Election 2011 - Did principle trump pandering in Atlantic Canada?

“You can’t always get what you want, but if you try sometimes you just might find… you get what you need” – Rolling Stones

Perspectives change. Often those changes are quite dramatic.

A perfect example is the perspective of people in Newfoundland and Labrador who, like others across Canada, are parsing the structure of a vastly redefined post-election Parliament.

Before proceeding further I’d be remiss if I didn’t re-affirm my long standing and deeply held belief that adherence to principle is always far more important to the long term good than simply caving into external pressures or the temptation of seemingly self serving actions.

Principle should always trump personal gain, pandering and opportunism.

This is as true for individuals as it is for governments at any level.

When you make a promise you do everything in your power to keep it and when you believe you’re right you fight with everything you have to defend your position. End of sermon.

Those sentiments were clearly on display during the federal election as most Newfoundlanders and Labradorians once again refused to support Conservative party candidates. In fact, the only Harper candidate elected this time out was a newcomer to the political scene. One who barely eked out a win by a few hundred votes. By all accounts his victory came in spite of his party affiliation rather than because of it and was due to the stature of the man himself. Not exactly a ringing endorsement for the Harper government.

The actions taken by voters in the Province are something all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians should take pride in today. It once again proves, regardless of what certain individuals in parts of Canada might say, that the people in Newfoundland and Labrador are fiercely principled and willing to stand by those principles, no matter the short term pain.

With that clearly said, we now must live with the choices made by a broader Canadian electorate. The odd yet somehow poetic result is that this time around, standing by a principled position may have placed the Province in a far better position than anyone could have imagined.

At the outset of the campaign nobody in Canada would have predicted the near implosion of the Bloc, that the Conservatives would win such a solid majority or that the NDP, thanks largely to Quebec frenzy, would form the official opposition with more than 100 seats in Parliament. These are the realities of Canada today and they may actually work in Newfoundland and Labrador’s favor.

With ABC remaining a factor, the election of Labrador’s Peter Penashue as the Province's single Conservative MP presents interesting possibilities going forward. Perhaps just as important is Quebec’s version of ABC that played out during the campaign. These separate actions by two long time adversaries could in fact have resulted in the best of many possible outcomes that might have developed on voting day.

Make no mistake, the history of Federal/Provincial relations hasn’t changed. Stephen Harper turned his back on a promise to exclude non-renewable resource revenues from the equalization formula and essentially gutted the intent of the Atlantic Accord a few years back. Both actions led to a loss of billions for Newfoundland and Labrador. Harper also failed to move on his promise to make 5 Wing Goose Bay an integral cog in the Canadian military.

Those are indisputable realities, but there might, just might mind you, be a better chance of Harper’s latest election promises being kept than there has been in the past, even after the province’s voters refused to let him to buy votes with those promises.

On the issues of a loan guarantee (or equivalent funding) for the Lower Churchill and an increased role for 5 Wing Goose Bay nothing is guaranteed but the possibilities are far brighter today than they were a few short weeks ago. In fact they have a better chance of coming to fruition now than they would if this election had resulted in a minority Parliament for either party.

With the Bloc no longer a major force in Ottawa and a majority firmly in hand, Mr. Harper will face little if any opposition to his Churchill Falls promise. Any excuse not to honor that promise will be difficult to sell.

During the campaign both the Liberals and NDP made similar promises in spite of Quebec’s vocal opposition to the project. One would hope all parties will stand by their commitments but with the NDP now serving as a voice for Quebec and the Liberals looking to rebuild support there, either party could easily succumb to an urge to curry favor in Quebec at the expense of Newfoundland and Labrador.

In a minority Parliament, or if either of today’s opposition parties had formed government, that reality could have been devastating for the Province. This isn’t the case in the current configuration.

Allowing the Conservatives an opportunity to slip their oversized foot ever so slightly through the door has sent the clear message that voters most surely remember the broken promises but some are willing to offer one last chance at redemption. If Mr. Harper is to have any hope of growing his party’s fortunes in the province the onus is now squarely on his shoulders to accept the opportunity provided.

After multiple elections, any chance of widespread Conservative gains in Quebec is a long shot at best. Mr. Harper knows his party’s future, beyond the current term, depends largely on an ability to retain and grow support in other regions, including Newfoundland and Labrador.

Most of Canada, with the exception of Quebec, supports the development of the Lower Churchill thanks to a growing awareness of the mistreatment Newfoundland and Labrador has suffered at the hands of Hydro Quebec. In addition the entire Atlantic region stands to benefit greatly from the Lower Churchill project and, as the last bastion of Liberal support these days, Conservative strategists must be eyeing the area with a glint of lust in their eyes.

While an ABC hangover may continue to reveal itself from time to time as long as Stephen Harper is party leader, the Conservatives surely realize that strong support for the Lower Churchill will go far in building loyalties throughout the region and help drive a stake into the heart of a critically wounded Liberal party.

The Lower Churchill project isn’t the only issue that has a better chance of being advanced under the current federal configuration.

While Stephen Harper’s newly minted Labrador MP, Peter Penashue, is a strong advocate for that project he’s also solidly behind growing the role for the airbase at 5 Wing Goose Bay. How much influence Mr. Penashue can bring to Ottawa remains to be seen but as Newfoundland and Labrador’s lone representative on the Conservative bench he is most certainly up for consideration in the new cabinet.

His chances of gaining a cabinet position may be enhanced in light of Harper’s campaign message - in fact his message for the past 3 years - that the Province would be better served electing someone who can fill a seat at the cabinet table. Once again, the time has come for Mr. Harper to walk the walk.

Simply having the good fortune of being elected as a member of the top finishing party isn’t the only thing Mr. Penashue brings to the table. He also brings a world of experience thanks to his years as a respected native leader and pivotal role in the successful negotiation of Innu agreements on Voisey’s Bay and the Lower Churchill.

When you consider the combination of such a strong proponent for Labrador development, including 5 Wing Goose Bay, and Mr. Harper’s long stated position on protecting Arctic sovereignty, the possibilities become clearer. This may in fact be one last chance to ensure the survival of 5 Wing. Time will tell.

On May third many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, like many Canadians, awoke to an election result very few expected. In direct opposition to the feelings of true blue Tories the first reaction of many was likely despair and disillusionment, but as they say, every cloud has a silver lining.

When life gives you lemons you make lemonade.

Issues remain that find the Harper government and the province of Newfoundland and Labrador miles apart. That hasn’t changed. Marine Atlantic and Fisheries management, among many others come to mind. Never the less, both the Lower Churchill and 5 Wing Goose Bay are two very important files for Newfoundland and Labrador.

After multiple broken promises, when Danny Williams first tapped into the sentiment of the electorate and pushed ahead with the ABC campaign Canadians wondered if he could deliver the Conservative goose egg he promised. He did, yet many believed the Province was only hurting itself as a result.

After sticking to their guns once again in 2011 the Province has proven, contrary to popular belief, that the electorate does indeed have a long memory. The people of Newfoundland and Labrador have provided a glimmer of opportunity for Mr. Harper to gain support in the Atlantic region at the same time offering one last gasp of life to the Liberal brand if he doesn't.

Today there isn't a politician across Canada, regardless of party stripe, who doubts for a second the Province's willingness to act on it's convictions going forward. At the end of the day that legacy may pay far bigger dividends than the previous 60 years of hat in hand politics ever did. If so ABC effect will far outweigh any short term lack of government representation the Province has experienced over the past few years.

Just as Mr. Harper forced his way into a majority government in large part due to solidly reading the possibility of wide spread Liberal/NDP vote splitting in Ontario, Newfoundland and Labrador may have finally turned the corner on being bought off with crumbs and has managed navigate its way into the best of many possible election outcomes.

As election 2011 heated up, the parties, candidates and leaders pandered to anyone that they believed might help them win. The best part of the entire spectacle is that the people of Newfoundland and Labrador awoke to a new and potentially brighter reality without sacrificing their principles one iota in the process.

Post Election Analysis - History in the Making

Anyone who voted for the first time in Election 2011 certainly found an opportune time to exercise their democratic right.

With the election now in the books the nation is free to ponder the significance (or lack thereof) of the outcome. No matter how you slice it, this is one election that’s bound to be the talk of pundits, political science majors and arm chair politicians for decades to come.

It’s often said that history is written by the victors, but exactly what history says about Canada’s forty-first federal election remains to be seen. The conundrum this time around is how we define who the victors actually are. Different perspectives may produce different findings and the answer may not fully be understood for generations.

Clearly the Harper Conservatives are victorious. After years of planning, strategizing, campaigning (yes, years of campaigning) cajoling and practically begging the people of Canada Mr. Harper finally has the one thing he’s wanted since first elected, a majority. Never the less, for his detractors, this outcome could be seen as a tainted victory based on his limited level of cross-Canada support, his losses in Quebec and the growth of support for the center/left federalist parties (Liberal/NDP combined) after the collapse of the Bloc.

Following the election Mr. Harper, speaking to a partisan crowd, proudly said that the people of Canada had made their decision. Some might argue that with only 40% of voters supporting the Conservative party, in reality the nation actually backed into a Conservative majority accidentally rather than truly choosing it. Tomato / tomato.

Liberal leader, Michael Ignatieff, promoted this election as necessary to save democracy itself. He may have been fighting the wrong opponent in Mr. Harper. Perhaps the real opponent to democracy in Canada is not the Conservatives, who merely take political advantage of the rules, but Elections Canada who refuse to see that the system isn’t working in its current form.

Elections as they exist today in Canada work fine when you have a two party system. They don’t serve democracy very well at all when 3 or 4 parties are in play.

The evidence speaks for itself. If asked, most Canadians would say that democracy is when a majority of the people choose a government. Not so in Canada where a party, any party, can form a majority government when over half the population doesn’t support them.

As far as democracy is concerned it was indeed at stake in this election and, no matter who came out ahead in the seat count, we all lost on that front. In essence the Harper majority came as a result of unintentional vote splits between the NDP and Liberals in Ontario. In the end these meant a gain of 20 Ontario seats, a dozen more than the 155 needed to claim a majority.

As Thomas Jefferson quite rightly said, “The government you elect is the government you deserve”. We can read into Mr. Jefferson’s statement what we will.

Democracy itself aside, although the night clearly saw a victory for Stephen Harper, many elections have been won in the past and many will be won in the future by various parties. By itself there’s nothing of historic value to the win. Perhaps what the Harper government does with its majority will change the political landscape over time but the win itself is a less than historic event outside Conservative circles. Other outcomes are far more interesting from the historic perspective.

Nobody can argue that the rise of the NDP to official opposition status with more than 100 seats in Parliament is much more noteworthy in the grand scheme of things.

This sudden shift of support says a lot about the now massive gulf between the Right and Left in Canada as a result of the tactics employed by Conservatives over the past several years. It’s a case where 60% of voters in Canada have decided a change is in order. Most of that 60%, especially in Quebec, shrugged off the shackles of conformity and walked through a previously untested Orange door in an attempt to unseat what many see, rightly or wrongly, as a government that’s far too “Republican” for their liking.

Aside from the hard left tilt taken by Canadians, the historic impact of the NDP taking on the official opposition role are not to be ignored. This position will afford them a great deal of benefits they’ve long been denied. Their elevated status will mean an increased budget and far more media attention than the party has ever been able to capture in the past. The official opposition after all has long been considered a “government in waiting”.

In short, this election has catapulted the NDP onto the political stage like never before and, depending on what the party does with their new found status it might, over time, change Canadian politics in unforeseen ways.

If nothing else, the rise of the NDP has dealt massive blow to the aspirations of the Bloc Quebecois, leaving the nation far more united than it’s been in decades. Even if that unity comes as a result of a deep seated dislike for the Harper government.

With a massive drop in their per vote election subsidy as a result of such poor showing in this election and with Mr. Harper’s plan, now that he has a majority, to abolish the vote subsidy (a key funding mechanism for the Bloc) entirely, this election could signal the demise of a political force that’s shaped politics in Canada for a generation.

The Bloc, with just 4 seats and after the resignation of Gilles Duceppe as their charismatic leader has a very uncertain future to be certain.

Just as Canadians might have accidentally backed into a Harper majority, Mr. Harper himself may well have accidentally helped ensure Canadian unity. If so, he accomplished this unintended result by engendering an anti-conservative movement in Quebec that grew far stronger than the deep seated yearning for Quebec nationalism/sovereignty itself.

You can add the Liberal party’s standing to that of the Bloc when questioning the future of organized party politics in Canada. The Liberal’s election results have similarly impacted their funding possibilities and cost them a leader. Going forward they may, from necessity, be forced to consider looking at options for uniting the Left, even at the expense of the historic party brand.

It’s enough to make me wonder what color you get when you combine red and orange.

Although seen by most as a small scale victory, the Green party must also be considered a winner in this election. With Elizabeth May having finally won a seat in the House of Commons the Green Party will have a voice on the national stage for the first time.

It could be argued that a single seat doesn’t mean much but with the environment a top priority for a growing number of voters and ever more important on the world stage, the timing of Ms. May’s entry into Parliament could have far more significance than many might think.

A potential resurgence of young voters and Canada’s penchant for backing the underdog, in addition to the environmental issue itself, could lead to Ms. May’s new found voice resonating with voters over the coming years.

Certainly her approach to politics and original ideas are refreshing. Time will tell if her election is just a blip or a harbinger of things to come, but what’s seen as a minor victory today might one day be recognized as the start of a green revolution in Canadian politics. Only time and the electorate will tell.

Any way you slice it this has been an election like none other Canada has seen. We live in interesting times and they may become a lot more interesting as the days unfold. Just don’t twitter that point to any of your friends until you've cleared it with Elections Canada. You wouldn’t want to break any antiquated laws would you?

Finally, since this is Web-Talk Newfoundland and Labrador, I’d be remiss if I failed to point out the direct impacts of this election on our fair province.

From the Provincial perspective, the clear message telegraphed from Newfoundland (if not Labrador) is that even without the force of will who is Danny Williams, ABC remains a reality. While the Labrador riding elected a Conservative MP, anyone who knows the situation on the ground could easily argue that this was more of a victory for a single man who is highly respected rather than a win for the party itself.

Clearly Newfoundland & Labrador remains less than fertile hunting grounds for the Harper brand of Conservatism and with Quebec rejecting the Conservative brand as well another point comes to the fore. Quebec and Newfoundland & Labrador have finally found something they can agree on, their utter dislike of Stephen Harper. Now that's historic!

On a more tangible front, the outcome couldn’t have been more interesting for the Province. Yes, we sent a clear message to the Conservatives that the people do not like Mr. Harper but by electing one Conservative MP it also ensures that the Harper government no longer has an excuse for not offering the cabinet position they’ve told everyone the province has denied itself by not electing someone on the government side.

In fact, with a member in the government caucus and with 2 representatives in the official opposition ranks as well as 4 Liberal members of Parliament, Newfoundland and Labrador has covered all the bases and positioned itself about as well as anyone could have hoped.

As an interesting side note, the message sent to Stephen Harper by the Newfoundland and Labrador electorate was accomplished in spite, rather than with the approval, of the Provincial PC government.

In an effort to shore up support for the federal Conservatives the Dunderdale government trotted out cabinet ministers and caucus members by the bus load. They even went so far as to insert themselves into the election by announcing more than $4 million in funding for one riding, announcing it on election day while the federal candidate was positioned front and center beside the provincial representatives at the media event. Thankfully the voters didn’t take a bite from that apple.

Whether or not the stunt has an impact on Dunderdale’s position going into the October provincial election is a story for another day.

Last but not least, and perhaps most important to some in the Province, is the fact that with a majority in hand, an NL Conservative MP in caucus and a clear rejection by Quebec voters as clear as the nose on his face, there can be no excuse for Mr. Harper to back out of his commitments on the Lower Churchill development.

Time will tell if he does or not.

Promises, No Promises and Broken Promises...

At the start of this election campaign Newfoundland and Labrador Premier, Kathy Dunderdale, sent letters to each of the three main party leaders, Stephen Harper, Michael Ignatieff and Jack Layton. The letters outlined some of the key issues for her Province.

All three leaders responded and the letters were released this week.

If you’re like most people you either don’t have the time, patience or dogged interest to read the responses provided. Fortunately I have no life so I’ve taken the fairly significant amount of time required to fully evaluate the responses and summarize the key results for you. (you can thank me later) :-)

That said there is no replacement for reading them yourself and making up your own mind on what the leaders have actually said, or perhaps as importantly, didn’t say.

The original letters sent by Premier Dunderdale as well as the responses are available here:

LETTERS

Here are my personal takeaways from the responses.

Fisheries Restructuring and Early Retirement:

Harper: No actual promises but says his is willing to talk with the Province going forward, blames other parties for killing the budget which he says would have provided a role for the Province’s in fisheries management. Would continue to support the seal harvest.

Ignatieff: Will work with province on license retirement, fleet rationalization, older worker retirement & retraining programs and assisting in transition of workers to new opportunities. He would also recognize adjacency in the fishery, historical attachment and economic maximization. Promises increased funding for fisheries management and better fisheries enforcement. Would continue to support the seal harvest.

Layton: Would ensure adequate funding is available for DFO. Would establish a Royal Commission to determine why, after 20 years of moratorium, there has been very limited fisheries recovery. Would support a cost shared retirement and license buyout, negotiate better tariff terms with other nations for seafood exports. Are committed to a revised fisheries act that would include the concepts of adjacency and historical attachment. Would continue to support the seal harvest.

Lower Churchill:

Harper: Projects like the Lower Churchill will receive a loan guarantee or other funding if they have national / regional significance are financially viable and lower greenhouse gas emissions.

Ignatieff: Would support a loan guarantee for the Lower Churchill development.

Layton: Would support a loan guarantee for the Lower Churchill development and would invest $375 million from the 3P fund to support construction of the Maritime subsea link.

Federal Transfers to the Provinces:

Harper: Would continue to provide 6% annual increase to provincial health care funding.

Ignatieff: Will continue to provide 6% annual increase to provincial health care funding and convene a first ministers meeting within 60 days of taking office to examine health care needs.

Layton: Will continue to provide 6% annual increase to health care funding and would seek guarantees from the provinces to ensure the integrity of the health care system. Would meet with provincial leaders to discuss health care concerns. Sees the need to provide federal transfers to the provinces on a basis that recognizes each province’s unique challenges.

Child Care Improvements:

Harper: Focus remains on providing incentives to parents with limited support ($250 million nationally) and tax credits for business to create child care spaces. Creation of 25,000 new spaces for each of the next 4 years, improvements to community infrastructure related to child care, creation of integrated community based child care options.

Ignatieff: Would dedicate $500 million to an Early Childhood Learning and Care fund in first year growing to $1 Billion by year 4 of a mandate.

Layton: Would work with provinces to develop a nationwide child care and early learning program.

Offshore Occupational Health and Safety:

Harper: Work with NL to honor the terms of recommendation 29 of the Wells Inquiry (create a separate offshore safety board). Will not commit to improvements in Search and Rescue response times and does not mention basing rescue helicopter in St. John’s region.

Ignatieff: Work with NL to honor the terms of recommendation 29 of the Wells Inquiry (create a separate offshore safety board). Would undertake a review of Search and Rescue response times with an objective of 15 – 20 response times across the industry.

Layton: Work with NL to honor the terms of recommendation 29 of the Wells Inquiry (create a separate offshore safety board). Would re-allocate defense budget dollars to ensure that Search and Rescue response times are brought to international standards (20 minutes) and will look at delays in after hours response times.

Providing 8.5% Hibernia Shares to Province:

Harper: Is open to selling shares to province at fair market values.

Ignatieff: Is open to selling shares to province, no specifics identified on cost or timing.

Layton: Recognizes that the federal government has more than recovered its investment in Hibernia and is willing to work with the province on transferring the shares. Will negotiate with the understanding that the province should be the primary beneficiary of offshore oil. No specifics on time/price.

Future of 5 Wing Goose Bay:

Harper: Will support marketing of the base to other nations for use, committed to contamination cleanup and infrastructure spending. Says he will increase operations but with no specifics.

Ignatieff: Designate 5 Wing as a staging point for Arctic sovereignty including coastguard activities, fisheries and surveillance patrols. Goose Bay would also stage pollution patrols and arctic training.

Layton: Says federal government should honor its commitments to 5 Wing. No specifics provided.

Federal Spending & Presence in Province (federal employment):

Harper: No commitment of anything new and no committment to live up to previous election promise to station a batallion there.

Ignatieff: Would treat provinces equitably. No specifics.

Layton: Recognizes the disproportionate number of federal jobs that have been taken out of the provinces and says that federal presence should be more equitable. Is committed to reversing policies that have led to lower federal presence.

Broadband Access:

Harper: Will work with all provinces to improve broadband and digital services. No specific commitments to NL.

Ignatieff: Identifies goal of 100% broadband access across Canada within 3 years. No specifics.

Layton: Supports Internet neutrality, would end throttling and committed to broadband across country. Would create broadband program financed by wireless spectrum auction revenues in partnership with private industry investment.

Correctional Services (New Prison to replace HMP):

Harper: Recognizes NL’s desire for a new prison to replace Her Majesties but makes no commitment. Simply restates previous statements about being tough on crime.

Ignatieff: Is against U.S. style prisons as planned by Conservatives but is willing to work with province to replace Her Majesties Prison. No specific commitment.

Layton: Would work with province to come to an acceptable financing arrangement on a replacement for Her Majesties prison as quickly as possible.

Well folks, that's my take on it. Remember, this is an election campaign so reader beware.

An election promise and $3.75 will get you a beer at the local pub.