In the upcoming federal budget, the newly-minted Conservative majority will initiate the phasing out of public subsidies for political parties.
This move has been coming for some time. Ever since the Tories first tried to do it in 2008, and in the process spurred a crisis that almost cost them government, they have been waiting for the chance to chop the transfers to the opposition parties. Of course, their piece of the $27 million pie will also disappear, but Harper's party has become much better at fundraising than the others since the current funding regime was put in place by Jean Chretien in 2004. The NDP aren't terrible at it, but still do not do as well as the Tories. The Liberals, however, are abysmal at raising money from individuals, and therefore stand to lose most from the elimination of the $2 per vote subsidy (unless you're a supporter of the Bloc Quebecois, who, as I've previously argued, are on the verge of extinction partly due to their money woes).
Individual contributions to political parties are currently permitted to a limit of $1,100 per person per year. For this measure to make any sense at all, this limit must be raised to give parties a fighting chance at replacing the lost revenue once the subsidies are gone. As Jeffrey Simpson points out: "Transparency, a higher individual limit and the end of public subsidies would be a reasonable compromise. But, of course, the Conservatives with their majority are not looking for compromise." Harper wants to use the baseball bat of his majority to kneecap his competitors -- especially the flailing Liberals.
I believe the Tories should be very careful they don't get exactly what they wish for. By tilting the playing field so boldly and obviously in their own direction, they risk incurring the wrath of the public over time. The subsidy will be gone in time for the next election, meaning the annual infusions will play a reduced role in campaign preparations for the October 2015 election than it has in the past few campaigns. If the Conservative Party of Canada means to use a perceived advantage to attack its adversaries through spending dollops of cash on negative pre-election ads in 2014 and 2015, the public may finally revolt.
If any lesson can be learned from the Orange Crush this year, it's that Canadians are tiring of the old tactics and want a different political environment. The Tories would be wise to heed that lesson, lest they start turning their perceived advantages into tangible liabilities at the most inopportune moment.
Saturday, May 28, 2011
Friday, May 06, 2011
The U of T, or the Usefulness of Thought
 |
| Douglas Library, Queen's University |
In practical reality, the Council is a gab-fest where we talk about what challenges and opportunities are coming the university's way and provide ideas on how to address them. Depending on who the Principal is, our advice is either incorporated into decision making, or not. There's no requirement that our thoughts must be brought forward beyond the confines of our meeting room to affect the life of the broader university.
 |
| Massey College, U of T |
History will not be kind to Ignatieff. Many thought the Liberal Party had bottomed out with Stephane Dion's leadership in the disastrous 2008 campaign. Unfortunately for them, it seems there was much further yet for the party to fall, and Ignatieff will always be known as the guy who led them there. The Conservative charge that he was in it for himself all along isn't helped at all by the following two quotes from the Globe and Mail:
“The life that I like the best is teaching. It’s the end of my life as a politician.”
“I’m quite excited about the next phase of my life. Without blowing my horn too much, there’s not too many people who have been full-scale academics and who’ve also been the leader of a political party. It’s a special experience."
These quotes give the impression that Ignatieff never warmed to politics, and that he has decided to use his Liberal party leadership experience as a résumé-padder. Ironically, Canadians could tell that he never had the right stuff for the game, and that he didn't ever truly understand them or their issues. I believe Ignatieff is an honourable guy who worked hard and tried his best to lead his party in the best way possible. But he never should have left Harvard, if these two quotes can be taken at their face value.
Canada needs more than a leader looking for a "special experience." They need someone who has the passion for the country bred intangibly into their bones. For all their faults and shortcomings, you never felt like people such as Ed Broadbent, Joe Clark, Jean Chrétien or Preston Manning lacked those qualities. Even current leaders like Stephen Harper, Jack Layton and Elizabeth May clearly connect with their constituencies and could never be accused of lacking a deep commitment to Canada (even though their conception of what Canada is and should be diverge, sometimes widely). But you never got that impression consistently from Ignatieff. It often looked like an academic exercise to him.
The passion only truly came out when he became desperate in the latter stages of the campaign, as his dream of becoming prime minister disintegrated. And passion borne of desperation cannot be taken at face value.
So when I head out to Kingston tonight, I'll be reading the pertinent documents and arranging my thoughts on the various agenda items for the meeting tomorrow. I go to Queen's knowing my ideas and perspectives will be listened to, but not necessarily acted upon. My advice may be seen as crucial, or heard only as so much noise. But I go, and have been actively involved in the university's governance since 1996, because I believe giving up on Queen's will only remove one more voice that might help it achieve its mission that much more ideally.
Michael Ignatieff will give his advice and guidance to the students of Massey College over the next year, in the hope they may go forward from U of T and help Canada become a stronger, more compassionate and more respectable nation, both domestically and abroad.
I take him at his word when he says:
“And there's some things you learn when you've done it, and it’s just not in the books. I did it. I've lived it. And I know what's in the books isn't what it's like. Everybody who's done it knows that it's really different – and you want to tell [students] that, not to discourage them from public service but to get them to commit, and take the risks involved. I'm very keen on using the time I've got to get people into the game.”
There's an earnestness, tinged with bitterness, in these words that I think will serve his students well. I wish him the best of luck as he retreats to academia and a quieter life than the one he knew as a politician.
There's no requirement students bring forth his ideas from the university and into the public sphere with the aim of positively affecting the lives of Canadians. But if one student can learn the lessons and find a way to apply his principles for a more advantageous result for all of us, then perhaps his life's passion can find its best expression in that way. For his sake, and the sake of our country, I hope that is possible.
“I’m quite excited about the next phase of my life. Without blowing my horn too much, there’s not too many people who have been full-scale academics and who’ve also been the leader of a political party. It’s a special experience."
These quotes give the impression that Ignatieff never warmed to politics, and that he has decided to use his Liberal party leadership experience as a résumé-padder. Ironically, Canadians could tell that he never had the right stuff for the game, and that he didn't ever truly understand them or their issues. I believe Ignatieff is an honourable guy who worked hard and tried his best to lead his party in the best way possible. But he never should have left Harvard, if these two quotes can be taken at their face value.
 |
| Le petit gars Jean Chrétien |
The passion only truly came out when he became desperate in the latter stages of the campaign, as his dream of becoming prime minister disintegrated. And passion borne of desperation cannot be taken at face value.
So when I head out to Kingston tonight, I'll be reading the pertinent documents and arranging my thoughts on the various agenda items for the meeting tomorrow. I go to Queen's knowing my ideas and perspectives will be listened to, but not necessarily acted upon. My advice may be seen as crucial, or heard only as so much noise. But I go, and have been actively involved in the university's governance since 1996, because I believe giving up on Queen's will only remove one more voice that might help it achieve its mission that much more ideally.
Michael Ignatieff will give his advice and guidance to the students of Massey College over the next year, in the hope they may go forward from U of T and help Canada become a stronger, more compassionate and more respectable nation, both domestically and abroad.
I take him at his word when he says:
“And there's some things you learn when you've done it, and it’s just not in the books. I did it. I've lived it. And I know what's in the books isn't what it's like. Everybody who's done it knows that it's really different – and you want to tell [students] that, not to discourage them from public service but to get them to commit, and take the risks involved. I'm very keen on using the time I've got to get people into the game.”
 |
| Bob Rae (l) was once a senior resident at Massey College after a political flame-out of epic proportions, too |
There's no requirement students bring forth his ideas from the university and into the public sphere with the aim of positively affecting the lives of Canadians. But if one student can learn the lessons and find a way to apply his principles for a more advantageous result for all of us, then perhaps his life's passion can find its best expression in that way. For his sake, and the sake of our country, I hope that is possible.
Change to the Look of PS&R
I decided the site was in need of a refresh, so I flipped up the design and changed a few small aspects of the layout. I hope you like the new look!
Thursday, May 05, 2011
Barbarism and Sacrifice
Two significant news stories today that, at first, seem related in only a peripheral way, have come together in my thinking. The first is U.S. President Barack Obama's decisions not to release photos of Osama bin Laden's corpse, and to travel to New York today to lay a wreath at the site of the destroyed World Trade Centre. The second is the death of the last surviving veteran of World War I in Australia.
In a world of raging armed conflicts, devastating natural disasters, horrendous social and political upheavals, oppressive dictatorships and epidemic disease, it's amazing to me how much we can concentrate on whether or not we are entitled to see a blasted hulk of human flesh captured on a digital camera. Whether you believe the Americans or think they are lying (a discussion I don't want to get into), I find it reprehensible that people are actually celebrating murder like it's their daughter's fifth birthday party and she just opened all her presents. I find the lack of respect for the death of another human being to be galling.
And yes, the person in this case is bin Laden. I get that he's the world's most wanted man, a terrorist who inspired and supported the mass murder of thousands of people on U.S. soil in September 2001. He's not Mother Teresa. I'm not a fool, I know he's not a sympathetic figure. But what does it say when we can't even restrain ourselves enough to be more muted in response to news of his assassination?
Are we barbarians?
By comparison, the death of Claude Stanley Choules is receiving very little fanfare. He was the last known living combatant from the Great War, a conflict that was our first experience with total war. People like to say that our soldiers who fought in the trenches along the Western Front, and the ones who sacrificed so much to fight in the Second World War as well, did so in defense of our rights and freedoms. They were noble warriors, sent to do a dirty job that needed doing, and we should never forget their sacrifice.
Based on what I saw in the news media over the last couple of days with respect to bin Laden's assassination, however, I think we've already forgotten. The pursuit of liberty and peace is never easy, nor always tidy, but we should never try to attain it at the cost of our humanity. Photos or no, I believe the actions of people in the West are provocation enough for those who feel we are dancing on a dead man's grave.
Our history, principles and moral code, if we truly value them, would be better protected if we were less self-congratulatory and more sober in our response to bin Laden's murder. Claude Choules and others like him didn't risk their lives so we could behave like this. We should strive to do better than to stoop to the level of common thugs while seeking a higher purpose.
In a world of raging armed conflicts, devastating natural disasters, horrendous social and political upheavals, oppressive dictatorships and epidemic disease, it's amazing to me how much we can concentrate on whether or not we are entitled to see a blasted hulk of human flesh captured on a digital camera. Whether you believe the Americans or think they are lying (a discussion I don't want to get into), I find it reprehensible that people are actually celebrating murder like it's their daughter's fifth birthday party and she just opened all her presents. I find the lack of respect for the death of another human being to be galling.
And yes, the person in this case is bin Laden. I get that he's the world's most wanted man, a terrorist who inspired and supported the mass murder of thousands of people on U.S. soil in September 2001. He's not Mother Teresa. I'm not a fool, I know he's not a sympathetic figure. But what does it say when we can't even restrain ourselves enough to be more muted in response to news of his assassination?
Are we barbarians?
By comparison, the death of Claude Stanley Choules is receiving very little fanfare. He was the last known living combatant from the Great War, a conflict that was our first experience with total war. People like to say that our soldiers who fought in the trenches along the Western Front, and the ones who sacrificed so much to fight in the Second World War as well, did so in defense of our rights and freedoms. They were noble warriors, sent to do a dirty job that needed doing, and we should never forget their sacrifice.
Based on what I saw in the news media over the last couple of days with respect to bin Laden's assassination, however, I think we've already forgotten. The pursuit of liberty and peace is never easy, nor always tidy, but we should never try to attain it at the cost of our humanity. Photos or no, I believe the actions of people in the West are provocation enough for those who feel we are dancing on a dead man's grave.
Our history, principles and moral code, if we truly value them, would be better protected if we were less self-congratulatory and more sober in our response to bin Laden's murder. Claude Choules and others like him didn't risk their lives so we could behave like this. We should strive to do better than to stoop to the level of common thugs while seeking a higher purpose.
Wednesday, May 04, 2011
Evaluate, Pontificate, Consolidate
Now that the voting is out of the way and Canadians have delivered a verdict that surprised even themselves, I see a few themes emerging in the coming days and weeks:
- The Liberal Party must go back to the drawing board and figure themselves out. Whatever they've been peddling since the retirement of Jean Chretien simply hasn't cut it, and with Michael Ignatieff's resignation, they enter yet another period of soul-searching. For their own sakes, they better actually do the hard work this time. Canadians don't feel like they owe Liberals anything. It appears as if that news was a shock to Canada's "natural governing party" but it's been that way for four elections now. It took a LONG time for the message to sink in. Perhaps being reduced to a rump presence in Parliament will finally do the trick! The lesson is clear -- if they want electoral success in the future, they're going to have to earn it.
- The Bloc Quebecois is finished. I've put forward practical reasons why a revival is unlikely, so it will now fall to the NDP to find a way to incorporate their voices into the traditional structure of their party. If there is a single organization that will have to adapt more adroitly to the new political reality than the New Democratic Party of Canada, I'd like to see it. And before you say the Liberals, consider this: the NDP beat their previous best of 43 seats in 1988 without factoring in their Quebec seats. With 44 seats in English Canada and 58 seats in Quebec, in a party that has never before elected more than one Quebec MP at a single go, working out the potential differences within the caucus will be Layton's most difficult managerial task.
- Now is not the time for the Conservatives to go rogue. For five years, Harper and his gang have run roughshod over their opponents, the rules and protocols of Parliament, and even the basic principles of democracy itself. Incredibly, and primarily due to the utter failure of the Liberals to propose anything of substance that Canadians would accept, they have been handed a majority mandate. They need to remember that even though our first-past-the-post voting system gave them a majority of seats, three-fifths of voters wanted someone else to govern. They should see this situation as both an opportunity and a very dangerous situation. If they blow it by going overboard, they will ruin their chances at governance for a generation. If they get it right, they can stay in government for a long, long time to come.
All parties need to take a few days to consider the implications of the vote on their political fortunes. Internal party officials will discuss next steps and the leaders will dole out Cabinet or critic roles as appropriate. New strategies will be created and implemented. Staff will be hired. Research will be conducted. And the Tories will craft a new Speech from the Throne to officially announce their agenda for the first parliamentary session featuring a Tory majority since Kim Campbell went to the polls in the summer of 1993.
Once the evaluation of their new situations is completed, the parties will have to spread their messages within the electorate. I believe the Tories will start to fight the next election right away. Their strategy will involve emphasizing the national nature of the party's representation as a launch pad to govern for all Canadians (or at least that's how the propaganda will go). Meanwhile, the Ontario gains and Quebec losses will become the focus, since it is only by retaining seats in the province that gave them their majority that they can rule in the long term. And part of that calculus involves dealing with Quebec well, and fairly.
They will get a bit of help in that respect from the NDP, since this will be a shared objective of the Official Opposition. As Jack Layton moves ahead, goal number one must be to get the greenhorns in his Quebec contingent up to speed and hard to work in their constituencies. The key to future success for the NDP will be how well they can serve locally and how well they can advocate in Ottawa for the province that put Layton in Stornoway. Beyond that, reconciliation of their French and English objectives will also be a critical task. Other parties in the past have imploded over such tensions, mostly on the right flank of Canadian politics (Social Credit in the 1960s and the Progressive Conservative Party in the 1990s are the two main examples). This particular accord is a completely new political arrangement in Canadian politics. How adroitly Layton navigates this potential minefield while attracting a broader following from progressives across Canada will dictate his chances of defeating Stephen Harper in 2015.
The Bloc may try to revive itself. It is tough to say exactly how they will do that, but I don't anticipate them disappearing immediately. Their most likely fate is a gradual fade into irrelevance. The only thing that can save them is an NDP failure to connect electoral success with strong representation of Quebec's interests in Ottawa. If the NDP is even at least partially successful, the future for the Bloc is bleak indeed.
The newest party to elect a representative is the Green Party of Canada. Elizabeth May invested the party's political future in winning her riding. Now that there is a majority Harper government, however, the main source of funding for her party is about to be cut off -- the per vote subsidies the Tories have vowed to end. And without a minority, her vote can never be the deciding factor in a vote, which also limits her potential impact. The key to future success for the Greens is in electoral reform, a cause that over time is increasing in popularity within the electorate; however, the real job will be to vastly increase individual donations and improve the party internally to prepare for 2015. Expanding on their electoral beachhead must be the focus for the next four years.
And finally, the Liberal Party of Canada needs to listen to Rob Silver. He and I are in agreement that the Liberals are not a left-wing party, and a merger with the NDP is nonsensical. I look forward to reading his perspectives on where he thinks the Liberals should go in the future. My thoughts are fairly straightforward: the Liberals have one chance left, only one more chance, to make themselves relevant to Canadian politics. Grit partisans need to forget about a focus on history. If they do that, they will be history. No, the path to revitalization is reinvention. Anything less than that is disaster. Liberals didn't lose in 2008 just because of Dion, they lost because the Tories have evolved with the times and changed their approaches accordingly, while the Liberals keep fighting the last war. They learned nothing from that historic debacle, and had to suffer an even greater humiliation to hopefully get the message. Another re-run of this mess and there will be nothing left.
Canada is tired of Liberal arrogance when it comes to holding power, and will never elect them again if that air of entitlement lingers a moment longer. The task is daunting, the need for leadership and determination acute. Who will lead this effort? Without the answer to this question, it's hard to see the road ahead at this stage. But that's the biggest concern for the party today. The search for the next leader should be a fascinating one.
We are in uncharted waters for all the parties. Watching it all unfold will be fascinating. But the party best able to execute their plans to achieve their most necessary goals will benefit most four years from now, when Canadians will next go to the polls to elect a government. The 41st Parliament promises to be one of the most intriguing in our history. Don't go back to sleep. Keep paying attention.
It's going to be one heck of a ride.
- The Liberal Party must go back to the drawing board and figure themselves out. Whatever they've been peddling since the retirement of Jean Chretien simply hasn't cut it, and with Michael Ignatieff's resignation, they enter yet another period of soul-searching. For their own sakes, they better actually do the hard work this time. Canadians don't feel like they owe Liberals anything. It appears as if that news was a shock to Canada's "natural governing party" but it's been that way for four elections now. It took a LONG time for the message to sink in. Perhaps being reduced to a rump presence in Parliament will finally do the trick! The lesson is clear -- if they want electoral success in the future, they're going to have to earn it.
- The Bloc Quebecois is finished. I've put forward practical reasons why a revival is unlikely, so it will now fall to the NDP to find a way to incorporate their voices into the traditional structure of their party. If there is a single organization that will have to adapt more adroitly to the new political reality than the New Democratic Party of Canada, I'd like to see it. And before you say the Liberals, consider this: the NDP beat their previous best of 43 seats in 1988 without factoring in their Quebec seats. With 44 seats in English Canada and 58 seats in Quebec, in a party that has never before elected more than one Quebec MP at a single go, working out the potential differences within the caucus will be Layton's most difficult managerial task.
- Now is not the time for the Conservatives to go rogue. For five years, Harper and his gang have run roughshod over their opponents, the rules and protocols of Parliament, and even the basic principles of democracy itself. Incredibly, and primarily due to the utter failure of the Liberals to propose anything of substance that Canadians would accept, they have been handed a majority mandate. They need to remember that even though our first-past-the-post voting system gave them a majority of seats, three-fifths of voters wanted someone else to govern. They should see this situation as both an opportunity and a very dangerous situation. If they blow it by going overboard, they will ruin their chances at governance for a generation. If they get it right, they can stay in government for a long, long time to come.
All parties need to take a few days to consider the implications of the vote on their political fortunes. Internal party officials will discuss next steps and the leaders will dole out Cabinet or critic roles as appropriate. New strategies will be created and implemented. Staff will be hired. Research will be conducted. And the Tories will craft a new Speech from the Throne to officially announce their agenda for the first parliamentary session featuring a Tory majority since Kim Campbell went to the polls in the summer of 1993.
Once the evaluation of their new situations is completed, the parties will have to spread their messages within the electorate. I believe the Tories will start to fight the next election right away. Their strategy will involve emphasizing the national nature of the party's representation as a launch pad to govern for all Canadians (or at least that's how the propaganda will go). Meanwhile, the Ontario gains and Quebec losses will become the focus, since it is only by retaining seats in the province that gave them their majority that they can rule in the long term. And part of that calculus involves dealing with Quebec well, and fairly.
They will get a bit of help in that respect from the NDP, since this will be a shared objective of the Official Opposition. As Jack Layton moves ahead, goal number one must be to get the greenhorns in his Quebec contingent up to speed and hard to work in their constituencies. The key to future success for the NDP will be how well they can serve locally and how well they can advocate in Ottawa for the province that put Layton in Stornoway. Beyond that, reconciliation of their French and English objectives will also be a critical task. Other parties in the past have imploded over such tensions, mostly on the right flank of Canadian politics (Social Credit in the 1960s and the Progressive Conservative Party in the 1990s are the two main examples). This particular accord is a completely new political arrangement in Canadian politics. How adroitly Layton navigates this potential minefield while attracting a broader following from progressives across Canada will dictate his chances of defeating Stephen Harper in 2015.
The Bloc may try to revive itself. It is tough to say exactly how they will do that, but I don't anticipate them disappearing immediately. Their most likely fate is a gradual fade into irrelevance. The only thing that can save them is an NDP failure to connect electoral success with strong representation of Quebec's interests in Ottawa. If the NDP is even at least partially successful, the future for the Bloc is bleak indeed.
The newest party to elect a representative is the Green Party of Canada. Elizabeth May invested the party's political future in winning her riding. Now that there is a majority Harper government, however, the main source of funding for her party is about to be cut off -- the per vote subsidies the Tories have vowed to end. And without a minority, her vote can never be the deciding factor in a vote, which also limits her potential impact. The key to future success for the Greens is in electoral reform, a cause that over time is increasing in popularity within the electorate; however, the real job will be to vastly increase individual donations and improve the party internally to prepare for 2015. Expanding on their electoral beachhead must be the focus for the next four years.
And finally, the Liberal Party of Canada needs to listen to Rob Silver. He and I are in agreement that the Liberals are not a left-wing party, and a merger with the NDP is nonsensical. I look forward to reading his perspectives on where he thinks the Liberals should go in the future. My thoughts are fairly straightforward: the Liberals have one chance left, only one more chance, to make themselves relevant to Canadian politics. Grit partisans need to forget about a focus on history. If they do that, they will be history. No, the path to revitalization is reinvention. Anything less than that is disaster. Liberals didn't lose in 2008 just because of Dion, they lost because the Tories have evolved with the times and changed their approaches accordingly, while the Liberals keep fighting the last war. They learned nothing from that historic debacle, and had to suffer an even greater humiliation to hopefully get the message. Another re-run of this mess and there will be nothing left.
Canada is tired of Liberal arrogance when it comes to holding power, and will never elect them again if that air of entitlement lingers a moment longer. The task is daunting, the need for leadership and determination acute. Who will lead this effort? Without the answer to this question, it's hard to see the road ahead at this stage. But that's the biggest concern for the party today. The search for the next leader should be a fascinating one.
We are in uncharted waters for all the parties. Watching it all unfold will be fascinating. But the party best able to execute their plans to achieve their most necessary goals will benefit most four years from now, when Canadians will next go to the polls to elect a government. The 41st Parliament promises to be one of the most intriguing in our history. Don't go back to sleep. Keep paying attention.
It's going to be one heck of a ride.
Tuesday, May 03, 2011
Practical Reasons Why the Bloc is Dead
The Bloc Quebecois is in its final death throes. Here's why:
1. Leadership
Bloc Leader Gilles Duceppe went down to defeat in his riding, along with nearly everyone else in his caucus. The disastrous BQ campaign can be attributed to a lack of energy, purpose and cohesion, and the person who has to take the lion's share of the blame is Duceppe. There was no way he could have remained as leader, even if he'd pulled out a win in his seat. The first Bloc MP ever elected to the House of Commons is done.
But the bigger reason why the BQ's future is so hampered by his loss is due to a lack of a clear successor. Duceppe has taken up so much of the party's oxygen over the years that there is no heir apparent to his deeply corroded crown. Plus, with the repudiation coming from all sides of their traditional support base (both nationalist and sovereigntist), they have virtually no policy room to argue for their continued existence.
The first crisis this party faces in the aftermath of their historic annihilation is their utter rudderlessness.
2. Loss of Official Party Status
In the Canadian Parliament, a party must win 12 seats in order to be officially recognized. With just four seats, the Bloc now falls short of this standard. It is a heavy blow for their party; without it, they do not have the right to participate in the House during Question Period, nor do they have access to funding for staff and research afforded only to officially recognized parties. This development will starve them of attention through QP and greatly limit their ability to efficiently gather resources to conduct House business. In short, they can't do much in the House of Commons as elected MPs.
3. Political Contributions Will Plummet
As a result of becoming a non-factor in the House, there is little incentive for Quebec business or individuals to contribute financially to the BQ's upkeep. They cannot claim to represent the province's interests in the House anymore -- not when the NDP owns more seats in Quebec than they ever did in their two decades of existence. All that money will divert from the Bloc and start to flow into NDP coffers, which should give them to opportunity to marshal resources into the province on a scale they could never reach previously. Since the NDP will want to be in Quebec for the long term, it's logical they will invest significant capital into building an efficient electoral machine in the province.
The research money the NDP will get is about to get a generous bump upwards as well, since such funding is doled out proportionally based on the size of a party's caucus. When the guys replacing you will have three times as much cash as they did before to do what you used to do, the writing's on the wall. And if you can't get your friends to give you the cash you need to fight back, the battle is a hopeless cause.
4. And the Coup de Grâce ...
Stephen Harper declared last night that his government would get back to work today. There are a number of items on his to-do list in the first 100 days, most notably his commitments to pass his budget and re-introduce his crime agenda in the Commons. But also high among his priorities is his determination to end per vote public subsidies for political parties.
The Conservatives have argued these subsidies artificially prop up the BQ and remove any urgency from its external fundraising efforts. So the removal of the subsidies will starve them of financing critical to any attempt at rebuilding the party.
In 2010, the Bloc raised $834,762 in direct donations from individuals, but collected $2.8 million in per vote subsidies.
I've already said their donation base is about to shrink dramatically.
You do the math.
Bloc Leader Gilles Duceppe went down to defeat in his riding, along with nearly everyone else in his caucus. The disastrous BQ campaign can be attributed to a lack of energy, purpose and cohesion, and the person who has to take the lion's share of the blame is Duceppe. There was no way he could have remained as leader, even if he'd pulled out a win in his seat. The first Bloc MP ever elected to the House of Commons is done.
But the bigger reason why the BQ's future is so hampered by his loss is due to a lack of a clear successor. Duceppe has taken up so much of the party's oxygen over the years that there is no heir apparent to his deeply corroded crown. Plus, with the repudiation coming from all sides of their traditional support base (both nationalist and sovereigntist), they have virtually no policy room to argue for their continued existence.
The first crisis this party faces in the aftermath of their historic annihilation is their utter rudderlessness.
2. Loss of Official Party Status
In the Canadian Parliament, a party must win 12 seats in order to be officially recognized. With just four seats, the Bloc now falls short of this standard. It is a heavy blow for their party; without it, they do not have the right to participate in the House during Question Period, nor do they have access to funding for staff and research afforded only to officially recognized parties. This development will starve them of attention through QP and greatly limit their ability to efficiently gather resources to conduct House business. In short, they can't do much in the House of Commons as elected MPs.
3. Political Contributions Will Plummet
As a result of becoming a non-factor in the House, there is little incentive for Quebec business or individuals to contribute financially to the BQ's upkeep. They cannot claim to represent the province's interests in the House anymore -- not when the NDP owns more seats in Quebec than they ever did in their two decades of existence. All that money will divert from the Bloc and start to flow into NDP coffers, which should give them to opportunity to marshal resources into the province on a scale they could never reach previously. Since the NDP will want to be in Quebec for the long term, it's logical they will invest significant capital into building an efficient electoral machine in the province.
The research money the NDP will get is about to get a generous bump upwards as well, since such funding is doled out proportionally based on the size of a party's caucus. When the guys replacing you will have three times as much cash as they did before to do what you used to do, the writing's on the wall. And if you can't get your friends to give you the cash you need to fight back, the battle is a hopeless cause.
4. And the Coup de Grâce ...
Stephen Harper declared last night that his government would get back to work today. There are a number of items on his to-do list in the first 100 days, most notably his commitments to pass his budget and re-introduce his crime agenda in the Commons. But also high among his priorities is his determination to end per vote public subsidies for political parties.
The Conservatives have argued these subsidies artificially prop up the BQ and remove any urgency from its external fundraising efforts. So the removal of the subsidies will starve them of financing critical to any attempt at rebuilding the party.
In 2010, the Bloc raised $834,762 in direct donations from individuals, but collected $2.8 million in per vote subsidies.
I've already said their donation base is about to shrink dramatically.
You do the math.
A Quick Comment on Election 2011
As the votes continue to be counted, the seat count at this exact moment is 166 Conservatives, 103 NDP, 34 Liberals, 4 Bloc Quebecois and 1 Green Party MP.
It is a truly amazing result. The Canadian electoral map has been completely redone. This election is a watershed moment in our political history.
I will have more analysis after the results are more solid. But let me signal one thing that I will be exploring in the days ahead -- the assumption that there is a left-wing split in this country between Liberals and the NDP. John Ibbitson wrote a response article about the election results, arguing this point. He wrote that now is the time to combine the parties, and merge Canada's two left-of-centre parties.
This is wrong. The Liberals are NOT a left-of-centre party. But if they want to be taken over by the NDP, they should feel free to propose it.
Now is not the time for Jack Layton to even entertain such a proposal. Most progressives reject outright that the Liberals can be counted among their ranks. We will see what the Liberals do next, and how long Ignatieff will remain at the helm, but an NDP/Liberal merger can only happen on NDP terms at this point, which is exactly why the Liberals will never do it.
Let's give Layton and his team the next four years to strengthen themselves as a true government-in-waiting and then see what voters think. The people of Canada are sick of the pundits and the Liberals telling them what they should think.
Monday, May 02, 2011
Some Final Election 2011 Thoughts
Tonight, the 41st election in Canada's history will reshape our political map.
Or not.
Depending on factors that are beyond the ability of mere mortals to predict, we will either get a slim Conservative majority or the wildest, craziest election result the country has ever seen.
A quick recap:
- The "Seinfeld election" the Tories desperately wanted us to have died with the debates. Pundits will look back on this campaign and see that Layton landed punches in those events that resonated far beyond what was considered his base support. Everything changed from that point on, and the Liberals and Tories were slow to react. We'll see if they reacted well enough to dampen Dipper dreams.
- The Conservatives have campaigned on a "majority or bust" basis. For Stephen Harper, anything less than a majority is a loss. I think it's highly unlikely he keeps his job if the Tories are held to a minority. However, if he wins a majority, he gains the chance to solidify his gains over the next four years. I view this moment as a razor's edge point in our country's evolution. I hope voters pull us back from the brink.
- The Liberals under Michael Ignatieff are sliding further and further into irrelevance. While people have been talking incessantly about the NDP "orange crush" that started in Quebec and started affecting voting intentions elsewhere, less ink has been spilled about the fact the Grits have launched a similar red tide across the country. Starting with the sponsorship scandal, the Liberal Party has failed to reverse a spreading sentiment of discontent and disinterest in their policies and personnel. As much as the Dipper Wave is the main story of the past two weeks, the Descent Into The Red for Ignatieff's party (which is now taking hold across the country and was first triggered in Quebec) is a story for the historical ages.
- Gilles Duceppe has fought his last election campaign. The destruction of Election 2011 leaves him with no option but to resign, which will also kill any remnant hopes he may have had about eventually contesting the provincial PQ leadership. In the postmortem analysis of the BQ's electoral humiliation, the blame for this debacle will land squarely on his shoulders, no matter how many seats the party wins later tonight. The party itself no longer has a firm raison d'être nor a compelling case to make about its future relevance. Going forward, the Tories will absorb right-leaning voters, the NDP left-leaners, and the Liberals ... well, they'll have time to contemplate another butt-whupping dans la belle province. The BQ may remain, but only as a rump, unless they can find a purpose, and fast.
- Finally, the NDP gained the most of any party from a simmering discontent with politics as usual, the political mobilization of the youth vote, negative campaigning tactics that turned off many voters and a disintegration of the entente between soft nationalists and the sovereigntist Bloc. Whether this stunning turn of events translates into enough seats for Jack Layton to become Opposition Leader, or better, depends on fluid factors even Nostradamus would have trouble handicapping. All previous political assumptions are out the window. What lies ahead for all of us depends greatly on this party's final seat tally vis-à-vis the Conservatives.
Full disclosure: I have been fairly clear in my commentary during the campaign that I am anti-Harper and ambivalent towards Michael Ignatieff. I have always admired Jack Layton, and I campaigned on behalf of Alexa McDonough in Halifax during the 2005-06 campaign. I am not a card-carrying member of the NDP, though at points in my life I have carried a card both for that party and for the Liberals (when I was a university student at Queen's). My dislike of Ignatieff's party stems from my experience as a Young Liberal in the mid-1990s, when the pro-Martin forces were taking over the internal operations of the party in anticipation of their guy usurping Jean Chrétien in the PM's chair. I was disgusted by their methods and remain a conscientious objector to the way they do politics. I nevertheless campaigned for Peter Milliken, the former Speaker of the House of Commons, in his Kingston and the Islands riding during the 1997 and 2000 election campaigns. I have a great deal of respect for Peter, whom I consider a friend, and wish him all the best in his retirement.
I am not a disinterested commentator. I am not an NDP shill, but I also hew closest to their political philosophy and ideas. I believe all Canadians should express their personal political views as clearly and as loudly as they feel comfortable doing, and I certainly have chosen this blog to do that very thing. However, I believe strongly that all people should exercise their franchise in the way they believe is best.
I implore you to go to the polls and vote your conscience (whether that's in accordance with your personal views or a strategic ballot) before the ballot boxes are sealed today. Vote for whichever party you support, and be proud to register your opinion this way. And if you feel none of the above should get your vote, then go to your polling station and spoil your ballot. Don't take your rights for granted. Stand up and be counted.
Then go home to relax with family and friends, and take in the coverage that will be all over the airwaves tonight. May 2, 2011 will be a historic day. Participate in it.
- The Conservatives have campaigned on a "majority or bust" basis. For Stephen Harper, anything less than a majority is a loss. I think it's highly unlikely he keeps his job if the Tories are held to a minority. However, if he wins a majority, he gains the chance to solidify his gains over the next four years. I view this moment as a razor's edge point in our country's evolution. I hope voters pull us back from the brink.
- The Liberals under Michael Ignatieff are sliding further and further into irrelevance. While people have been talking incessantly about the NDP "orange crush" that started in Quebec and started affecting voting intentions elsewhere, less ink has been spilled about the fact the Grits have launched a similar red tide across the country. Starting with the sponsorship scandal, the Liberal Party has failed to reverse a spreading sentiment of discontent and disinterest in their policies and personnel. As much as the Dipper Wave is the main story of the past two weeks, the Descent Into The Red for Ignatieff's party (which is now taking hold across the country and was first triggered in Quebec) is a story for the historical ages.
- Gilles Duceppe has fought his last election campaign. The destruction of Election 2011 leaves him with no option but to resign, which will also kill any remnant hopes he may have had about eventually contesting the provincial PQ leadership. In the postmortem analysis of the BQ's electoral humiliation, the blame for this debacle will land squarely on his shoulders, no matter how many seats the party wins later tonight. The party itself no longer has a firm raison d'être nor a compelling case to make about its future relevance. Going forward, the Tories will absorb right-leaning voters, the NDP left-leaners, and the Liberals ... well, they'll have time to contemplate another butt-whupping dans la belle province. The BQ may remain, but only as a rump, unless they can find a purpose, and fast.
- Finally, the NDP gained the most of any party from a simmering discontent with politics as usual, the political mobilization of the youth vote, negative campaigning tactics that turned off many voters and a disintegration of the entente between soft nationalists and the sovereigntist Bloc. Whether this stunning turn of events translates into enough seats for Jack Layton to become Opposition Leader, or better, depends on fluid factors even Nostradamus would have trouble handicapping. All previous political assumptions are out the window. What lies ahead for all of us depends greatly on this party's final seat tally vis-à-vis the Conservatives.
Full disclosure: I have been fairly clear in my commentary during the campaign that I am anti-Harper and ambivalent towards Michael Ignatieff. I have always admired Jack Layton, and I campaigned on behalf of Alexa McDonough in Halifax during the 2005-06 campaign. I am not a card-carrying member of the NDP, though at points in my life I have carried a card both for that party and for the Liberals (when I was a university student at Queen's). My dislike of Ignatieff's party stems from my experience as a Young Liberal in the mid-1990s, when the pro-Martin forces were taking over the internal operations of the party in anticipation of their guy usurping Jean Chrétien in the PM's chair. I was disgusted by their methods and remain a conscientious objector to the way they do politics. I nevertheless campaigned for Peter Milliken, the former Speaker of the House of Commons, in his Kingston and the Islands riding during the 1997 and 2000 election campaigns. I have a great deal of respect for Peter, whom I consider a friend, and wish him all the best in his retirement.
I am not a disinterested commentator. I am not an NDP shill, but I also hew closest to their political philosophy and ideas. I believe all Canadians should express their personal political views as clearly and as loudly as they feel comfortable doing, and I certainly have chosen this blog to do that very thing. However, I believe strongly that all people should exercise their franchise in the way they believe is best.
I implore you to go to the polls and vote your conscience (whether that's in accordance with your personal views or a strategic ballot) before the ballot boxes are sealed today. Vote for whichever party you support, and be proud to register your opinion this way. And if you feel none of the above should get your vote, then go to your polling station and spoil your ballot. Don't take your rights for granted. Stand up and be counted.
Then go home to relax with family and friends, and take in the coverage that will be all over the airwaves tonight. May 2, 2011 will be a historic day. Participate in it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)