re Canada's General election (post comments here)

The fact remains that an overwhelming majority of Canadians rejected Harper and his party. Remember Canada is still a democracy .

 

Except those who voted Liberal.

 

True. But many Canadians still remember the day when Brian Mulroney and Ronald Reagan sang "Irish Eyes" on national television. There is still some spill over from the Mulroney days, and perhaps this is what carried over to last weeks election. Harper has some excellent ideas and a solid platform. Just too bad nobody out there was listening.

 

Sorry Leo, perhaps I wasn't clear.

When I said that I personally do not feel that the Liberals earned the right to form another government I meant that was my personal opinion. I did not mean that they should not in a practical sense form the government. They have more seats than any other party, therefore they will form the government (minority in this case).

I did not feel that they deserved to win (such as they did) the election and I cast my vote accordingly. I was on the losing side and I acknowledge that.

 

While I fully agree that the Liberals received more popular support that the Conservatives I think that it is worth noting that the liberals have a minority of seats in parliament and recieved only 37% of the vote. Hardly an overwhelming mandate. 67% of Canadians voted either Liberal or Conservative. Of that 67% 44.8% voted Conservative, 55.2% voted Liberal. I think you might be able to say that a pretty significant portion of Canadians rejected the Liberals too.

I don't think anyone here is forgetting that Canada is a democracy.

 

Canadian Federal Election

It's great to see that some people have commented on the Canadian federal election. Leading up to the big day, there was even some interest from high profile Americans such as Michael Moore and Ralph Nader. Here are my thoughts of the final results:

Liberal Party

In many ways, I was baffled by their election strategy. While their record as a governing party wasn't squeaky clean (e.g. sponsorship scandal), they did accomplish some key goals from 1993-2004. The Liberals tamed the government deficit and tackled the government's debt, which contributed to a period of economic growth, low interest rates, and low inflation. Canada's economy is in pretty good shape and should have propelled the Liberals to an easy win.

Unfortunately, rather than run a campaign based on their record in government, the Liberals bashed the Conservatives and scared most people into voting Liberal (e.g. go with the evil you know). At the end of the day, Paul Martin did not connect with voters like Jean Chretien did in the past. In fairness to Martin, Chretien never had to deal with a "united right."

Conservative Party

The Conservatives under Stephen Harper got a gift-wrapped campaign issue: the sponsorship scandal. With this, the Conservatives took the moral high ground and scored a lot of points at the Liberals' expense. However, in the last week or two, the Conservative campaign lost momentum. There were several things that contributed to the Conservatives' loss:

1. Candidates with unpopular views about issues like abortion could not keep their mouths shut. At the very least, this was a sign of an undisciplined party which was not ready to govern. At the very most, this validated the Liberal view that the Conservatives had a hidden agenda and were not to be trusted.

2. Whether Harper wanted to admit it or not, there was still some resentment from former PC people over the merger. This led to some high profile candidates either defecting to the Liberals or endorsing Liberal candidates.

3. In the last two weeks of the campaign, Harper stayed close to home and played it safe, while Martin concentrated in southern Ontario and travelled all over Canada. I think that Harper should have done more in Ontario and the results support that.

In order to move forward, the Conservatives need to decide whether they are still the Reform/Canadian Alliance or a party with national appeal. If they want national appeal, they need a platform which is friendly to Canadian voters. All of their candidates need to stick to the platform and not let their personal opinions fuel the opposition's hysteria. Finally, they need a leader with national appeal (e.g. Bernard Lord). Maybe Harper can turn it around, but he is already talking about stepping down. Better luck next time!

In summary, I am glad that there was a Liberal minority. Majority governments inevitably lead to abuse of power and corruption, no matter who's in control. As stated above, I don't believe the Conservatives were quite ready to go. Part of this can be blamed on the Liberals for their opportunistic election call.

Now that the Liberals cannot go it alone any more, I believe they will be more accountable in terms of ethics and public policy.

Thanks for reading,

Michael Weedon

 

Re: Canadian Federal Election

I find such sentiment ridiculous and akin to racism. Why is it that everyone but an Albertan is assumed to have national appeal?

Does Winnipeg still have square mile after square mile of run-down urban blight that you can't find in Calgary and have to look hard to find in Edmonton? Oh yes and how's the socialist experiment going or did I just describe it?

 

Just to set the record straight, I never stated that Albertans lacked national appeal. However, on several occasions, the Conservatives have reverted to the Reform/Canadian Alliance pattern of advocating unpopular views. Here are just a few examples:

1. There was a Conservative candidate comparing abortion to the beheading of an American citizen in Iraq.

2. Harper characterized the people of Atlantic Canada as being "defeatist" (whether he meant to or not).

3. Harper talked about erecting a "firewall" about Alberta to prevent oil & gas revenues from flowing to the federal government.

Regardless of the validity of these viewpoints, these are not views that Canadians normally associate with a tolerant, united Canada. The Conservative party has come a long way in a very short time. However, they need a platform with national appeal (partially accomplished), candidates that can articulate the platform to voters (OK with a few exceptions), and they also need to lure back the disgruntled former PC members/voters that flocked to the Liberals.

As for Manitoba, we are doing OK, thanks for asking. We regularly compete with Alberta for having the lowest unemployment rate in Canada. Our NDP government has continued the PC tradition of balancing the books and not doing anything too rash. While we may not have billions of dollars from oil & gas revenues and we are dealing with the BSE crisis, Manitoba is still a great place to call home! Now if we could just open the border to Canadian beef!

Michael Weedon

 

But the Americans still think we are sending them bull!

 

1. Some Liberals have voiced opinions on the burning issue of the 1970s, abortion, but because they are Liberals we assume they will never do as they promise.

2. Duh! Do you mean the 10-2-40 lifestyle doesn't exist? Work 10 weeks, wait 2 weeks, collect unemployment insurance for 40 weeks. It's a cottage industry in Atlantic Canada.

3. The firewall would merely be opting out of federal programs wherever possible just like that great Liberal ruled province with a national agenda, Quebec.

 

I'm no lover of the Liberals, but between them and the Bloq I'll take the Liberals anyday. And between the Provincial Libs and the PQ, well that one's easy too.

Actually, Jean Charest has been irritating a few of his Liberal compatriots recently by proposing things such as smaller government. Somewhere along the way they (the Quebec Liberal Party) forgot they recruited a Tory.

Not like he's going to get reelected anyway.

As far as Stephen Harper goes I think he's smart, tough and would be a good PM. I think that he would generally promote a good national agenda. Unfortunately, he's still viewed as part of the Reform party so that was the kiss of death in Ontario. You know, what with him being a baby eater and all.

 

Over simplifaction of the facts. Have you ever been in Atlantic or Eastern Canada?

 

Why? They all live out here.

Simplified yes. Actually it's sometimes 2-10-2-40. Fish 2 weeks, report 10 weeks, wait 2 weeks, draw 40 weeks.

It's half way to London and costs twice as much to get there - a Canadian thing - no competition from foreign carriers.

I actually saw Quebec once accross Lac des Allumette from that fine vacation spot CFB Petawawa. Have been to Ontario a few times but there are 100 other places to see on earth ahead of eastern Canada.

 

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Dennis Ruhl


1. Some Liberals have voiced opinions on the burning issue of the 1970s, abortion, but because they are Liberals we assume they will never do as they promise.

2. Duh! Do you mean the 10-2-40 lifestyle doesn't exist? Work 10 weeks, wait 2 weeks, collect unemployment insurance for 40 weeks. It's a cottage industry in Atlantic Canada.

3. The firewall would merely be opting out of federal programs wherever possible just like that great Liberal ruled province with a national agenda, Quebec.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Actually, both the Liberals and NDP have had candidates with controversial viewpoints on abortion. However, these parties did a better job of enforcing party discipline and ensuring their candidates either stick to the party line or not say anything. Differences in opinion within parties happens all the time, but the place to resolve those disputes is in caucus, not in the media.

2. I seriously doubt that all Atlantic Canada people like being unemployed. For decades, these people have had to make the painful choice of either staying in the areas they were born in and love (and being poor) or leaving Atlantic Canada for better opportunities. Thousands of people have left Atlantic Canada and have not returned because of a lack of economic opportunities. Hopefully, offshore oil and gas opportunities will reverse this trend.

3. Alberta (or any other province for that matter) would be doing a disservice to Canadian unity by thinking that because Quebec can opt out of federal programs, then everyone should. It is our strong national programs (e.g. health care) that make Canada one of the best countries in the world to live.

Michael Weedon