted, even about the epic, dramatic and world-altering election of Barack Obama, so the question begs...why?

Basically it boils down to a lack of time, a lack of a home computer, and a recovery from the orgy of politics I've been swimming through for the last 2+ years.

I can't promise a coherent, regular posting schedule, but I can promise my full effort and weight behind anything I do put out there.

I hope to do a couple pieces on Canadian politics in the coming hours / days, as we look to be on the verge of either a coalition government of Liberals and New Democrats, or yet another election.

There is also the Cabinet picks of Mr. President-elect to mull over, although I will be perfectly honest and admit I don't know who too many of these people are, because their time in the sun, back with the Clintons, was when I was still in my early teens, and not into politics in the least, let alone digging through qualifications for Cabinet picks.

In any sense, I do hope to get more out there more often, but only time will tell.

The Liberal Leadership : The Race, and the New Political Reality

With Stephane Dion resigning this past Monday as leader of the Liberal Party, (thank God) it opens up a new race for the person that will succeed him and lead the Grits into the next election, and hopefully further.

There are already contenders floating around, even as Dion's gravestone is still being carved.

Michael Ignatieff and Bob Rae, the two from which the last leader should have been chosen, will almost certainly be in the running once again, as their leadership campaign machines are still warm under the hood from the last race. Both of these two, as last time, have even-to-better odds of being the next leader in 2009. Hopefully we don't see another dark horse backroom deal like the one that screwed both of these men in 2006. If they lose, they lose, but Dion pulled 18% on the first ballot in '06 and ended up the leader. That stinks worse than roadkill on a 40 degree day.

Today, Martin Cauchon, a member from the Chretien era, has said he may also consider tossing his hat into the ring, citing the need for a 'generational change'. He is experienced in government, a former Cabinet minister, and is only in his late 40s, well under the 60-plus years of both Ignatieff and Rae. He could have a shot, but with Dion doing so badly, mostly based on his communication skills, I find it hard to believe the Liberals would appoint another Francophone to their leadership. Aside from that, his age and experience would both be tremendous assets. We'll see where that goes, but I'm labelling him as a long shot for now.

There are also some other repeat candidates, aside from Rae and Ignatieff.

Gerard Kennedy, the man that gave us Stephane Dion is likely to run again, as is Martha Hall Findley, who may find herself on better footing this time around than last, as she is now a sitting MP. Same with Kennedy.

They are still considered very long-shot tries and if either wins, I will be stunned, but in that same sense, who saw Dion as viable last time?

The most intriguing of all the candidates, at least in my mind, is Frank McKenna, the former premier of New Brunswick, Canadian Ambassador to the US, and current Deputy Chairman of TD Bank.

He has the cred, both politically and economically to blow everyone else out of the water.

Frankly, he would have done so in 2006 had he chosen to run, deciding instead to step aside, later taking the TD gig.

This race will be shaped by him, and whether he gives it a go this time around. If he does not, I expect Rae or Ignatieff to take the mantle handily.

This seems like very much a re-do of the disastrous 2006 choice, with Dion obviously not around to swipe it this time.

The leadership choice will be made in May of 2009 in Vancouver (yay, my home city) and it will lay the groundwork for the Liberal Party for what I think will be at least the next decade, as two disastrous choices in a row could doom them to obscurity (If Dion hasn't already done so).

The Liberals are in serious need of a kick-start, as they have died as a party in BC, finishing fourth in most ridings behind even the Greens, getting knocked around badly in Quebec and losing ground in Ontario.

They also are very much in need of an overhaul in the way they fundraise, as Harper and the Tories absolutely killed them in the financial race this cycle, allowing them to run attack ad after attack ad and basically assassinate Stephane Dion's character before he really even got rolling.

Liberals can cry all they want about the right wing propoganda machine killing them this cycle, but that is part of the game, and if they can't hold their ground in that part of the game, they will lose every single time.

No one likes attack ads, but they work, and the Liberals need to recognize the reality of the situation.

You can whine, or you can win, and whether it's Ignatieff, Rae, McKenna, Cauchon, Kennedy, Hall-Findley or someone else, they need to go on the offensive as soon as they take the keys, or the Liberals will be looking for a new leader once again in a few years.

Election Live Blogging : Fortier Loses Again

Michel Fortier, the unelected member of Stephen Harper's cabinet, who lost his last race and was appointed to the Senate to be able to serve in Cabinet, has lost again.

Does anyone think Harper will pull the same stunt again for the man he clearly wanted in that seat?

Fortier already resigned his Senate seat to run, so my guess would be no. Then again, who thought Harper would have done such a thing anyways?

Lots more to come from this election night.

Looks like another Conservative minority, with little movement seat-wise.

The question tomorrow morning may not be who won, but why we just spent $300 million dollars on what amounts to the status quo.

There wasn't much need for an election, outside of Harper's bare ambition for a majority, and it looks like he will not get it yet again...

Meeting Elizabeth May, Peter McKay , and Discussing Charter Rights

Well, it wasn't me, but it was my significant other, Lindsay.

She lives on the East Coast, in Antigonish, Nova Scotia, home of St Francis Xavier University, which she attends, and also the site of the local candidates debate for the riding of Central Nova last night.

In this riding, the very impressive Green Party Leader Elizabeth May is trying to wedge herself and the Greens into Parliament by knocking off Nova Scotia native son and Defense Minister Peter McKay.

At first glance, this does seem, frankly, insane. Going up against a Cabinet Minister, from a town within the riding, who is running for the party that has had an iron grip on the seat for decades, etc. But, all that outsider, fringe party, insurmountable stuff is getting turned on its head. May has a shot, and she showed why last night.

She was smart, on the ball, rational and reasonable, just like she was in the Federal debates last week. The crowd, chocked full of university students, was fully on her side, as the Liberals aren't running a candidate in the riding, and the NDP candidate is completely and utterly out of their league with two such strong and notable candidates.

She runs her campaign out of Antigonish, and clearly has a good chunk of the town on her side, just based on the amount of signs populating lawns. The riding is not just Antigonish however, as it covers a wide area, but May has more of a chance of knocking out McKay than any Liberal or NDP member has done so far.

After the debate, Lindsay got a chance to speak with both McKay and May, and got a chance to bring up the question to McKay that had gotten cut from the actual debate due to time constraints.

A little background before unleashing the whole story. The Nova Scotia Conservative provincial government has new regulations in place that force those that have taken prescription drugs for a disorder such as depression or post-traumatic stress disorder to declare those conditions and the drugs taken on their driver's licenses.

The government says it is due to safety concerns over people driving under the influence of medication, but that is a little hard to swallow with no evidence that these kinds of people have been a danger, or the drugs taken will impair driving ability.

So, basically what is in place now will force people to either admit to the public record their private medical conditions, or simply ignore treatment to avoid having to do so. Neither of those jives with my values as a Canadian.

I smell a Charter violation there, and so did Lindsay. So she decided to pose the question of the viability of such a law from a Charter standpoint to the one and only Peter McKay.

Now, while provincial and federal parties aren't specifically aligned together (In BC they couldn't be more of a separate entity), apparently on the East Coast it is much more of a central party than translates policy from the top down.

So, talking to a Cabinet member of the ruling Conservatives federally can very much have an impact on the Conservative party provincially.

She posed the question, they went back and forth and debated for 10-15 minutes, and then, the shining light appeared.

Peter McKay admitted the law was a violation of our Charter Rights, and pledged to do what he could to affect some positive change on the matter.

McKay went against his own party, and conversed with a constituent on a personal level. I admire that, and I have a lot more respect for the man now than I think I ever have. Up to this point, he seemed nothing more than the guy that was jilted by Belinda Stronach and sold his soul to Stephen Harper to unite the right.

They exchanged email addresses, and he also gave her some links and contact information for the provincial and federal health ministers, so that she could run down some of the details on her time.

Obviously, that doesn't mean the law is repealed, or that it will be tomorrow, but there is a commitment on record from a very powerful minister to the effect that it should be. That my friends, is a pretty big deal.

I want to congratulate Lindsay for standing toe-to-toe with a very seasoned politician, and winning him over in the end. That's not an easy task, especially when that politician resides in the spin and negativity of the right wing.

Just so you know I'm not fakin', here's the pics of Lindsay and Elizabeth May, and with Peter McKay

Election Tidbits - Greens Shut Out, Harper and Layton Fast Out of the Gate, Dion Lags

It looks like Elizabeth May and the Greens are going to be shut out of another leaders debate. The decision was made today by a group of Canadian television broadcasters who actually run the debates on their airwaves to only host the Conservative, Liberal, NDP and Bloc parties for the two debates slated for early October.

Unlike all the other times, this time I actually feel they should be there.

They are a legitimate national party now. They are not viable to form any kind of government, but neither is the NDP or the Bloc. They are running candidates in every single riding across the country, except one, which is a product of the ill-advised deal Stephane Dion made with May to not run candidates in each others ridings. (This works just fine for May, but as May herself is running against Peter Mackay, Dion might be thinking twice about not being able to run a candidate against the Foreign Minister) Also, as of the dissolution of Parliament, they actually had a sitting MP, as the near-disgraced, now-cleared but shunned by his former Liberals MP Blair Wilson had switched to Green stripes.

Maybe the Greens should have been let in last time, or the one before, but this time around, they have national prominence, and cannot be denied. More importantly, their main party issue should be injected into our national discourse in a major way.

May and the Greens are taking legal action to hopefully force their way onto the national stage. They've been doing a damn good job of it for over a decade now, and I hope the trend continues sometime in the next few weeks.

-------------------

Jack Layton and Stephen Harper really jumped out of the starting blocks of the national campaign today, hitting hard on issues and trying to define their opponents, campaigns and themselves.

Stephane Dion on the other hand, has had more of a...slow start on the race.

His campaign plane will not be ready for another few weeks, even though this election had been on the horizon since the moment he sat for the first time as Liberal leader in Parliament. He is to be on a bus tour for the time in between, and began today with a rally in Montreal.

As you can see from a 24 Hours review of the event here , it didn't seem to lack too much punch and enthusiasm.

This is going to be a tough campaign for Dion just based on the issues (Green Shift), let alone having to battle problems with energizing his Liberal base and the electorate. This is a very uphill battle, and Dion started with a thud.

Harper, on the other hand, has been issuing election-style commercials for a few weeks now, and peppering Canadian mailboxes with fliers about leadership, the environment, crime, and all the other issues of the day. They have a big head start on the hearts and minds campaign, as the Harper commercials have been effective, showing ordinary people praising Harper's policies, and the man himself.



On a side note, I saw the first Liberal ad of the campaign, and it was highly unimpressive. It didn't seem to have a clear point, didn't convince anyone about the Green Shift, throwing out a bunch of cliche lines about creating jobs and making our economy stronger, without offering specifics. It closed with a very bad, grainy shot of Dion saying something about why he respects Canada. I say again, THUD.

(Note: I searched for a good 20 minutes trying to find the Liberal Party's ad on YouTube, but could not, and ironically, every search with the keywords 'liberal' 'party' 'election' 'ad' 'Canada' '2008', etc, ended up pulling up the Stephen Harper leadership commercials for the first 3-4 hits. Dion is losing the viral campaign already, and with this generation possibly going to the polls, that is a very necessary chord to hit)

Layton gave a fiery speech in Vancouver today, hitting the Conservatives hard on their environmental and social policies. Jack is trying to be the Canadian Obama, preaching about being the candidate of 'change', and right away, it seems to be working for him. He has the populist cred to run this kind of campaign, and with him paying no attention to Dion and all his attention to Harper, in a year where people seem to be largely apathetic towards Dion, and not entirely comfortable with Stephen Harper having a majority, he could steal a lot of left-leaning voters.

I honestly think we will end up in another Conservative minority government, but if Dion flubs, or people are not comfortable enough with him, or Jack, then it could lead to a big Conservative slide.

Jack has opportunities, so does Harper, and the Liberals are just trying to hang on.

Ahhh, feels like 2006 all over again.

I do also think this will be Dion's only election as leader, and he will be subtly, or not so subtly, pushed to the side after the almost assured loss. I think everyone that leans left of Bush in this country (Which would be the type of policies Stephen Harper in a majority setting would emulate to the fullest) is just hoping he doesn't blow it and condemn us to absolute rule by the Conservative Party, and then we'll move on to someone more capable of winning an election. Someone like Michael Ignatieff or Bob Rae, two men who should have been the last two in the leadership contest before Dion and Gerard Kennedy pulled their backstage deal to swipe the leadership away.

That aside, I have heard many people say in this cycle they will not vote Liberal or NDP, they will simply vote non-Conservative. Whatever works in their riding to ensure that seat is not held by a Conservative MP is what their vote is pointed towards. That concept will likely decide the makeup of our next Parliament more than anything the leaders have to say over the next 5 weeks, because with the polls showing a near tie amongst the Liberals and Conservatives, not many opinions are likely to change in just over a month, no matter how heavy the rhetoric and how prosperous the policy proposals are.

Federal Election in October All But Assured After Harper and Dion Meet and Decide They Cannot Play Nice

Along with the attention-grabbing US election, it looks like Canadians are also going to go to the polls this fall.

Stephane Dion came out of a meeting with Stephen Harper at 24 Sussex Drive this afternoon and announced to reporters that there was going to be a fall campaign, because he wouldn't give Harper a "blank cheque to govern".

Everyone seems to be on board this time, unlike the near misses in the past.

Dion has been Liberal leader for almost 2 years now, and apparently has been backed into enough of a corner to have at least the appearance of growing a set. Harper seems to be more than willing to violate his own fixed election date law that sets our next federal election for 2009. Jack Layton responded to that move by saying essentially that if Harper wants to quit his job he'll be first in line to apply for it. Gilles Duceppe has pledged to hold a confidence vote, with or without any support.

So here we are folks, ready to mark ballots again.

The competing themes will be leadership from the Conservative side, and the Green Shift policy put forth by Dion.

I would go over the NDP and Bloc approaches, but those haven't changed much. For the NDP, bitch about anything that gets traction, and for the Bloc, bitch about not getting enough support from Ottawa even though you want to separate entirely. Oh, and the Greens, how could I forget? Bitch about the environment and run your leader against one of the highest profile Conservatives in a safe, deep blue riding. Smmmart.

I've actually been meaning to write about the outreach I've been seeing in my mailbox from the Conservative party for a while now, so this seems as good a spot as any to do so.

I have now gotten 4 separate mailers from the Conservatives, about Strong Leadership, Youth Crime, Senate Reform and Clean Air.

They are all stacked with facts, figures, policy standpoints, and imagery that is thought-provoking. Me and my fiancee had a separate conversation each time one of them came in the mail, sparking conversation about the Conservative stances. On leadership and Senate reform, I found myself on the Conservative side of things, which is an odd sensation to say the least.

I do think Harper is a stronger national and international player for Canadian interests than Stephane Dion would be. I don't care for Harper's policies when it comes to free trade and relations with the Bush Administration, but I can take some good with the bad, especially when compared with Paul Martin's Panderbear foreign and domestic policies.

On the Senate, I've been on the reforming train for as long as I have understood the Canadian political process. In no modern democracy should we have an unelected, highly paid, patronage-infested body, which serves almost no purpose other than to rubber stamp. The Senate as is, is nothing more than a money pit which lends itself to cronyism, as all members are essentially there as a reward for a career of party loyalty. This does not jive with a functional democracy. There does need to be a check on Parliament, as we cannot have one sole elected body, especially with a majority government, as that setup is essentially a dictatorship anyways.

We need a Senate that represents all areas of the country equally, with 2 or 3 members for each province, with elections that run opposite Parliamentary cycles.

That is plain and simple, but Dion does not agree, as the Liberals have a heavy majority in our unelected chamber, due to being the governing party an overwhelming majority of the time in Canadian history. Most Canadians are on the side of reform, some on abolishment, but I do not see too many advocating for the status quo on this one.

I'm not saying I agree with the information as a whole, and definitely not on punishing our youth harder as opposed to rehabilitating them, or that Harper is on the right side of the climate change argument, despite his attempts, but the point is they are providing information, and the Liberals are not.

The Conservatives have also debuted a series of commercials to define Harper as a strong leader for Canada, and surprisingly, they don't take shots at Dion, they're simple record pieces on Harper to show people he is the best leader for Canada right now. They are with ordinary people; blue collar workers and soccer moms, listing with emotion and certainty the Conservative accomplishments since in power, and how those accomplishments helped their daily lives and made them feel safer.

Harper does still have a sizable 'creepy problem', as shown in the closing seconds of the ad, when he is sitting down, perched forward with his elbows on his knees, wearing a sweater, and smiling into the camera. It doesn't seem normal, and honestly, it gives me the willies. All in all though, he is in people's hearts and minds more than Dion, by a long shot.

Dion, as detailed in a previous article, available off the right side of this page, has a serious communication issue, as even after 2 years, most Canadians don't know or trust him enough to mark Liberal in their riding come October.

There are of course areas that will remain Liberal until the day this country dies, but there are a lot of battleground-type areas available for either side, with the NDP spoiling a race here or there.

BC is a big toss up, with a left-leaning, green-based ideology perfectly suited to swing Liberal. I've lived here my whole life, and I still cannot understand why the majority of BC seats are as blue as the sky. Partially it is a symptom of the incompetent provincial NDP party, as people have trouble dividing federal parties from their essentially unaffiliated provincial brethren.

But aside from that, it comes down to delivery, to speaking to people's concerns everywhere, not just in Southern Ontario and across the St Lawrence seaway.

Harper can and will nab Alberta easily, but with a concerted effort, a few of those seats further West can swing the other way.

Dion must spend the next two months connecting with people, traveling coast to coast and convincing them that his Green Shift is the way to go for the country.

The Conservatives have spent almost their entire time in power trying to build up their cred on green issues, but it all has rung rather hollow, leaving Dion the opportunity he needs to kick the door in to a serious electoral advantage. Dion needs to hit that note, and hit it hard, convincing people not only is his plan the way to go, but that environmental issues are the most pressing of our time. His whole policy book is built around the Green Shift, so people need to see the environment as above their pocketbook, because that is where the Green Shift is going to hit them.

Dion has said the Shift will be revenue neutral, but that isn't the kind of language that people are going to get in line with everywhere, especially with Harper hammering home the fact that it is a tax increase, leaving aside the incentives and tax cuts elsewhere. As I have said previously, the Green Shift is not an effective campaign strategy, although it is likely a great governing strategy. Hard truths are not easy to campaign on, especially when you have communication and trust issues with the electorate.

The Conservatives are hitting home with their mailers and ads, and Dion needs to jump on this before it is too late. Leadership will be the question, as it always is, but Dion's supposed test of leadership will be defined by how people view the Green Shift. If they don't agree, then Dion and the Liberals are in serious trouble, and Harper might get the majority government he so craves.

We'll find out in the next two months what the Canadian people see as the best road forward, and during that time, we will also see the most dynamic and important US Presidential election ever held.

For pols, such as myself, the fall season isn't going to be about new shows, it's going to be about policy proposals and politics at the highest levels. It's going to be busy, and I'm going to be loving every minute of it.

Dion's Delivery Failure -- And No, I'm Not Talking Emails Here

As you can tell by the last article I posted up, I am in favor of a carbon tax to address the problems of climate change.

Now, this support of the BC plan does not mean I support the idea across the board.

Here we come to the point of this post, which is Stephane Dion's proposed federal carbon tax. It has been hammered from the start, much like the BC Liberals plan, from all sides. There is a reason why though, and it points towards a huge part of Dion's overall problem as Liberal leader.

Delivery.

The BC Liberals delivered their carbon tax with hard-set plans to offset the tax through tax cuts and dividend cheques. It hasn't quelled the furor, but when people actually get down to it, and look at their paystubs, hopefully the message finally hits home, and I don't have to convince person after person, some who I view as extremely bright, that the carbon tax is not akin to Satan rising up from the depths of Hell to swallow children.

That aside, Dion did not deliver his carbon tax in any way that would have been palatable. He introduced it flippantly, without a plan to show why it would be revenue neutral, and has been shooting himself in the foot with the details ever since.

There are some plans in place now, with hard prices per tonne of carbon ($10 in the first year, rising to $40 by the fourth year). There will be tax increases of around $15 billion on the highest fossil fuel consumers and carbon emitters, and it will be offset by around $15 billion in tax cuts, which trickle mostly to lower and middle income families who will feel most tightly squeezed by the new rules.

From CBC.ca :

• A 1.5 percentage point rate reduction for the lowest tax bracket (the first $37,885 of taxable income), to 13.5 per cent from 15.
• A one percentage point rate reduction for the second-lowest tax bracket ($37,885-$75,769), to 21 per cent from 22.
• A one percentage point rate reduction for the bracket between $75,769 and $123,184, to 25 per cent from 26.

There is also set to be a supplement of $1225 to low income families with kids under 18, by the fourth year, there will be a $350 child tax credit every year, and rural taxpayers would receive a $150 dividend cheque every year.

Dion predicts a family of four with an income of $60,000 / year will actually end up saving $1300 a year under these types of programs, even though their fuel costs will have risen.

Dion has also pledged that gas prices will not rise due to his new tax, which I personally find to be the most troubling part of the whole idea. Basically the justification for this belief is that oil and gas companies are already making tremendous profits off our backs, so they wouldn't translate the new tax over to the pump.

If I may, let me just say, bullshit. Absolute bullshit. The large oil and gas producers have already translated higher costs of oil down to us, at a rate higher than what the actual cost of a barrel of oil is rising. They have shown no remorse in raping everyone at the pump up until now, so where is the belief that they will magically stop? This tax is targeted to make their industry more expensive to run, and eventually either force them to diversify or die. If I'm in that position, I'm probably not going to be too peachy about going along and making the plan easier to swallow.

Gas prices will likely rise nationally, and Dion will have to account for it, or risk losing the whole argument up front.

The most major part, as with BC, in selling this kind of plan, is to make it 'revenue neutral'. Ah, there's that lovely buzzword again. He has pledged to make it so, and to have the Auditor General do a review every year to ensure that commitment continues to hold water.

Dion has said flat-out that within four years of his new system, costs for a regular, median household in Canada would rise $225-$250. Home heating costs will jump up to 8%. But as those increases will be offset by tax cuts, we're all good right? Wrong.

The most vocal critic of this plan has obviously been Stephen Harper, who is a much better communicator and politician than the BC carbon tax's main opponent, Carole James of the NDP. The fact that Harper can communicate his opposition, and basically Western Canada's opposition to Dion's plan so well may doom it from the start. Harper can deliver his ideas, Dion cannot.

I may not like Dion's style, but he seems to be rather ballsy when it comes to something he believes in. He has said flat-out this tax will hurt Saskatchewan and Alberta most (Alberta obviously, but Saskatchewan due to a high number of coal-fired power plants) and now he is touring there to sell / convince skeptics. If nothing else, this may push Dion's timid and tepid image to the back burner a bit.

The carbon tax. Yes, we need it. Yes, it will help us in the end, even though it may be painful now. Yes, BC, and Canada can be world leaders in green technology.

The problem is that it is long term. Our politics, mindsets, society, is all instant. Instant gratification, quick money and real-time results is what we thrive on, and it is not what the carbon tax gives us.

This is why, in the end, I am labeling Dion's ideas good, but his delivery of them as absolutely craptacular. The carbon tax is something you push through when already in power (see Gordon Campbell and the BC Liberals), not something to campaign upon. You campaign on those short-term, positive sounding ideas that sell you and your government to the people, then you start the wide-ranging, long term policies once in office.

This is fairly fundamental in our politics, but it is something Dion doesn't seem to grasp.

It's all about the message, where, when and how it is communicated.

In short, my friends, it is about the delivery, something Dion needs to learn if he has a hope in hell of selling his carbon tax, and the Liberals as a whole to Canada.

Bilateral Civil Assistance Plan

There was an agreement signed on February 14, 2008, between U.S. Air Force Gen. Gene Renuart, commander of North American Aerospace Defense Command and U.S. Northern Command, and Canadian Air Force Lt.-Gen. Marc Dumais, commander of Canada Command, that essentially ended Canada’s stint as a free and independent country.

It is called, as this article is entitled, the 'Bilateral Civil Assistance Plan'. What this agreement does is allow American troops to operate on Canadian soil in times of civil emergency, and vice versa. I can't think of a circumstance where the US would ask us to step in, but with the depleted numbers of their own National Guard due to the war in Iraq, maybe it is a possibility.

Either way, this kind of agreement, signed with smiles, as you can see if you like by clicking on the title, which will take you to the US Northern Command site, is dangerous in so many ways I'm thinking if I should check and see if there's a word limit on Blogger before I get really into this.

We're losing sovereignty, straight up. I don't know about the rest of you, but watching the US operate on the world stage for the last 8 years doesn't instill too much trust in them not abusing this agreement and taking it in ways it was never originally intended (see, Original UN Iraq Resolution)

Who defines this 'emergency'?

Say for example, the Canadian Prime Minister is assassinated, everything is in chaos, we have no clear number 2 because of a ridiculously outdated political system, the US steps in to 'lend assistance' during the crisis. Bingo Bango, we've got a 'friend' who won't get the hell out of our country.

The US has plenty of fingers in plenty of friendly pies, and it will be over my dead body before those fingers are in ours. I know we have been bought out piece by piece by US companies, our culture is dominated by that from the South of us, and our current government panders to the Bush administration like an underachieving child to an overbearing father, but US troops, in our streets, 'keeping the peace' is more than I could handle.

That is just one of many different scenarios that would be made out to be justifiable in such a circumstance, as any logical and realistic person knows the US would love to have our resources and space for their own uses. We have always resisted them at every turn from complete and utter domination, but this agreement sets all that back dramatically.

We have laws in place to preserve 'Canadianism', culturally, requiring so much Canadian content on our radio and airwaves, but is that really enough?

The most troubling aspect of this entire agreement, leaving out everything mentioned, is that it was never even brought up in the House of Commons, let alone debated and passed by a plurality of elected members. The same goes for the US Congress. Not a whiff of this passed through there either. And it was not released to the press, and was actually suppressed by the Canadian government from coming to light.

This is a major treaty, changing the way we define our borders and how we allow other nations to operate within them. This fundamentally alters Canadian sovereignty forever. And no one knows it even happened.

I will be lobbying my Member of Parliament, Bill Siksay of the NDP, to at least raise this issue in the House, and have the Prime Minister and the Conservative government answer for their actions and their secrecy. I recommend you do the same if you at all care about maintaining Canada as a free and independent nation. Links to each party, where you can find your MP, and for US readers, your Member of Congress, are located on the right side. We need to raise this issue now, because it seems like our governments are completely unwilling to.

Find Your Member of Parliament

Find your Member of Congress

Straddling the Fence on Smoking

I live in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, and I am a smoker. I also work in the city, in an office, with tight little old-style streets outside.

The reason I'm sharing this is not so that all several of you that have clicked through my thoughts on here can come and shower me with praise. I mean, that would be great, but I'm not expecting anything. The reason is because on March 31, 2008, Vancouver essentially became a city where smoking in public is no longer allowed.

They haven't made smoking illegal, or anything like that, far too much tax revenue is derived from cigarettes to make them completely unavailable. This is a point I'll come back to, because it's central to the whole idea of what we're talking about here.

The new law put in place stipulates that the following are now illegal, and I'm quoting right from the Government of BC's website here :

- Smoking in all indoor public spaces and work places, with exemptions made for the ceremonial use of tobacco by Aboriginal people;
- Smoking within three meters (15 Feet) of public and workplace doorways, open windows or air intakes;
- Tobacco sales in public buildings including: hospitals and health facilities, universities and colleges, athletic and recreational facilities, and provincial government buildings; and
- Display and promotion of tobacco products in all places where tobacco is sold that are accessible to youth under 19.
- Unless prohibited by municipal regulations, smoking will still be allowed on the outdoor patios of restaurants and bars, as long as that patio area is not substantially enclosed.

In Canada, between 63 and 79 per cent of the price of cigarettes is tax (CBC). The government, both provincial and federal, collect huge tax revenues from smokers, and yet make it nearly impossible for them to use the product they are collecting for.

Such blatant and opportunistic hypocrisy would almost be laughable, if it didn't negatively impact so many people's lives in such a way. I’m all for not displaying cigarettes, not selling them in government buildings, and not having smoking rooms inside bars and clubs, but a 15 foot restriction is simply unworkable and ridiculous.

I have always prided myself on being a polite smoker, someone who has this habit, but doesn't annoy others with it. Someone who blows smoke away from whomever I happen to be with, whether they are a smoker or not. Not smoking around kids, especially babies, and not smoking inside. This is the kind of behavior we need to be focusing on.

I in no way want to make smoking out to be safe or friendly. It is horribly addictive, harmful, and secondhand smoke is most certainly very damaging. I do want to point out though that it is a choice that we smokers in the world make, and it is perfectly legal, and available every ten feet, in every little shop.

It's like offering out something in one hand, then trying to swat the person away with the other hand when they try and take it.

The Government of BC and the Government of Canada need to get real on this issue, and stop playing both sides of the fence by looking tough on tobacco and smokers, while the entire time collecting millions from us. It's all political, just like everything else, but this goes a little bit far in my opinion.

We haven't even started to look into other substances also taxed to the gills that are very harmful, such as alcohol. The costs of medical care for those affected by their cigarette addiction is certainly higher than that of alcohol abusers, but nonetheless, it is the same idea. The government sells, promotes and taxes a very harmful substance, and then tells people they shouldn't really be buying it or using it in the first place.

If say, smoking was outlawed tomorrow, a huge black market would spring up, and there wouldn't probably be too much of a noticeable shift in supply. It would just be much harder to acquire, and harder to use, and would drive smoking rates down dramatically. Obviously this isn't going to happen, but it's about the only way that Gordon Campbell, Stephen Harper and their respective parties pass the hypocrisy test.

We've seen the effects of prohibition before, with alcohol, and obviously it's not a viable, real solution, but all I'm asking is for the ruling parties to stop acting so righteous about the whole issue as 80% of the price I just paid for my daily pack is bulging out of their coffers.

Now, excuse me, I have to go and stand in the middle of the street to have a smoke, as in this part of town, it’s about the only place that's 15 feet from a door, window or vent.

I certainly feel like I'm safer and society is better off by having millions do the same, don’t you?