If You Don't Vote You Shouldn't Complain

“If you don’t vote then you shouldn’t complain about what government is doing.”

It’s an old saying that I’ve always seen for what it truly is, total B.S.

That sort of sentiment might serve the interests of politicians who want your vote or who would love nothing more than for the public to shut up and not complain when government runs amok, but to say somebody doesn’t have the right to complain because they didn’t vote is one of the dumbest things I’ve ever heard.

If non voters don’t have the right to complain then who does?

From my perspective anyone who doesn’t vote has a much greater right to complain than those who visit the polls and mark an X for one of the mainstream parties.

Think about it. Voters elect government members to office and in doing so ultimately decide the form and shape a government takes on both sides of the House.

When government neglects the needs of the public, wastes tax dollars and makes decisions that cause great harm to the public good voters should share in some of the blame.

In fact it’s voters who have far less right to complain about the actions of elected officials than anyone else, after all it was voters who put them in office in the first place.

Far too often political spin doctors and the mainstream media talk about the growing problem of low voter turnout at elections and claim it’s the result of disinterest or apathy rather than identifying it for what it is. Either they blindly choose to believe this falsehood or they simply don’t understand what’s happening around them which is entirely possible from what I've seen. Either way they’re dead wrong.

Sure, some citizens have absolutely no interest in politics or elections, those people have always existed, but there are growing numbers of people who have come to the realization that no matter which party or individual is elected the end result will be the same and it won’t likely be good.

Einstein once said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. It’s the non-voters, not the voters, who have adopted those words of wisdom and who have given up on Canada’s elitist and centric political system. Good on them.

Until the system can be changed to better ensure that the public interest is being served, not the parties or the politicians, the act of voting is nothing more than the act of abetting corruption, lies, deceit and fraud.

I’d rather stab myself in the eye with a rusty nail than support any of today's federal mainstream parties so don’t expect to see me at the polls any time soon. Rest assured however that the complaining will continue as it always does. I have every right to complain and plan to use that right as much as possible.

The next time someone says to you, “if you don’t vote you shouldn’t complain” tell them the same thing I will. Here’s a hint, its two words, starting with F and ending with OFF.

Canada, where democracy comes to die

If Stephen Harper used his powers for good instead of evil can you imagine the utopia we might all live in?

Can you imagine what might happen if the Prime Minister spent even a faction of the time addressing the real issues of the Country that he now devotes to his personal political ambitions.

Canada is suffering and will continue to suffer for some time to come but instead of doing anything about it Mr. Harper, in what can only be described as a cold, calculating and heartless political game, has decided to use this opportunity as an excuse to choke off funding to his political adversaries and strengthen his grip on power.

As a result, instead of our elected officials spending their time addressing the real problems facing Canada they are now battling for their political survival while Mr. Harper masterminds his attack to its inevitably successful conclusion: The destruction of all opposition to his rule.

911 was the crisis that gave the Bush administration the excuse they needed to move forward with a pre-planned war in Iraq and to oversee the removal of civil liberties and freedoms through the “Patriot Act”. The Harper government learned much from the U.S. Republican Party. So much that one might suspect Dick Cheney himself of working in the Conservative war room these days.

Thanks to the current financial crisis Stephen Harper now has the 911 he needs to move his political agenda forward.

For many voters the cutting of federal subsidies for political parties might seem reasonable. In fact I agree that it might even be the right thing to do, if handled properly, but doing it under the guise of defending the economy and without giving reasonable notice to the affected parties is nothing more than an opportunistic attack on democracy itself.

The halting of the $1.95 per vote federal subsidy for parties will save taxpayers about 27 million dollars but that’s a drop in the bucket in a multi-billion dollar economy.

The cut itself might not have much of a financial impact but doing it this soon after an expensive election, without warning and without giving the opposition parties a transition period that would allow them to adjust and evolve is like dropping an atomic bomb on your enemies.

This cut will all but silence political opposition in Canada for years to come and the only people who want to do that are within the Conservative Party of Canada.

These cuts will essentially destroy the ability of the Liberals, NDP, Bloc and Greens to wage any kind of campaign in the foreseeable future. In fact it might even lead to the total collapse and disappearance of one or more of the parties and almost certainly prevent new political parties from ever forming.

Some analysts have referred to the Harper move as a gutsy “roll of the dice” but I disagree. In fact, just he opposite is true. This comes across to me as the act of an intelligent though gutless individual who doesn’t have the intestinal fortitude to face his opponents head on.

No matter how many times I run the possible outcomes through my feeble mind I can’t find a single scenario that would see this backfire on the Conservative party. I can, on the other hand, find many that will be disastrous to their opponents and to democracy itself.

If one of the opposition parties decides to vote in favor of this action, or even to sit out some members so it can “passively” get through the House, it will mean that several of the opposition parties will find themselves teetering on the brink of bankruptcy, if not pushed over the edge, by losing between 60% and 80% of their funding.

This might not worry some voters who think the mainstream parties should raise their own money, but consider if you will that cutting off this funding will almost guarantee that small “grassroots” parties just starting up and hoping to bring a fresh new voice to Canadian politics will be crushed into silence before they can even get out of the starting gate.

It will also mean that only those with deep pockets can take part in the political debate of the federation and that’s a reality that should concern everyone.

In this scenario the Harper Conservatives are the only winners.

If, on the other hand, the opposition parties decide to topple the Conservative government they have two options before them.

The first is forcing another election. An election Canadian’s don’t want and the opposition parties can’t afford just 5 weeks after the polls closed on the last campaign.

The only party in the financial position to fight another election today is the Conservative party.

With the opposition parties nearly broke and because the Conservatives will be able to claim their adversaries forced an election because they felt “entitled to their entitlements” Mr. Harper will surely walk away with a majority.

At the end of the day, with the opposition parties even more in debt and their coffers emptier than they are now, Mr. Harper will simply re-introduce the funding cut and totally wipe his opponents off the political map.

In this scenario the Harper Conservatives are the only winners.

A third option is for the opposition parties to topple the government and form some sort of loose coalition to lead the federation.

This move will allow Mr. Harper to sit in opposition while his opponents are thrust into governing at a time when the economy is collapsing, job losses are growing, businesses are shutting their doors and deficits are mounting.

This scenario will see the fallout of Canada’s economic woes rest not on Conservative shoulders but squarely on the shoulders of the Liberals, NDP and Bloc equally. The Harper Conservatives meanwhile will be free to attack from the opposition benches while never getting the least bit sullied by the economic mess.

After a year (at best) of taking a political beating any coalition will likely fall apart, Canadians will end up back at the polls and Mr. Harper will be free to bill himself as a knight riding to the rescue on a shining white horse to claim a majority victory. (At which time he will once again simply re-introduce the election funding cut and strangle his indebted adversaries to death).

In this scenario the Harper Conservatives are the only winners.

It may be a brilliant political move but unfortunately the people who will suffer the most are the ones who have the least to gain from all this political wrangling, but everything to lose, the voters.

They are also, by the way, the last thing anyone in Ottawa is thinking about these days.

Once the political intrigue is over on Parliament Hill the economy will still be in the toilet and the smaller provinces or regions at the edges of the federation will still be neglected, abused and forgotten. As an added bonus however, any hope of nurturing a new or different political perspective in Canada will be dead once and for all and the Conservatives will have achieved their ambition of ruling with an unquestioned iron fist for many years to come.

Welcome to Canada, where democracy comes to die.

Political Heaven or Democratic Hell?

Not so far into the future the day finally arrives when Stephen Harper shuffles off this mortal coil and, as we all must, arrives at the pearly gates to learn his fate for all of eternity.

'Welcome to forever,' says kindly old St. Peter as he greets the one time Prime Minister in a Fatherly sort of way.

“Thank-you St. Peter” the former Mr. Harper responds. “I’m glad to see I made it to Heaven. Then again I knew I would after so many years of public service to my fellow man.”

“Not so fast,” replies St. Peter. “I have orders from the Big Guy Himself in how I should dispense with your special case.”

“Since you have spent your lifetime working in a democratic environment, where people are free to choose their future as they see fit, I’ve been ordered to give you a choice rarely offered. You have a choice between spending an eternity in Heaven or in Hell,” St. Peter says. “It’s your call.”

“Well, that’s an easy choice,” replies Harper, “I choose Heaven of course”.

“Unfortunately it’s not that easy,” continues St. Peter, “you see all you think you know about the afterlife comes from what you’ve read or heard from others while on earth. In order to make sure you have a full understanding of the choice placed before you God has ordered that you spend one day in Hell and one day in Heaven. Only after you have done this will you be able to make an informed decision on your future.”

'But I've made up my mind. I want to be in Heaven,' Harper replies.'

I'm sorry. But we have our rules,' Peter interjects. And, with that he escorts Harper to an elevator where he goes down, down, down...all the way to Hell.

When the doors open Harper finds himself standing at the edge of a lush golfcourse. The sun is shining in a cloudless sky. The temperature is a perfect 23 degrees. In the distance is the most stately and beautiful club house he has ever seen.

Standing near him are dozens of people he has known and worked closely with in the past. All of whom have pre-deceased him of course.

Brian Mulroney smiles knowingly and waves him over for a chat.

Ryan Sparrow is lining up an easy 2 foot putt while past cabinet ministers and caucus members look on dressed in the most expensive clothing, sipping cool drinks and simply enjoying the perfection of a marvelous day.

As Harper approaches, one by one they begin to turn toward him with welcoming smiles and warm handshakes the likes of which he never experienced in all of his years on earth.

Eagerly they surround him and begin to reminisce about the good times and how they helped shape the future of an entire Country. Eventually they invite him to join them in a round of golf where he discovers that he simply cannot miss a shot no matter how difficult it might seem. He finishes with a score that would be the envy of even the best PGA pro.

Near the day’s end they all retire to the club house where they dine luxuriously on the juiciest Nova Scotia lobster and Alberta beef ever to grace a dining plate, all washed down the most expensive French wine which flows throughout the meal like tap water.

Finally the Devil himself arrives for an after dinner cognac and personally offers his guest a snifter to finish off the evening.

“Really I can’t, says Harper. I’ve imposed enough.

“Don’t be so foolish my friend”, says the Devil. “This is hell. Despite what you may have heard to the contrary we are all friends here. We look out for one another. You can eat and drink to your hearts delight. You’ve led a long and eventful life and you deserve a break. It’s your turn to reap the benefits of all your hard work. Believe me it just gets better from here.”

Harper takes the cognac and sips it slowly as he listens to a joke or two as told by the Devil himself, realizing that, in spite of his reputation, the prince of the underworld is really not such a bad fellow after all.

Before he knows it, it's time to go. Everyone gives the former Prime Minister a big hug and waves as he hesitantly steps onto the elevator and heads upward toward Heaven.When the doors open, he is once again greeted by St. Peter who informs him that it’s now time to visit Heaven.

Once inside the pearly gates Harper is left to hang out with large groups of honest, good natured and well meaning people for a full 24 hours. During that time the residents of Heaven sit around in flowing robes and simply enjoy each other's company while talking about beauty, philosophy and the daily activities of the mere mortals below them.

There is not a stiff drink to be had, no lush golf course to play on and no fancy clothes to wear. Yes, the food is good but it’s by no means lobster or prime steak and the worst part of all is the fact that most of the residents appear to be from a poorer class than he would prefer to associate himself with.

He doesn't see anybody he knows and isn't even treated like someone special!

With the day done, St. Peter returns and says, 'Well Stephen, you've spent a day in Hell and a day in Heaven. Now must choose where you want to live for all of eternity. Please pick your future."

With the 'Deal or No Deal' theme music playing softly in the background, the former Mr. Harper reflects on his fortunes for a minute or so. Then answers:

“Well, I would never have thought I'd say this -- I mean, Heaven has been delightful and all --but I really think I belong in Hell with all of my friends.”

“I thought you might feel that way”, replies St. Peter who gently escorts him to the elevator where once again he descends down, down,down, all the way to Hell.

When the doors open this time he finds himself not on a lush golf course but instead in the middle of a barren scorched earth covered with garbage and toxic industrial waste. A place every bit as desolate as the hottest Arab desert, but worse, far, far worse.

The former Harper is horrified to see all of his friends, dressed in filthy rags and chained together, picking up roadside rubbish and dead animals before placing the vile refuse in black plastic bags. They are groaning and moaning in pain, their faces and hands blackened with putrid grease and grime. As he stands there speechless the Devil comes over and puts an arm around his shoulder.

“I don't understand,” stammers a shocked Harper, “Yesterday when I was here there was a golf course and a club-house and we ate lobster and drank cognac. We lazed around and had a great time. Now there's just a wasteland and nothing is as it seemed back then”

The Devil looks at him, smiles slyly and purrs, “Didn’t St. Peter tell you that God wanted you to exercise your democratic right based on freedom of choice?”

“Well, yes, but things seemed so different yesterday, this is not what I wanted”, Harper whines.

“Oh, yes but you see yesterday we were Campaigning for your support. Now that you’ve made your decision it’s back to business as usual. Thanks for your vote by the way.”

Top 10 Post Election Harper Comments

Top ten comments made by Stephen Harper to his staff in the week since the federal election.

10 "Get me the details behind the Dion 5 point plan I crapped all over during the election. That thing sounds pretty good."

9 "Hey, a new report says Ontario has the best transit system in Canada and Newfoundland has the worst. Make sure we get more federal funding into the Ontario transit system as soon as possible folks."

8 "Now that we’ve been elected again, can we spend another eighteen months calling ourselves “Canada’s new government” like we did last time?"

7 "I don’t care what I said about deficits. The election is over isn’t it?"

6 "So, any good ideas on how we can buy some votes in Quebec this time around?"

5 "I just got a letter of congratulations from Danny Williams. Can someone please file it under F&*K YOU for me?"

4 "Find out who the next Liberal leader will be and start putting together the attack ads now so we can start the character assassination at least a year before the next election."

3 "Someone start working on the weakest links inside the other parties. I want a dozen potential floor crossers in my office by Monday morning."

2 "Someone get Ryan Sparrow on the line and tell that little spin jockey to get back to work. The coast is clear."

1 "Oh man, I can’t believe they fell for it a second time."

Newfoundland and Labrador Makes its Election Choice

Ever since the election results rolled in last week the local media in Newfoundland and Labrador has been buzzing with the incessant pleas and moans of anguish from a handful of grumblers, all aiming to resolve the provinces lack of representation in a yet to be announced Harper cabinet.

Give me a break and climb down off (or maybe out of) the pot will ya!

The local call in radio shows are a twitter, editorial after editorial has been written and even the Mayor of St. John’s has weighed in with his two cents on the issue. The incessant buzzing is starting to sound like someone kicked a hornet's nest and, to say it as politely as I can, it's driving me freakin nuts!

It's as though everyone with ready access to a phone or a keyboard, yours truly definatly not included, suddenly woke up last Wednesday morning quaking in their boots and crapping their tidy whities because they heard rumors that Peter MacKay might be named as the province’s representative in cabinet.

“We deserve better”, they say.

“Harper can appoint a senator and name that person to represent us, anything less will show his contempt” others bawl.

“The sky is falling the sky is falling”, cries Chicken Little, or was that St. John's Mayor Dennis O’Keefe?

Personally I say, "Whooppee Ding. Who the hell cares?"

I realize the hue and cry is not coming from the majority of stable minded people in the province, but from the vocal minority. Unfortunately it isn't coming across that way in the media and instead is making it look like everyone in the province is suddenly living in fear after sending such a strong message to Ottawa.

It's as though voters suddenly woke up from a hypnotic trance and realizing what they've done want are all cry baby about it. The next thing you know they'll be calling for an investigation of where Danny Williams' gold pocket watch was on the evening of October 13th.

Yes, thanks to a few weak kneed loud mouths the people of Newfoundland and Labrador are once again being portrayed as a pack of whiners.

Don’t get me wrong, I agree that Mr. Harper is capable of naming someone from Newfoundland and Labrador to cabinet just as he did when he appointed a resident of Quebec to the Senate and made him a Cabinet Minister.

I also believe that if Mr. Harper decides to name Peter MacKay to the post it will be for the sole purpose of sending a strong message of retaliation back to Newfoundland and Labrador voters.

Doing so would ensure that the message, “Don’t F$%K with me again”, comes through loud and clear to all in ear shot.

Putting all that aside, I’m personally willing to live with whatever the Prime Minister’s decision might be on this and I believe the silent majority of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are as well.

It's not because we've all suddenly decided to bury the hatchet, as Premier Williams appears willing to do, but because it's the adult action to take.

It’s the vocal minority that ticks me off, the rest of us are fine thank-you very much.

Long before electin day voters heard Conservative candidates warn them almost daily that they would have no representation in caucus if they didn’t elect a member to the government side.

Public discussion of the pros and cons took place almost daily in the media and were easily seen (or heard) by anyone with access to a radio, T.V., newspaper or the internet.

It changed nothing.

On October 14th Newfoundland and Labrador voters made a conscious decision to expel any remnants of the Conservative party from the province, regardless of the repercussions.

That decision was made, we made it together, so lets stop the whining already!!!

I mean come on folks, to tell the truth we all know for a fact that Newfoundland and Labrador had no representation in the last parliament. Isn’t that why we turfed the Conservatives out of here in the first place?

In reality, with a population of just over 500,000 and only 7 seats in Ottawa, we haven’t had any real level of representation in the federal government since entering Canada in 1949 and we never will under the existing system.

When it comes to a pissing contest in this federation the larger numbers of seats in provinces like Alberta, Quebec, Ontario and even Nova Scotia trump our pitiful seat count every time and as a result Newfoundland and Labrador invariably ends up down wind of the winner and a hot stream of... well you get the picture.

If Stephen Harper wants to make a pathetic attempt to placate voters in Newfoundland and Labrador, perhaps with an eye to gaining support in the province the next time around, he may decide to appoint someone from this province to the post.

He may instead try to meet on some middle ground by appointing a less distasteful representative than Mr. MacKay. Perhaps he may call on his newest MP from PEI believing, in some odd way, that it makes sense for an islander to represent other islanders, (no offense to the folks in Labrador, but you know how the minds of politicians work).

If, on the other hand, Mr. Harper is still in a fighting mood he might just go ahead and appoint Peter MacKay, or someone even worse, to take on the Newfoundland and Labrador file.

Either way, WHO THE HELL CARES?!!

I don’t believe any of us should care one whit if the Prime Minister appoints someone to represent the province at all. I also don’t believe we have the right or the moral grounds to ask for that representation, let alone demand it as some people are now doing.

The voters of Newfoundland and Labrador clearly decided to reject the Conservative party and to intentionally exclude the province from any voice within the current government, which includes the cabinet. Why then should anyone be yelling for representation now?

The election is over. The arguements were made long ago on this. The message was sent to Ottawa. What will be will be.

GROW UP and MOVE ON!!!

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.

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.

Atlantic Accord Revisited

Hi all,

I know that just today I told everyone I wouldn't be posting anything new until after the provincial election, but I just found something in my own web site statistics that is too curious to overlook. It may mean nothing but then again...

You see I sometimes check my site's statistics to see how many visitors have come by, what part of the Country they hail from and so on. Don't worry, the statistics don't tell me who you are, just a few general facts that are somtimes interesting, especially today.

With Stephen Harper posturing for a federal election rumors surfaced last week in Nova Scotia that Bill Casey, the Conservative castaway who had the cubes to stand up to the PM over the Atlantic Accord, might run for the party again, if they are willing to make amends over the issue.
Of course we all know the Harper government has about as much support in Atlantic Canada as a spanish trawler on the Grand Banks, so with an election looking more and more likely the question is if the Conservatives taking another look at the Atlantic Accord debacle in the hopes of regaining some ground.

Maybe they are.

Today in my statistics I found two very interesting entries.

The first was the recording of a visitor who came to us via the parliamentary server and stayed on for nearly 3 hours. This isn't that odd since Big Brother usually stops by for a visit, but the length of the visit was a little out of the ordinary.

What was a even stranger was the following entry.



As you can see, some industrious little beaver at the Federal Finance Department also paid Web Talk a visit and interestingly they stumbled on the site while searching Google for: Cost Wade Locke Equalization Cap.

Go ahead and perform that search for yourself and see what you get. Essentially, for the most part, it's a bunch of material on economist Wade Locke's assessment of the damage done thanks to Ottawa's callous actions on the Atlantic Accord.

It would seem that months after side stepping its obligations on the Atlantic Accord and dismissing the concerns of the provinces involved, with an election looming, someone at the Department of Finance is, for whatever reason, clearly interested in the situation and the numbers.

It may mean nothing but it certainly falls into the category of -

Things that make you go Hmmmmm......

Conservative Smoke and Mirrors

Does Stephen Harper really think he has anyone fooled?

No matter what he might say about wanting to govern under his current mandate the Conservatives are clearly in election mode and Harper himself is practically salivating at the idea of going to the polls.

The timing for an election couldn’t be better for the PM and his rhetoric to the contrary is nothing more than Conservative smoke and mirrors.

The recent elections in Quebec were proof positive of waning support for the Bloc and Liberals there. The Liberals have yet to recover from the sponsorship scandal. Stephane Dion is floundering around with no focus or direction and, as one pundit recently put it, the Liberal party is so screwed up they’re actually stabbing each other in the front instead of the back.

For over a year and a half the Harper Conservatives have been playing to the masses by presenting themselves as a middle of the road party. As a result most people are beginning to forget their far right philosophy. It’s an image that has been carefully cultivated and one that will serve Harper well in an election. It’s doubtful however that the hard line conservative views of the party are really very far under the surface.

As comedian and political satirist Rick Mercer pointed out recently, since taking office the Conservatives have moved much further to the left than most of their bible thumping financial supporters ever thought they would, yet those supporters are still donating to the party in a big way. It’s enough to make one wonder if those supporters know something the rest of us don’t.

Harper can drone on all he want’s about not wanting an election, he has to say as much after having set an election date in 2009, but that doesn’t mean the PM won’t engineer a non-confidence vote over the Throne Speech this month or over its contents at a later time.

In a press conference held this week, apparently for no other purpose than to “chat” with the media, Harper noted that even if the Throne Speech passes, a Commons vote relating to any of the initiatives it contains would constitute a vote of non-confidence. He also said he was not impressed with the demands of the opposition parties. In other words Harper is setting up the demise of his own government at the time most beneficial to his personal goals.

One of those goals, beyond any ambition he may have to win another mandate, is clearly finding a way to resolve the ongoing political stalemate over the Afghanistan mission.

For months the PM has said he would seek a consensus of Parliament before extending Canada’s combat role in the war torn country. Now, after flying in the president of Afghanistan and the Minister of Education to talk with the media about how well the mission is going, Harper is saying he only requires a vote of 50% + 1 to extend that mission. A far cry from the sort of consensus spoken of in the past.

Harper's actions and words are those of a man hell bent on maintaining Canada’s combat role no matter what his government's official line might be.

In the current political environment, with the Liberal party in tatters and the Bloc severely weakened, Harper’s strategists clearly see an opportunity to form a majority government. With a majority firmly in hand you can bet your bottom dollar Canadian troops won’t be trading in their artillery shells or rifles for aid packages and blankets in February of 2009. In fact it’s doubtful they’ll be doing it for a long, long time after that.

If it's any consolation though, should Harper be successful in his bid to extend Canada's combat mission in Afghanistan, with the war machine in the U.S. in full swing the PM may be able to save a few dollars by getting a good deal on body bags from his friends down south.

Newfoundland & Labrador Leader’s Debate

The leaders of the PC, Liberal and NDP parties participated in an election debate at NTV studios on Tuesday evening. With two weeks remaining before voters go to the polls this was the only opportunity for the public to see all three go head to head over the issues.

The opening remarks of the three party leaders were designed to deliver a targeted message and they did just that. While NDP leader, Lorraine Michael, and PC leader, Danny Williams, both appeared calm and composed, Liberal leader Gerry Reid often stumbled over his words, looked tired and came across as very uncomfortable in front of the camera. As one viewer noted, “…he looked like he just woke up and someone hustled him behind the podium before he could wipe the sleep from his eyes”.

While Reid spoke of his party being a potential winner in the upcoming election, the NDP leader immediately positioned her party as the right choice to form a strong and effective opposition. It was a position that smartly conveyed her understanding of the realities of the current political climate and allowed her to effectively take a swipe at the Liberal party. A clear and perhaps effective move to woo voters from the Liberal camp.

The polls show Williams’ popularity in the province at well above 70% leading into this campaign, leaving him with little room to improve his standing during the debate. The leaders of the two other parties meanwhile had hoped to use the debate as a springboard to make up some much needed ground on the Tories.

During the debate Williams accomplished his objectives by holding his ground and getting his message out while the NDP leader, Lorraine Michael, came across as smooth, composed, and calm. This potentially made her the biggest winner of the evening by affording the NDP an opportunity to siphon off some support from her clearly unprepared Liberal counterpart.

During an early exchange the Liberal leader almost appeared to be reaching out to the NDP in an attempt to have Michael enter into a sort of “tag team” against Williams. Michael proved too politically savvy to fall for the tactic and instead countered by going on the offensive against Reid, proving that while she has only led her party for about a year, she clearly understands the realities of the situation. With the Tories riding high in the polls, any additional support her party hopes to gain will have to come from inside the Liberal camp. Michael’s performance, and Reid’s lack of composure, may have served to help the NDP in that cause.

At one point the Liberal leader opened himself up to attack by broaching the topic of Newfoundland and Labrador’s dilapidated schools and blaming the Williams government for the situation. His statement opened the door for the Tory leader to point out that the schools did not fall apart in the short four years the time Williams' government has been in office but rather over a much longer period of time, a reference to the fact that the Liberal party had previously been in power for more than a decade.

From a technical perspective the debate was poorly organized and the format often allowed extended periods when the leaders, primarily Williams and Reid, shouted or talked over one another making it difficult for viewers to understand what either man was saying. While this sort of exchange also took place during periods when the NDP leader was speaking, overall her exchanges were much more civilized and effective.

During the closing remarks Williams and Michael both spoke clearly and calmly. Michael focused on her party and what it could bring to the legislature while Williams stood on his record as premier and invoked the spirit of patriotism and autonomy he is most known for. Liberal leader, Gerry Reid, once again came across as being unprepared and uncomfortable while continuing to stumble over his words as he had done during the entire evening. An evening that was clearly not a good one for the Liberal leader.

How Will You Vote in The Next Federal Election?

Speculation is already starting that Canada could be into another federal election before Christmas. The Bloc has presented the Harper government with several non-negotiable demands they want addressed in the October throne speech.

The Liberals are facing a situation where they may either have to go to an election, in order to force all their troops to fall in line behind Dion, or head into another leadership convention.

The NDP already see themselves in a position to pick up some seats thanks the the momentum the gained in a recent Quebec by-election.

Stephen Harper appears to be willing to take on the opposition parties thanks to largely consistent, if not stellar, polling numbers.

The Greens don't have a say in an election call but their new found popularity and the Canada's inaction on the environment means they must be factored into any election strategy.

If an election is called, the Question facting Newfoundland and Labrador voters is which party should they support.

All of federal parties govern by playing the numbers game, caving in to the area of the Country where they want more seats, rather than doing what's best for the public in various parts of this diverse nation. Usually this practice leaves smaller provinces like NL to fend for themselves while desperately trying to fight off federal legislation that will actually harm the them.

Deciding who to vote for is a complex issue.

Just by examining the track records of recent governments (let's put a boat load of historical grievances aside for a moment), you have to ask yourself, should I vote for the party that tried to screw us on the Atlantic Accord but didn't get away with it, the party that succeeded in screwing us on the Atlantic Accord or the ones that never had a chance to screw us?

Or is there another option?

Maybe when this election rolls around we should put aside all the past actions of the various parties and simply focus on their philosophies, political leanings and so on.

Rather than try to outline these in words, perhaps the following versions of the Canadian Flag (as sent to me by a regular visitor to Web Talk) say it better. As someone once said, "A picture is worth a thousand words".


Green Party Flag:





NDP Flag:


Liberal Flag:



Conservative Flag:


It paints a pretty scary picture doesn't it? But who knows, perhaps this time around there may be another option to consider.

The NL-First Party Flag:

Liberal Verbally Attacks Voters and Supports Tory Candidate

Politics makes strange bedfellows and in Newfoundland and Labrador the evidence to back that statement up has never been clearer. This is definitely one for the "Would you Believe” files.

Even though newly minted Liberal party candidate, Simon Lono, is running for a seat in the district of St. John’s North he still found time before hitting the campaign trail to cast a vote during the Conservative nomination race in neighboring St. John’s East.

As a Liberal candidate Lono has been busy this week defending his decision to take part in the Conservative nomination process and in helping Conservative candidate Ed Buckingham win that party's nomination. The question on many voter's minds is whether Lono voted for the Conservative candidate he thought would best represent the district or the one he felt the Liberal candidate in the riding had the best chance of winning against.

This isn’t the first time Lono has exhibited questionable judgment over the past year. In May he offended many Bloggers at the site, Web Talk – Newfoundland and Labrador, by verbally assaulting people who didn't agree with his point of view.

At the time contributors to the political Blog were discussing a refusal by the Globe and Mail to publish an editorial response by Premier Danny Williams. Williams had written the paper after a column appeared that was very critical of his province. While most people visiting the Blog site thought the Globe should have allowed the Premier to respond, Lono took exception to those expressing that view.

The following is a direct quote from Lono published on the site:

“…This is a snake's nest of hateful venomous neo-nationalist navel-gazing presented by a gang of the NL equivalent of Archie Bunkers who blame the world for their problems and can't figure out why a red-blooded white-skinned proud patriotic NL'er can't get an even break in a cruel and contemptuous world as you sit in your comfy chair, read the Independent, listen to Great Big Sea on the stereo and drink a bottle of Screech in your fisherman's sweater in the big plastic-covered house in the suburbs of Commonwealth Avenue.

It's the same kind of professional NL'er who wears the Pink-White-Green to cocktail parties with your buddies from MUN res - ready to defend the outports but secretly grateful for not living there because it's too far from George Street, the Mall and the LSPU.

Shallow, hollow, empty, negative pseudo-pride with no motivating force of expression other than greedy grasping demands for endless compensation for historical grievance…”.

The tirade and seemingly unstable actions of the Liberal’s new star candidate were further displayed when, after being confronted about his attack and pressured for an apology, by contributors from across the province and around the world, Lono refused to respond. Instead he later quietly deleted every comment he had posted to that point in time, but not until after several quick fingered visitors, and the Blog moderator (yours truly), had time to make copies of his statement.

After Lono decided to run for the Liberal nomination copies of his comments were sent directly to the leadership of the Liberal party and party leader Gerry Reid. To date there has been no response from the party itself however Simon Lono did respond directly via email with the statement, “You’re a fruitloop”.

No doubt about it folks, the future of the Newfoundland and Labrador Liberal party is in good hands.

Bell Offers Pick and Pay - Why Can't the Candidates?

With the provincial elecion now in full swing the Liberals have released their platform document. It's a little later than the Tories, but better late than never as they say. There is still no sign of the NDP platform document but some policy direction is coming out through the media and is available on their website. It's expected that the NDP Orange Book will be out later this week.

Information on all three parties and their plans can be found here:

Tories: http://www.pcparty.nf.net/blueprint2007.pdf

Liberals: http://www.nlliberals.ca/press/platformchapters.pdf

NDP: http://www.nl.ndp.ca/

For those of you who don't have the time, patience or interest to wade through endless pages of rhetoric in search of key points, (though you really should) here is a Coles Notes synopsis.

The Tories, Liberals and NDP all have some very interesting ideas, in fact it seems that all three parties have risen to the task of trying to win voters over. Unfortunately, as a friend of mine noted just today, while all three parties have identified a fair bit of spending on various programs none have clearly identifed the overall cost of their initiatives or how they would be funded.

All three parties are offering savings for the unwashed masses, ideas for enhancements to services and their direction for development in the province.

While all parties are offering some good ideas others are highly questionable. This is especially true of the Liberals who intend to provide a wealth of tax cuts while going heavy on program spending. I'm not sure how fiscally responsible that is but then again, as I said before, since none of the parties are providing a view to the overall cost of their plans it's hard to say which will ideas are valid and which will simply pile up more debt for our kids to pay off.

The scariest thing for me appeard in the Liberal platform. It has to do with their approach to offshore oil and gas development.

While the Liberals are offering up some interesting ideas around how to disperse wealth from the offshore, the doucment also states, and I quote:

"Industry (oil and gas) has often stated their concern that the province continues to change its position in negotiations and that they cannot be certain what the policy and royalty framework of the provincial government will be from one day to the next...."

The Liberal solution: provide stable and competitive policy and royalty framworks, nogotiate in good faith on Hebron and Hibernia South and, "...not take an equity stake in offshore oil and gas projects, but would instead focus on generating maximum benefit from a revamped royalty regime..."

On the surface this may sound good to some poeple, especially those concerned about the potential risk of investing in developments directly, but consider what it really means.

It means that if the Liberal Party is elected on October 9th, Gerry Reid's new government will respond to oil company concerns about uncertanty over royalties and the provincial position by once again changing the provinces royalty regime and the position. It's an interesting approach.

It also means that the Hebron MOU, signed just a few weeks ago, will be torn up and the entire negotiation process will have to start all over again. Think about it, if Gerry Reid intends to walk away from an equity stake and negotiate a totally new royalty regime what else can it mean? It's the only possible outcome.

Don't get me wrong, I see some really good ideas in the Liberal platform, just as I do in those of the Tories and NDP. Unfortunately I also see glaring omissions in all three and, specifically in the case of the Liberals, some questionable and worrisome plans.

Too bad voters can't pick and choose the best ideas from all three documents and turf the rest. Sort of like a "pick and pay" election. Now there's a concept that might actually get voters a little excited.

Rating the Party's Election Platforms.

Well folks, the Newfoundland and Labrador election is underway. Who knows what the next few weeks will bring but one thing is clear from a quick web search today.

The Williams (PC) team seems the most organized and on the ball with addressing key election issues. Everything from Culture to Education, Energy to Elder Care, Labrador Issues to Health. All in all there are some pretty good intiatives peppered throughout their platform document, if they are implemented that is.

As I mentioned, a quick web scan today led me to a crisp new copy of the PC Blue Book:

http://www.pcparty.nf.net/blueprint2007.pdf

The Reid (Liberal) team looks to be playing catch up and scrambling for anything to grab onto. That perception wasn't helped by seeing Gerry Reid on a fishing boat yesterday. Maybe he was looking for a life preserver.

The Liberal "Red Sheet of Paper" appears to be little more than a press release that promises to reduce licence renewal fees from $180 to $140, something also identifed in the PC Blue Book.

Also, as a quick aside for the folks running the Liberal web site, you might want to update some of your outdated links and actually put someting under the link that is supposed to direct someone to your platform document. Well, for what it's worth, here is the Liberal one pager:

http://www.liberal.nf.net/News_Releases_2007/sept_17_reid_drivers.htm

The Michael (NDP) team has only one player and little chance of scoring. Why do I say this?

On the NDP site I found absolutely nothing. Apparently the last update on the party's site was on the 14th. Nothing since.

Oddly enough the description of the site when I searched Google still says the party is led by Jack Harris. Might want to fix that folks.

No Link provided (Nothing to really link to)

Well, that's how things look on the first full day of the Campaign. With the PC's at an over 70% approval rating and a broad platform firmly in place this could be a long hard few weeks for the Liberals and NDP unless they can get their act together, something they don't seem to be able to do.

It makes me wonder how well these folks might run a province if they can't even run a party or campaign efficiently.

In closing, just as a reference to my previous post (see below), thus far none of the parties have directly commented on the potential for becoming a major part of an Atlantic Gateway Initiative, though some cryptic references to economic diversification and the like were made in the Blue Book. I guess we'll have to wait for Gerry Reid and Lorainne Michael to find a printing press and a webmaster before we find out if they have something to say about that.

By the way, if the Liberals or NDP actually have online copies of their platforms and I missed them, please let me know. I went to the web sites of all three parties and had no success finding anything Red or Orange to present.

Sad but true.

Bio - The Provincial Party Leaders

With an election call expected in the province on Monday, this week the Canadian Press ran a short profile on each of the province's mainstream party leaders, Lorrain Michael, Gerry Reid and Danny Williams.

Though the biographies only scratch the surface of the three leaders they do provide some interesting insights into the candidates. I’ve reprinted them here in their entirety.

Lorraine Michael:

Born: March 27, 1943, in St. John's.
Family: Single.

Education: A former nun, she has a degree in education from Memorial University of Newfoundland, and a master's of divinity from the University of Toronto.

Work history: Worked as a high school teacher and principal in various parts of Newfoundland. Served as director of the Office of Social Action in St. John's where she represented the Roman Catholic Archdiocese. Served as head of the women and work committee with the National Action Committee on Status Women and executive director of Women in Resource Development Committee.

Political history: She describes herself as a feminist and committed activist for "gender and racial social and economic justice." Elected leader of the Newfoundland and Labrador New Democratic Party on May 28, 2006.

Quote: "All of our candidates are new, fresh people who have not been part of the political scene. What I'm hearing people say to them ... is that we do need new faces, we need to ... clean the place up."

Gerry Reid:

As a young boy growing up in the small fishing outport of Carbonear, N.L., Liberal Leader Gerry Reid learned early on he would sometimes have to make do with what little he had.

His father was often away at sea, working as a cook on schooners that traversed the Atlantic. He died of a stroke, when Reid was only 12, leaving his mother to raise the family. "We lived a meagre existence, but we didn't know it because most people were the same at the time," Reid recalled in an interview.

"It was difficult ... you had to be creative on how you were going to raise six kids and get them all educated."

Even Reid's decision to seek a post-secondary education left his mother worrying over how he would pay the bills.

"When I decided to go to university, my mother thought it was a bit naive," he said.

But his time at Memorial University served as the foundation on which he would base his political career. While studying education and philosophy, Reid became president of the campus Liberal party.

After graduating, he juggled a teaching career along with a three-year term as a municipal councillor on a small island off Newfoundland's northeast coast.

In 1996, after working as an aide to former fisheries minister Walter Carter, Reid challenged and defeated his boss for the Liberal party nomination in one of Newfoundland's largest constituencies.

He quietly worked his way up the government ranks, taking over as minister of fisheries in 2001.

The Tory landslide victory in October 2003 left the Liberals in turmoil. Infighting within the caucus led to a change at the top that eventually saw Reid, the party's interim leader, take over the Liberal reins for good.

He didn't even want the job at first, despite widespread support within the party.

"It's just like they say in The Sopranos," says the 53-year-old.

"Just when you think you're out, they pull you back in."

His big challenge now is to fend off the government of Premier Danny Williams, which has enjoyed soaring popularity during its four years in office.

He believes his key to success - which some observers define as the party's survival in the Oct. 9 election - lies in his ability to relate to the common man.

After work on Fridays, he's often spotted quaffing a pint with friends at a British-style pub in downtown St. John's.

"I've always considered myself the underdog," he says with a grin.

"We'll continue to fight."

Danny Williams:

Danny Williams was on holiday, strolling along a sun swept beach in the Caribbean when he decided to dive into the circus of Newfoundland politics seven years ago.

It was his version of Pierre Trudeau's walk in the snow. "I was in Jamaica, so it was a walk in the sand," the Conservative premier laughs in an interview. "I just got up one morning - this is quite truthful - looked in the mirror and said, 'If I don't do this, what am I going to say in 10 years time? Will I say you never had the guts to do it?"'

In truth, Williams was seen as a great hope for the Tories since the early 1980s, when party supporters quietly courted him in an effort to succeed then-premier Brian Peckford.

Since he was acclaimed party leader in January 2001, the political pugilist, former criminal lawyer and ex-cable TV mogul has taken great care to portray himself as Newfoundland and Labrador's Everyman with the common touch.

He whips around town in a Dodge Viper, one of several high-priced vehicles he drives, but has a weakness for fast food.

He earned the nickname "Danny Millions" after selling Cable Atlantic for $232 million in 2000, but now donates his $165,000 legislative salary to a local charitable foundation.
He is a Rhodes Scholar, but can't resist picking a brawl that would otherwise be unbecoming for a man of his pedigree.

During a strike that threatened to disrupt a local American Hockey League game, Williams, an avid fan, challenged St. John's Mayor Andy Wells to a fight, declaring he needed a "good shit-knocking."

The two outspoken politicians are now allies.

But Williams insists he detests engaging in the scraps for which Newfoundland's political landscape is renowned.

"If I was able to devote 100 per cent of my time to doing what I should be doing in the Office of Premier, I think the people of the province would be much better off," he said.

"But you spend at least 50 per cent of your time dealing with the negativity that comes from all sources, whether it's from the media, whether it's from the opposition."

His competitive spirit and love for law came from his father, a criminal lawyer and tennis player in Newfoundland's sports hall of fame. His mother, a long-time Tory supporter, had him handing out brochures for former prime minister John Diefenbaker's campaign when he was a child.
"I think it whetted my appetite," Williams says.

Politics has also dominated his life. Few decisions of any importance are made before landing on his cluttered desk.

"It's 24/7. It never leaves you," says the 58-year-old.

"There's never a full day off unless you actually take a vacation, and even then, when I'm away from the province, there's not a day goes by that I don't have some contact with this office or with members of my cabinet or with members of my caucus."

The Politics of Desperation

Newfoundland and Labrador will be heading to the polls in a provincial election early next month. Soon candidates will be hitting the election trail in full force. Over the next week or so campaign signs will begin to deface the landscape once again and election promises will start flying around faster than a hummingbird on steroids. For the most part the process will play itself out as these things always do, but there is one marked difference this time around.

With the latest opinion polls showing what appears to be a one horse race, and with the two mainstream provincial opposition parties struggling on life support, a new tactic has become all the rage with those who see their political futures slipping further away with each passing day.

The provincial PC party, or as they would prefer to be called, the “Danny Williams Team”, currently stands at about 75% - 80% support in the province and are expected to win by a landslide. Whether those numbers actually hold up going into the election remains to be seen but they have prompted some party faithful, those not on the “Danny Williams Team”, to an act of utter desperation.

Some are suggesting that the 80% of voters who currently support the PC party should consider using their vote strategically rather than casting it for the party of their choice.

It’s a new wrinkle in what appears to be an increasingly undemocratic society, a concept that’s being talked about a lot lately and one that speaks volumes about the desperation of those promoting the idea.

Essentially the proponents would like supporter of the reigning PC party to vote for a Liberal or NDP candidate instead. They say strategic voting will ensure a strong opposition, help hold the government to account and protect our democratic system.

Excuse me while I vent, but the entire concept is ludicrous. It reeks of fear and desperation. Cleary the idea is nothing more then a last ditch attempt by dying and unbalanced political hopefuls who hope to hang on by their well manicured fingernails.

There is no doubt that there’s something to be said for a strong opposition. As someone once said, “Absolute power corrupts absolutely”. In Newfoundland and Labrador those words ring far truer than in most places. Many voters are old enough to recall Joey Smallwood and the fallout of his unchallenged power, but the existence of a strong opposition is something that has to happen in a natural way, not through a forced agenda.

The onus for getting elected lies with the members of the various parties, not with the voters. It’s the parties that must present strong candidates and solid platforms. It is the candidates themselves who need to give voters sound reasons to trust them, to want them in office and to elect them. If they can't do that then they deserve to lose.

Instead of the parties stepping up to the challenge of providing a real alternative to the voting public, those voters are being asked to cast their ballots against their choice in the name of protecting democracy.

It’s a concept that is the complete antithesis of what democracy is all about and the proponents of this approach should hang their heads in shame.

By asking this of the public they are actually asking them to give away their ability to vote for their candidate or party of choice.

Why should I or anyone else vote for a candidate or a party I don’t support? What possible reason could I have to even consider such a thing? It’s almost too foolish to talk about. Consider what might happen if everyone suddenly had a massive attack of the stupids and actually acted on this. The end result might see the public elect a government nobody wanted. Now there's a cold reality check for you.

The very foundation of a democracy is the right of each individual to vote for the candidate of their choice. The system is not meant to be corrupted by having voters support a candidate or party they do not want to form government.

I have no way of knowing if my preferred candidate will win a seat this October or not, but win or lose, I'll execise my franchise in the way it was intended. I certainly don't intend to cast my vote for someone who is looking for a free pass instead of providing me with a solid choice that would warrant my support.