Federal Election Counter Spin - ABC easy as 123

On Wednesday Canada woke up to the equivalent of the “Ground Hog Day” movie. A situation where, like in the movie, the same circumstances are repeated ad-nauseam.

After the taxpayers funded a $300 million dollar election campaign, called for no reason and in spite of legislation intended to prevent it, the Harper Conservatives are still leading a minority government, Stephane Dion is still under attack for his leadership ability and other than shuffling of a few deck chairs around it’s almost as if the federal election never really happened.

Almost…

One thing has changed as a result of this process and that's the provincial / federal dynamic, especially in Quebec and Newfoundland & Labrador. Two jurisdictions that have soundly rejected the current federal government.

After weeks of party slogans, attack ads, cross Country tours, millions in marketing and tons of jet fuel carbon emissions, in the end the final outcome (minority vs. majority) came about, in spite of all the spin, because of the actions of people in those two provinces and two of their political leaders.

Going into this election Stephen Harper, no matter how much he denies it, was confident of winning a majority mandate. This and his desire to side step an economic situation that was beginning to sputter are the only reasons the election even happened in the first place.

This election wasn’t about some burning National issue. It was about the Conservatives wanting to gain a stranglehold on power.

At the end of the day however Mr. Harper was denied his much sought after majority and no doubt he is now laboring under the misguided belief that he has Newfoundland & Labrador and Quebec, along with Gilles Duceppe and Danny Williams, to blame for that.

Mr. Harper’s perspective on this, like the ideology he is foisting on Canada, is wrong.

Yes, Gilles Duceppe fought hard to fend off any kind of growth for the Conservatives in Quebec.

Yes, Danny Williams’ ABC (Anyone But Conservative) campaign in Newfoundland and Labrador may have had some influence in ensuring that the Conservatives were completely shut out in the province.

Both of those facts are true but they don’t tell the entire story.

Saying Mr. Harper lost out on an opportunity for a majority government thanks to those two provinces is not the same thing as saying that any blame for that loss should rest with anyone there.

The reality is that both Mr. Duceppe and Premier Williams are merely conduits for the feelings of many people in their respective jurisdictions. It is Mr. Harper himself who was the chief architect of his undoing. He accomplished this by virtue of a litany of broken promises and his adherence to right wing ideologies.

It isn’t the electorate in these two jurisdictions or their political bent that is to blame for shattering Mr. Harper’s aspirations. It is the actions of the man himself. Of that there is no doubt.

The Harper slide in Quebec came in the middle of the campaign after the PM callously brushed aside concerns over cuts to arts programs and his push for adult style sentencing of young offenders, two positions that got under the skin of Quebec voters and produced an irritating itch that only Mr. Duceppe was able to scratch.

For the sake of a paltry $40 million dollars Mr. Harper's hopes in Quebec during this $300 million dollar campaign were dashed.

In Newfoundland and Labrador problems with the Harper campaign started long before the writ was dropped.

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are a different people in many respects from most Canadians. Like the people of Quebec their culture is also unique within Canada.

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have a very, very long memory.

While most Canadians went to the polls on Tuesday and marked their X based on the campaign itself most Newfoundlanders and Labradorians were not as highly impacted by the hype and spin produced in the past month or so. Instead they quietly considered the happenings of the past two and half years knowing full well that a government cannot be judged solely on what it does during an election but what it does while actually in office.

By calling on their cultural, or perhaps even genetic, predisposition for recalling the past and learning from it, the people of Newfoundland and Labrador found their decision to oust all Conservative representatives from the Province an easy one.

Ask anyone in the Province about past political events that directly affected them. Ask them about the Upper Churchill contract or Confederation with Canada in 1949 and they'll tell you all about it as it has been handed down from parent to child.

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians simply don’t forget.

While many political analysts and pundits have tried to determine the full effect of the ABC campaign the fact that it even existed was far less important to the outcome of this election than the collective memory in the people.

Multiple broken promises and the underhanded breaking of the Atlantic Accord contract were at the root of the shutout in Newfoundland and Labrador and the people didn't need an ABC campaign to remind them of those trangressions.

The Atlantic Accord debacle was more than the side stepping of a contract, it was a slap in the face to everyone in the province. This was a contract that had been so hard fought for, not only by the provincial government, but by the people of Newfoundland and Labrador themselves and the promises broken were not small ones. They were promises that could have finally pulled the Province out of debt and put it on a solid foundation for generations. The cost of those events to the province is an estimated $11 billion dollars, a far greater injustice than the $40 million dollar debacle that limited Mr. Harper's hopes in Quebec.

When it comes to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, in addition to having a long memory, it's fair to say that it take a lot to make them angry, but when they are you better watch out.

Political junkies, pundits, strategists and students will no doubt study the outcome of this election for some time to come. There will be those who wonder what would have happened if...but at the end of the day Mr. Harper has nobody to blame for this rejection by two of Canada's Eatern Provinces but himself and when the rest of Canada wakes up to what kind of government they have put in power nobody, and I mean nobody, will be able to pin any of the blame on the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Strategic Voting Impacts Harper Campaign Hopes

Strategic voting, or vote swapping, seems to have become more prevalent during this election campaign than during any other in Canadian history. Whether all this talk about casting strategic ballots actually translates into an impact at the polls remains to be seen but by all indications it just may.

The question is why? Why has strategic voting become such a major issue this time out?

The answer could well be that voters have finally begun to understand Stephen Harper’s strategy of splitting the left and sailing up the middle to a majority victory.

Most vote swapping sites and strategic voters have one thing in common. It isn’t making sure the Liberals win. It isn’t holding back the NDP, Greens or others. It’s all about stopping Stephen Harper by any means possible.

This is something new in Canadian politics.

Never before have so many voters been this galvanized or determined to remove a PM from office.

In the past many people have disliked a party leader or didn’t agree with some party position and simply voiced their opinion at the polling station but it seems this time out there is a real undercurrent of fear and even hatred being focused directly at the Harper Conservatives and their ultra Republican attitudes on the issues.

It seems that a great many individuals who are very concerned about the thought of what might happen to Canada if Mr. Harper were to win a majority are beginning to run a grassroots campaign of their own.

As a result of this, and a string of public “insights” into the possibly true character of the man and his supporters, the latest polls are showing the Conservatives slipping in Quebec and beginning to stagnate in other areas of the Country.

The potential power of self organized and widespread strategic voting has not been lost on the rarely seen but often felt Conservative war room. Their latest strategy has been attacking the concept of strategic voting as somehow undemocratic or foolish.

Lately, in a bid to shore up support, Stephen Harper, has begun to publicly speak out against what could prove to be one of the most effective and truly democratic movements Canadian voters have been a part of in some time, strategic voting.

During the last days of the 2004 and 2006 campaigns thousands of voters, concerned with the what might happen if Mr. Harper and his merged Reform/Alliance/Conservative party actually took office, independently voted to block his ambitions and in doing so caused him to lose one election and eke out a minority in another. This was before anyone even thought to organize or publicize the strategic voting process and before anyone ever considered actually swapping votes to ensure a Conservative loss in specific ridings.

Mr. Harper is finally beginning to look in the rear view mirror and realize that a large segment of the population simply doesn’t support another party over his but are actually aligned against him. His greatest fear is that the left may not actually be as divided as the number of parties would suggest.

Mr. Harper and his handlers are finally beginning to see that deep pockets, political spin doctors and access to traditional media are not enough to control public sentiment any more. The intenet now allows a single voter in BC or Manitoba to swap their vote with someone in Nova Scotia or Newfoundland and Labrador with a few clicks of a mouse.

Politicians have always been slow to recognize the power of technology. Blogs, social networking sites like Facebook or Youtube and traditional web sites cost little or nothing to access and allow individuals to counter the spin and work together like never before.

It’s nothing new for voters park their vote with a “second choice” candidate in order to make a point but this time around the idea has caught on like never before and it's getting more organized by the day.

The proof can be found in web sites like the "ABC" campaign of Newfoundland and Labrador premier, Danny Williams and the increasing number of vote swapping sites on the internet (which have been declared perfectly legal by Elections Canada and are attracting thousands of members) .

When you consider that Mr. Harper won the last election with only about 40% voter support doesn’t it say a lot about how much he really represents the views of most Canadians?

With eligible voter turn out averaging somewhere around 65% in the 2006 federal election and with only 40% of those who actually voted supporting Mr. Harper it’s hard to make the case that he truly represents anyone but his die hard supporters.

Harper's campaign strategy is and always has been about keeping the other 60% of Canadian voters, those who support centre and left leaning parties, split at the polls and allowing him to sneak up the middle.

The Conservatives are now beginning to see a potential problem with that strategy and that's why Mr. Harper has recently begun to turn up the rhetoric and begun to attack the concept of strategic voting as somehow being a bad thing.

On a campaign stop in BC last Wednesday Mr. Harper said, "We're asking voters to vote for the party they have confidence in to govern the country.”

The PM didn’t say vote Conservative.

He didn’t say it because he knows roughly 60% of voters have no intention of doing so because they don't believe he is the best choice.

The Conservatives have already written off those votes and those voters and they don't really care what they do as long as they don’t organize and keep them from winning.

Mr. Harper knows he has enough support to win at least a minority government if he can just keep support for the other parties split as it has been over the past few years and he is doing whatever he can to encourage that without admitting that he has a large segement of the population that doesn't support him.

In Western Canada for example Mr. Harper recently asked voters not to waste their ballots on the NDP because Jack Layton has no chance of becoming Prime Minister yet in Eastern Canada, he warned voters to be careful because Mr. Layton could end up being elected Prime Minister.

The messages may sound contradictory, and they are, but they are being put forward for a specific reason:

To allow Mr. Harper to achieve his ambitions of gaining a Majority government while having the support of less than half of the Canadian voting public.

The Conservative strategy may be politically sound and it may even work but it strikes me as more than a little underhanded and sleazy that anyone would want power so much that they would aspire to win an election without caring if they actually win the public’s support.

The Art of Campaign Brainwashing

At the risk of being dismissed as one of Danny Williams’ minions, brainwashed by the NL premier’s ABC (Anything but Conservative) campaign or being all too willing to “drink the kool-aid”, as they say in these parts, I've reached a point where it simply amazes me that the federal Conservatives remain as high as they are in the polls.

In the latest in a series of disgusting comments from the Harper camp, Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz, during a conference call at the height of the listeriosis outbreak, decided it would be fun to crack a few jokes while all across the Country people were dying of the deadly bacteria.

“This is like a death by a thousand cuts. Or should I say cold cuts," Ritz joked during the call. After being informed that another death had just occurred in PEI Ritz’s only response was to say, "Please tell me it's (Liberal MP) Wayne Easter."

Totally disgusting.

There are those who might be willing to attribute Ritz’s comments to the cold and uncaring nature of a single individual, I might have been one of them myself, were it not for a series of similar incidents coming out of the Harper camp.

When taken in conjunction with other statements and actions by Conservative members recently I believe the crude comments made by Minister Ritz are actually a symptom of a party culture that by its very nature promotes this behavior.

As with any team the rank and file look to their leadership for guidance on how to behave, what direction to take and how to succeed. It is through example that leaders lead best. The action, or lack of action, by Conservative party leader, Stephen Harper, when members of his party have crossed the line sends a strong signal to his followers, intentionally or not, that this sort of behavior is acceptable.

It’s not and Mr. Harper's quiet acceptance of such actions by his followers is not the stand a "strong leader" should be taking.

When a video tape of Conservative MP Tom Lukiwski surfaced showing him drinking and crudely pointing out the differences between himself and “homosexual faggots with dirt under their fingernails who spread disease…” Mr. Harper felt a public apology was enough to end all discussion of the incident. No further steps were taken against Mr. Lukiswsk and after the apology read to the press by Gerry Ritz last evening the PM now considers this issue put to rest.

I'm sorry Prime Minister but reading a prepared apology is not enough.

It’s not enough for those who have been the target of statements like Lukiwski’s, the families of those who have suffered or died during the deadly listeriosis outbeak or the Father of a slain soldier who was accused by a senior party strategist of invoking his son’s name for political gain.

And an apology isn't enough to show strong and effective leadership to either your followers or to the nation itself.

Every day the perception is mounting, or at least it should be, that there is something seriously rotten at the core of the new Conservative brand, yet somehow they still manage to retain voter support in key ridings. I have to admit to being totally thrown off balance by the situation.

This is a government that has cut funding to arts programs and women’s rights groups. A government that clearly lied about income trusts and fixed election dates. A government that destroyed the court challenges program. A government that on several occasions has abandoned Canadian citizens incarcerated in foreign lands, including one being held illegally at Guantanamo Bay and a government that handled the Maxime Bernier affair, not by addressing the national security concerns it clearly raised, but by desperately trying to sweep the entire matter under the rug.

Yet the polls show they still have more support among voters than any other party.

Isn’t there something wrong with this picture or am I missing something completely?

The Harper government has claimed that, thanks to their efforts, Canada has never been more united than it is today and that the relationship between the provinces and Ottawa is stronger than ever.

The reality is that the people of at least three provinces, Nova Scotia, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland & Labrador feel as if they’ve been robbed by Ottawa over natural resource revenues.

Ontario feels it is still not getting its fair share of revenue in the federation, has had the Conservative Finance Minister state publicly that it is the last place on earth anyone would want to invest and its premier has been called the “small man of confederation” by the Conservative government.

Does this sound like a Country that is more united than ever before?

Meanwhile, as the economy is tanking in the U.S. and the impact of the collapsing U.S. economy is beginning to be felt in Canada, the surpluses that used to exist have been spent and are no longer available if needed during a recession. Job losses in the manufacturing and forestry sectors are mounting and all the Prime Minister can say about it is, “The Canadian economy’s fundamentals are strong” or that anyone who loses their job in the pulp and paper industry can simply move to Fort McMurray.

I've never seen a party survive an election campaign in Canada with so many strikes against it yet the Conservatives still remain strong in the polls.

It makes me wonder exactly who is being brainwashed here. If it's those who have been dismissed for taking an anti-Harper stance by supporting ABC or if it's those who still plan to vote for the Harper brand of Conservatism.

UPDATE: 3:23pm

The disgusting attitudes of members of the Conservative movement in Canada are coming in so fast and furiously it's getting hard to stay on top of them. Here's another just hitting the news services.

The Conservatives have issued another apology, this time for comments caught on video Wednesday by an assistant to Transport Minister Lawrence Cannon.

Mr. Cannon was campaigning in Maniwaki, Que., Wednesday when a group of protesters from the divided native community of Barriere Lake showed up to outline their demands.

Mr. Cannon listened to their speech and then left, but his constituency assistant continued an exchange with the lead protester, Norman Matchewan.

The exchange was caught on video and broadcast as the lead item Wednesday by the Aboriginal Peoples Television Network.

“If you behave and you're sober and there's no problems and if you don't do a sit down and whatever, I don't care,” said Mr. Cannon's assistant..."

Where Will You Mark Your X on October 14th?

In January of 2006, just prior to the last federal election, I wrote an article outlining the responses of each party leader, to a letter written by Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Danny Williams, asking each what their position was on several key issues of importance to the province.

They say that in politics a day is like a week and a week can be a lifetime. They (politicians being they) also say that the public has a short attention span and an even shorter memory when it comes to issues. With this in mind, and with Premier Williams actively campaigning against the Harper Conservatives, I thought a look back at exactly what each party’s position on those issues was just a little over 2 years ago might be in order.

A note of caution:

Recall that at the time the Liberal party was led by Paul Martin so it may be a little unfair to tar the current leader, Stephane Dion, with the same brush on these issues. Then again many of the same old party faithful are still in place in Liberal land so there may be some comparisons to be drawn.

One might also want to take Jack Layton’s responses with a large grain of salt since, at the time anyway, he was clearly not in a position to become the Prime Minister or even the leader of the official opposition and as such knew he would never have to act on his promises.

That said, if Mr. Layton's tactic was to simply make promises he knew he wouldn’t have to keep, and I’m not saying it was, that would tell voters a lot about the true character of the man.

It seems that in this election the character of the leaders is about the only real issue being debated.

The history:

Just prior to the 2006 Federal election Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Danny Williams sent a letter to the leaders of the Liberal, Conservative and NDP parties identifying 17 key priorities for the province and asking each leader to respond with their level of support for each item.

The Responses:

As a disclaimer, my understanding of the content in each response is open to interpretation but having studied the precise wording, phrasing and tone of each response has led me to the following conclusions.

My analysis of course is no substitute for reading the details yourself (available at http://www.gov.nl.ca/) but if you’re not inclined to hunt the letters down and read them yourself here is the straight story. The Coles Notes version you might say.

Do you support cost sharing an early retirement program in fisheries workers:
Liberals – NO, Conservatives – NO, NDP – YES

Will provide a northern shrimp allocation to the Province:
Liberals – Evasive, C – Evasive, NDP – YES

Will you take Custodial Management on the Grand Banks and Flemish Cap:
Liberals – Evasive, Conservatives – Evasive, NDP – YES

Will you adopt the Northern Cod Strategy and not List cod as endangered:
Liberals – YES, Conservatives – YES, NDP –YES

Will you support a comprehensive federal/provincialAquaculture Agreement:
Liberals – Evasive, Conservatives – Evasive, NDP – Evasive

Will you assist with the Lower Churchill hydro development:
Liberals – Evasive, Conservatives – Evasive, NDP – Evasive

Will you sell the Federal share of Hibernia to NL:
Liberals – NO, Conservatives – NO, NDP – YES

Will you re-open Gander Weather Office:
Liberals – NO, Conservatives – YES, NDP – YES

Will you increase the Federal presence in Newfoundland and Labrador:
Liberals – YES, Conservatives – YES, NDP - YES

Will you undertake Equalization Reforms:
Liberals – Evasive, Conservatives - Evasive, NDP – YES

Will you cost share Trans Labrador Highway:
L – Evasive, Conservatives – YES, NDP – YES

Will you make 5 Wing Goose an operational requirement (with troops):
Liberals – NO, Conservatives – YES, NDP – Evasive

Will you create a reserve at Sheshatshiu by June of 2006:
Liberals – YES, Conservatives – Evasive, NDP – Evasive

Will you stabilize Marine Atlantic services and cut fees:
Liberals – Evasive, Conservatives – Evasive, NDP – Evasive

Do you support bilateral cost sharing for economic development:
Liberals – Evasive, C – Evasive, NDP – YES

Will you ensure federal contracts for Marystown and Bull Arm shipyards:
Liberals – NO, Conservatives – NO, NDP – YES

Will you participate in costing sharing of a waste management strategy:
Liberals – Evasive, Conservatives – Evasive, NDP – Evasive

Final Tally: Liberal: 5 NO, 3 YES and 9 Evasive
Final Tally: Conservative: 3 NO, 5 YES and 9 Evasive
Final Tally: NDP: 0 NO, 12 YES and 5 Evasive

Of course there’s a certain level of subtlety to each of the evasive answers that might allow them to be interpreted either a yes or a no, but I thought it best to simply label those as evasive and be done with it. We all know it doesn’t pay to read between the lines with political types and unless a promise is spelled out in great detail, and sometimes even if it is, what does it really mean anyway?

There’s nothing a politician loves more than a good loophole he or she can crawl through when the time comes to deliver the goods.

In all fairness, a few of the evasive answers may have been valid and perhaps the Premier himself should have been aware of potential problems prior asking the questions.

For example, how could anyone support a shrimp quota for a community until ensuring stock viability and availability prior to allocating it? I believe it was moves like handing out quotas willy-nilly that helped lead us to the sorry state of a fishery we have today.

In another response it would have been difficult for a government leader to promise contracts to a specific shipyard when a little annoyance like the public tendering act is in place.

Those realities lead to another interesting point. Some of the questions NDP leader Jack Layton responded affirmatively on should perhaps have elicited a more evasive answer than was given, including the aforementioned question of shrimp quotas.

So, what does all of this mean to the average voter today?I guess it means that when you get right down to it we all have to do some soul searching and hard thinking before we step into that ballot box on October 14th. How many promises were met and how many were broken, who stands for what and who deserves your support are all important questions.

Whether Stephen Harper, or any of the leaders for that matter, can be trusted will likely play a big part in the decision of where to mark your X, or at least it should.

In Newfoundland and Labrador in particular the impact of Williams' ABC (Anyone But Conservative) campaign and the string of broken promises left behind by the Harper government, as well as previous federal leaders, both locally and nationally will no doubt be on people’s minds as will the very structure of the Canadian parliamentary system and the province's lack of voice in it.

For those of you with the kind of short memory politicians love to talk about (and who are not yet tired of reading this lengthy review) here is a short list (certainly not all inclusive) of the broken promises given by the current Conservative government (some of which were given in writing).

Taxing Income Trusts after saying he wouldn’t tax them and in doing so encouraging thousands to invest and lose their savings.

Promising to remove of non-renewable resource revenues from the equalization calculation and then including them anyway.

Promising to station a 650 person rapid response battalion at 5 Wing Goose Bay and a military contingent in St. John’s and walking away from that promise. Nothing has been said about the issue since the 2006 election.

Passing a federal fixed election date law and setting the date of the next election for October of 2009, in an effort to prevent a ruling party from timing elections when it is most favorable to them politically, and then disregarding that law and calling an election anyway.

Campaigning on a platform that included plans for the election of senators and providing a government that would be truly accountable to the public. In his first days in office the PM appointed his campaign manager to the senate, and put him in charge of public works by making him cabinet minister, a cabinet minister who is not really accountable to the public since he does not have to face questions in the House of Commons.

And the list goes on…

Witness to Political Suicide

With an election looming in mid October the swords are beginning to rattle and the battle is heating up to shut out the federal conservatives in Newfoundland and Labrador.

After backtracking on written promises to exclude non-renewable resources from the equalization formula, walking away from a commitment to custodial management of fish stocks on the Grand Banks and the Flemish Cap, stonewalling on a promise to station a battalion at 5 Wing Goose Bay and reportedly telling Premier Danny Williams, “…I don’t need Newfoundland and Labrador in order to win…” it’s no surprise the wheels are beginning to fall off Stephen Harper’s Conservative bandwagon in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Shortly after helping to pass the budget that is estimated to have cost Newfoundland and Labrador $10 billion in resource revenues Conservative MP Norm Doyle was the first to read the writing on the wall and quickly announced that he would be retiring from politics when the next election was called. The Conservative’s other two MPs in the Province, Loyola Hearn and Fabian Manning, were not as astute in their assessment of the impact supporting the Prime Minister would have on their careers and continued in spite of a growing wave of anger against them. This week, for one of them at least, the attempt to weather a pending storm has finally come to an end.

Before the writ has even been dropped reports are beginning to surface that long time Conservative MP and Federal Fisheries Minister, Loyola Hearn, will not be seeking re-election. No doubt the reality of his situation has finally dawned on the Minister and he now realizes that by crawling into bed with Stephen Harper, at the expense of his constituents, he has written his own death warrant and, like Liberal John Efford before him, he has hurled himself onto the political dung heap of Newfoundland and Labrador history.

With two of the three Conservative incumbents in the Province no longer running and with reports of total disarray and disorganization inside the local Conservative election team the possibility of a Conservative shutout in the Province is becoming more of a possibility every day.

With Fabian Manning, who gleefully sat by Stephen Harper’s side clapping and smiling as the PM ridiculed statements that the Province had been wronged by his decision on equalization, the only incumbent running this time around things are not looking good for the Harper team. Party organizers are now admitting that they are having trouble finding anyone to run in several ridings and that they can’t find enough volunteers to run a solid campaign.

The road ahead looks pretty bleak for anyone willing to put their name forward on a Conservative ticket this time out.

The question now is whether Fabian Manning, like Doyle and Hearn before him, will opt out of the fight and simply fade into political oblivion.

My prediction is that he will not.

Fabian Manning, unlike Doyle and Hearn, is a one term MP. He doesn’t have the ability to simply retire with a fat federal pension, an option another term would afford him. As much as Manning would likely love to move out from behind the bullseye directly aimed at his career he’s caught between a rock and a hard place.

Having hitched his future to Stephen Harper’s wagon Manning has burned his bridges on the Newfoundland and Labrador political scene, undermined those who elected him to federal office and in in doing so allowed us all to witness his political suicide.

His short time in office has left Manning with no pension to fall back on, no real influence or connections inside the party and little hope that conservative insiders, either Federal or Provincial, will even return his phone calls should he decide not to run or if he loses this election bid. Not an enviable position to be in but one of his own making.

Fabian Manning’s only hope of avoiding a future that includes regular trips to the local food bank is to soldier on in the hope that by some miracle his constituents will overlook his betrayal and give him a second term. All is not lost though and there may still be one ray of hope flickering for the Manning campaign, however dim.

With the feud between Danny Williams and Stephen Harper raging and Williams’ ABC (Anyone But Conservative) campaign moving into full gear Stephen Harper will be inclined to pull out all the stops to ensure that he is not completely shut out of Newfoundland and Labrador, a situation that would allow Premier Williams to claim victory.

Winning just one riding, Manning’s, will give Harper the ability to spin the result as a clear indication that William’s ABC campaign was a failure because his party simply lost in ridings that didn’t have experienced incumbents running.

There is little doubt this strategy is already being planned inside the Conservative election machine and that all possible resources will be poured into making it happen.

With the mood in Newfoundland and Labrador these days the possibility of this tactic actually succeeding are slim but it’s about the only hope Manning or Harper have of holding onto any kind of foothold and saving face. Then again, it may just work. Who knows how much money and how many promises will be heaped on the voters of the Avalon riding in an effort to buy them off between now and polling day.

Who knows if they’ll fall for it.

Fledgling Federal Party Steps Into Ottawa - NL Dispute

There has been a new turn of events in the ongoing dispute between Newfoundland and Labrador and Ottawa.

This week the leader of the fledgling Newfoundland and Labrador First Party, Tom Hickey, informed the media that his party intends to field a full slate of candidates in the province when the writ is dropped for the next federal election. Hickey also indicated that he is hoping Premier Danny Williams will throw his support behind those candidates if the Premier is serious about shutting out the federal Conservatives in the Province.

It’s an interesting idea and clearly some pretty solid planning has gone into this move by the new party. If the Premier is serious about campaigning against the Harper government he might want to consider the offer extended to him by Mr. Hickey.

Ever since the Harper government backed out of its promise on non-renewable resources and unilaterally changed the Atlantic Accord contract, Williams has been telling everyone in the Province to vote ABC “Anybody but Conservative”. The slogan may be catchy but how valid is the ABC campaign? Where does it leave the voters?

The outcome of the recent provincial election proved beyond doubt that the majority of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are firmly behind the Premier in his battle with Ottawa and in the direction his government is taking locally. The overwhelming percentage of the popular vote Williams received speaks volumes about his ability to “encourage” the people to take a stand and to follow his lead. Now a Newfoundland and Labrador centric party is challenging the Premier to step up to the plate and use that popularity to help send 7 independent voices to Ottawa for the first time in the Province's history.

For Liberal, NDP or Green party supporters William's "ABC" campaign does’nt present much of a problem, they can simply continue to support the party of their choice in the next election, but what about anyone who would have traditionally voted Conservative? How many of them will feel comfortable casting a vote for one of the other parties? How many will be willing to do that and how many long time voters will be satisfied to simply stay at home?

What about the average person who is not a traditional conservative supporter but who feels, for whatever reason, that this time around neither of the other options available is a valid one for them? Where should they park their vote?

The NL First party is hoping to fill the void left in the wake of the Premier’s battle with the fed and are asking him to support their efforts.

The party is lead by a former, and well respected, provincial MHA and cabinet minister who represented the PC party for several years. The party itself espouses many of the same ideals and principles as the Williams government does and the party appears eager to take on the task of tackling a federal campaign.

For disenfranchised Conservative voters, or even the common Joe with no party affiliation, the NL First party might be the answer to their current dilemma, and to the Premier's. If Williams hopes to make his anti-Harper campaign a succesful one he may have found a way.

I’m not out to promote the NL First or any other party, but under the present circumstance NL First may indeed present an option in the next federal election if they do indeed field a slate of candidates answerable only to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador and can gain the Premier's support.

NL First is saying, as many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians believe, that the seven federal MPs the province traditionally sends to Ottawa have never had a strong voice. This they say is because those MPs are part of a large national party answerable to the majority of voters in just about every other province except their own. In other words, national parties, no matter the stripe, will respond to the wishes of the majority in vote rich provinces like Ontario and Quebec, even if those wishes are in direct opposition to the needs of Newfoundland and Labrador. It’s hard to deny the truth in that.

The NL First party has positioned itself, not as a Bloc style separatist movement, but as an independent voice for their Province.

Mr. Hickey recently noted that his party has no intention of being obstructionist if elected. They intend to support or fight each piece of federal legislation on its own merits but always with an eye to how it might harm or benefit Newfoundland and Labrador.

Canada has reached a point in its history where minority governments are likely the norm rather than the exception. With the Liberal, Conservative, NDP, Bloc and Green parties all vying for voter support, and with the latter two parties becoming increasingly popular all the time, the odds of winning a majority government are not what they once were.

The thinking behind hte NL First party is that by electing candidates who are not answerable to anyone outside the province, especially at a time when minority governments are likely, Newfoundland and Labrador will have a better chance of getting its message out, its needs met and perhaps, in the case of a close minority, even holding the balance of power when it comes to voting on key pieces of legislation.

As far as Premier Williams is concerned, he might want to give the NL First a good long look. This new party could provide him with the solution he needs if he hopes to address the concerns of anyone looking for a place to park their vote.

It’s often difficult for voters to stand behind a negative election campaign. If Williams chooses to do so, supporting the NL First party would allow the him to seamlessly and easily move from a negative, “Anybody but…” campaign to a much more positive and constructive one that supports a locally focused party and candidates.

Will Williams get onboard? Only time will tell, but it’s definitely a new twist in the battle between Williams and Harper and one well worth keeping an eye on.