Globe and Mail endorses Conservatives but pans Harper

The Globe and Mail published an editorial endorsement of the Conservatives as they have done for several elections now but at the same time they reject Stephen Harper.

+ Add Image

One might think that this was a piece in The Onion, but no it is actually in the Globe and Mail. This is the fourth straight federal election in which the Globe has endorsed the Conservatives. The editorial claims the Conservative Party deserves another term primarily because of its economic policies but that Harper should go because he has been bad, bad, bad. The Globe then is in the anyone but Harper camp but at the same time wants to elect the Conservatives. Who said you cannot square the circle?

Harper, the editorial claims, has created a "rotten" governmental culture. His vision is "narrow." He exhibits "meanness of spirit." His campaign has descended into "American-style, culture war over niqabs and 'barbaric cultural practices." The editorial moans: “The spectacle of a prime minister seemingly willing to say anything, or demonize anyone, in an attempt to get re-elected has demeaned our politics." The Globe agrees with those who say it is time for change and Harper must go but insists that the Conservatives should stay: “It is not time for the Conservatives to go. But it is time for Mr. Harper to take his leave.” So when we elect another Conservative government on Monday the Globe and Mail calls on Harper to quickly resign.

This would be a novel move for a leader who wins an election. The Globe does not say what it will do if Harper does not resign. One article points out that the Globe's own editorial board has criticized the party countless times for being "anti-democratic, xenophobic, and opposed to Canadian values." Of course this is quite wrong. It is not the party but Harper whom they are criticizing. As the editorial concludes: The Conservatives have been a big tent party in the past, and they must be once again. Fiscally prudent, economically liberal and socially progressive – the party could be all of those things, and it once was. But it won’t be, as long as Mr. Harper is at its head. His party deserves to be re-elected.Perhaps this was a draft editorial left lying around that was supposed to be published on April 1 and mistakenly published on Friday.

Latest polls conflict but race is close with no one party forging ahead

Two recent polls show Liberals now leading the NDP but the margin is so slim that it is virtually a tie. Another recent poll shows the Liberals and Conservatives tied for the lead with the NDP third. Another recent poll shows the NDP clearly in the lead.

+ Add Image	1 of 2

These polls provide a golden opportunity for each party to choose a poll which favors them enabling them to claim that their campaign is progressing well. The most recent CBC poll tracker averages a number of recent polls up to September 9 but there have been two new polls since then and another is expected today. Two of three recent polls in the poll tracker averages put the Liberals ahead but the averages bring the results to a statistical tie with the NDP.

Averages as of Sept 9 are: Conservatives, 28 percent a gain of a whole percentage point from the last averages; NDP 31.6, a decline of 0.7 percent; the Liberals 31.5 percent, a gain of 0.2 percent. For the first time seat predictions favor the Liberals at 119, versus 113 for the NDP, and 105 for the Conservatives. Obviously the race for seats is also tightening up.

A new Nanos poll with results from Septmber 10 show the Liberals and Conservatives tied at 31 percent with the NDP at 30 percent. Given the margin of error this is no doubt a statistical tie among all three major parties. This poll was not included in the CBC poll-tracker averages. Another poll not included in the average comes from Forum research. This poll headlines the NDP as having a clear lead unlike other recent polls. The NDP garners 36 percent of the vote with the Liberals at 29 percent and Conservatives at 28. The poll was taken September 9 and 10.

Eric Grenier of threehundredeight.com summed up the situation as he saw it on Friday: A trend away from the Conservatives and towards the Liberals is definitely taking place in this campaign. But it seems that the narrative of the NDP-Liberal switchers does not particularly hold. Since Week 2, the New Democrats have been steady. The gains the Liberals have made seem to have come from the Conservatives.Grenier updates the averages for CBC poll-tracker. Since I started this article there has been an update that incorporates the two recent polls I mentioned.

Updated poll-tracker results are: Conservatives at 29.7 per cent up 1.7 percent from last polls; Liberals at 29.8 percent, down 1.7 per cent from last polls; and NDP back in the lead at 32 percent with a gain of 0.4 percent. The averages do not support Grenier's remarks about the Liberals gaining votes at the expense of the Conservatives rather than the NDP. The polls show that the Conservatives in the latest polls are gaining votes at the expense of the Liberals showing a reversal in the trend Grenier detected. In seat projections, the NDP are first again at 115; and the Conservatives second with 113, with the Liberals at 109. However, the three are all so close anyone could win. There is no sign yet of anyone pulling out from the pack or even approaching the 170 seats needed for a majority government.

Reasons for Conservative supporters to vote for Mulcair's NDP

Except for dedicated loyalists who will hear no evil, see no evil, nor speak no evil of Stephen Harper most supporters of the Conservative Party must realize that the Harper brand is irredeemably damaged.

+ Add Image

The question now for Conservative supporters is: " What is to be done? " A careful examination of the facts points to a rather surprising answer. Conservative supporters should vote for the New Democratic Party under its leader Thomas Mulcair. This may appear shocking and counter-intuitive to many but consider some of the reasons why this makes sense.

Before he became leader of the NDP , Mulcair actually tried to get a job with the Federal Conservatives as an advisor to the Harper government. According to one narrative he did not get the job because he asked for double the money being offered. According to an alternative version, Mulcair could not support Harper's environmental policies so the deal fell through. So why did he seek the job knowing the dismal record of Harper on the environment? Did he hope to reform the Harper government perhaps? According to former senior Conservative staffers the talks about the position were a prelude to having Mulcair run as a Conservative candidate in 2008. If Mulcair was acceptable as an advisor and a Conservative candidate surely he deserves the votes of conservatives now when Harper's star is dimming and may soon go dark.

There is nothing strange about the Conservatives, even the Harper Conservatives, supporting prominent NDP figures. Gary Doer was a long-time NDP premier of Manitoba. He resigned when Stephen Harper offered him the position of Canadian ambassador to the US. No doubt he is busy in Washington promoting the Keystone XL pipeline and other projects and policies pushed by the Harper government.

Mulcair would carry on the adulation of Israel characteristic of Harper. As well as cracking down on critics of Israel within the NDP, Mulcair said:“I am an ardent supporter of Israel in all situations and in all circumstances.” [“…je suis un ardent supporter de toutes les instances et de toutes les circonstances d’Israël.”]*

~Thomas Mulcair, quoted in Canadian Jewish News, May 1st, 2008

Even on economic matters where the NDP is regarded as interventionist, spendthrift, and opposed to free market neo-liberal policies, Mulcair has expressed admiration and support for that darling of conservatives globally Margaret Thatcher. Waxing eloquent, Mulcair declaimed while a member of the Quebec provincial Liberal government that the success of the UK economy under Thatcher's Conservative Party rule was due to the "winds of liberty and liberalism" that "swept across the markets in England". Sounding very much like a neo-liberal apologist and pundit, Mulcair in 2001 said:"A government should never pretend it can replace the private market. It does not work," Mulcair said in 2001. "It didn't work in England. Up until Thatcher's time, that's what they tried, the government stuck its nose everywhere."This surely shows that Mulcair espouses conservative values even though as leader of an allegedly left-leaning party he may from time to time spout rhetoric he thinks appropriate to retaining his leftist base. If there is any doubt here is another bit from Mulcair that could easily come from a writer for the Fraser Institute: "..interventionism is a failure. A government can create the conditions conducive to the creation of jobs… but the best way for a government to create wealth is to let the private market thrive and to get off the back of business men and women."

Surely there is a compelling case for Conservative supporters to vote NDP this time around.

NDP and Conservatives virtually tied in projection for most seats in fall election

The probability of the Conservatives under leader Stephen Harper winning the next federal election is 50.4, according to a Globe and Mail model.

 

+ Add Image	1 of 2

While the New Democratic Party(NDP) has a small lead over the Conservatives in recent polls, this does not necessarily mean the NDP will take more seats than the Conservatives. For example, almost doubling support in Alberta from the last election may do little to change the huge margins by which many federal Conservatives win in Alberta. The prediction assumes current conditions, past voting behavior and normal campaign changes.

The Liberals, who had hoped to do well with their young new leader Justin Trudeau have only a 2.9 per cent chance of winning the most seats. However, the probablity of the NDP and Liberals together winning a majority of seats is 97.2 percent. In any European country this would mean the NDP and Liberals should join in a coalition government especially since both are to left of the Conservatives. However, coalitions in Canada are seen as unpopular. Justin Trudeau has insisted he would not form a coalition with the NDP. If the Conservatives do not get a majority they might decide to rule simply as a minority government.

The NDP is often regarded as a spendthrift party since they favor expenditures on social programs. However, historically the data do not support this as shown here. The NDP has never been in power federally so the data for the NDP is of provincial governments. Another article points out that the recent NDP government in Manitoba has seen increasing debt levels and downgrading by Moody's, but there is no comparison with what is happening in other provinces and a couple of examples do not change the overall statistics.

Data from the Poll Tracker show predicted seat results if an election were held now based on a number of recent polls. There are very helpful graphs and charts with the results. There will be 338 seats up for grabs in the House of Commons. To form a majority a party needs 170 seats. The NDP would win 128 seats; the Conservatives, 118 seats; Liberals, 88; Bloc Quebecois, 3; Green Party, 1. The Bloc Quebecois is a separatist party that runs only in Quebec province. The Poll Tracker gives a different result than the Globe simulations but are in the same general range. While the NDP wins over the Conservatives, they are nowhere near a majority position being 42 seats short.

The Liberals gain 27 seats in Ontario compared to 2011. In Manitoba and Saskatchewan the NDP has gained a number of seats despite the NDP being far less popular provincially in Saskatchewan than the conservative Saskatchewan party. A fascinating article at the National Observer shows how Harper's Conservatives might win the election.

Well-known Toronto-based election consultant Warren Kinsella, a former campaign strategist for Jean Chretien predicts : “Harper is going to win [the next election]...Until the progressive side gets its act together, Harper is going to win because [the progressives] are splitting the vote. It’s a perfect cleavage."The left vote is split at least three ways in Canada between the NDP, the Liberals, and the Green Party. Often as the election nears the Liberals will urge leftists in other parties to vote for them as the only practical alternative. In third place this time, that narrative is not likely to work.

Harper is willing to use vicious tactics to win elections. Mike Casey, a veteran Democratic communications consultant in Virignia claims:“Stephen Harper is willing to burn the house down to own the lot. ‘I will bring a gun to a knife fight. You can call foul while you’re lying bleeding on the floor' — that is the kind of ethic.”

Kinsella notes however, that Conservative success is based upon extensive research:“What the Conservatives have been able to do for a decade now is high quality research – the kind of research that only previously Coca-Cola and Procter and Gamble could afford,”

Conservative ad strategists believe that their is no sense directing ads towards people who you know are not going to vote for you. Patrick Muttart, one of Harper's top advisers since 2004, said:“Close campaigns are decided by the least informed, least engaged voters. These voters do not go looking for political news and information. This necessitates brutally simple communication with clear choices that hits the voter, whether they like it or not.”Conservative strategists use an approach called "hypersegmentation" in which party polling identifies voter demands and then ads are designed to appeal to specific segments of the population often with the help of focus groups. Research identifies seniors, working-class suburbanites especially in suburbs of Vancouver and Toronto, and families as the best targets. Policies were adopted to gain their votes to with income splitting for seniors, and families were extended tax credits. The Jewish community was offered full support for Israel.

Muttart even gives names to the different group segments. There are "Zoes" who are young, single, female, progressive downtown apartment-dwellers. Zoes are a lost cause, will never vote Conservative and should be ignored. Conservatives should target their messages to "Steves and Heathers" who are married, Protestant, small business owners with children. They are in their forties and live in the suburbs. They should also target "Eunices," widows in their seventies living on modest pensions. These groups can be usefully targeted with ads designed to entice them to vote Conservative. We will know on election day whether these well-honed techniques can overcome the accumulation of negative baggage the Conservatives have accumulated and the negative effects of a slowing Canadian economy.

Federal Conservatives have ten point lead over Liberals.

This lead will probably not hold up after the recent problems in the Conservative cabinet. That the NDP dropped three points seems rather anomalous. Perhaps this poll is a bit anomalous. It will be interesting to see what the next polls show. At least the lead is not enough to give Harper a majority so he is not likely to try to provoke an election. Ignatieff will do the same as Dion and support the Conservatives but without the Green Shift! This is from MacLeans.

Tories build up double-digit lead
New poll suggests a snap election would return nearly identical Parliament

The federal Conservatives have built up a 10-point lead over their Liberal party challengers thanks in part to a 3-point jump in the last month alone. The latest survey by Ipsos Reid Public Affairs has the Conservatives in a comfortable lead at 37 per cent to the Liberals’ 27 per cent. While the Liberals lost one point since March, the NDP dropped three to land at 15 per cent support. The Greens and the Bloc were tied for fourth at 10 per cent. The results are largely identical to those of the last election, says Ipsos president and CEO Darrell Bricker, “and we already know the results of that.”

Conservatives to introduce tighter parole rules for non-violent offenders.

The Conservatives are now beginning to implement their help the prison-industrial complex agenda which is easy to sell since the public for the most part will always buy into a be harsh on crime program. Some Liberals may object and the NDP but they will do nothing. Not only do they not want to bring down the government but they do not want to appear as soft on crime. Of course jails are tremendously expensive and conservatives always worry about govt. expenditures and entitlements. But criminals need not worry about their entitlements to go to prison! That is safe and even expanding.


Tories propose tighter parole rules

CBC News
Minister of Public Safety Peter Van Loan says non-violent criminals such as fraudsters and drug dealers should have to earn the right to parole. (Canadian Press)
The federal government said Monday it will introduce legislation to crack down on early parole for non-violent offenders, a move it says will augment proposed tougher sentences for white-collar criminals.
The new legislation will change existing laws that allow non-violent criminals convicted of a first offence to be eligible for early parole after serving just one-sixth of their sentences and full parole after serving one-third of their sentences, said Minister of Public Safety Peter Van Loan at a press conference in Montreal.
He said under the current laws, criminals such as fraudsters and drug dealers are routinely granted parole in these circumstances, unless the parole board believes the parolees might commit violent crimes.
Van Loan proposes changes that will require criminals to demonstrate they have earned their parole.
"This will move us one step closer to a system of parole in which early release is a privilege granted only to those who have shown they are committed to rehabilitation rather than a right granted to every criminal," he said.
Conservative push for tougher sentencing
The Conservative government has introduced a number of bills to lengthen prison sentences for people convicted of crimes. In June, the government introduced legislation to repeal the "faint hope clause" that allows people convicted of first- and second-degree murder to apply for early parole.
Parliament gave approval last week to Bill C-25, which does away with a judge's ability to give two-for-one credit to criminals for time spent in pretrial custody.
And Justice Minister Rob Nicholson has also proposed tougher measures for white-collar criminals, including two-year minimum sentences in fraud cases involving more than $1 million.
Van Loan said while tougher sentences for white-collar criminals are welcome, they won't be effective unless parole laws are also changed.
"It’s one thing to increase sentences," he said. "It’s another thing to make sure criminals actually serve out their time before they’re released back into our communities."
Van Loan said the new measure will cost taxpayers about $60 million a year to pay to keep the non-violent criminals in prisons, but he described the cost as a bargain relative to the amount of money fraudsters have reportedly stolen from individuals.
The move to impose harsher penalties on white-collar criminals comes after a number of high-profile cases in Canada this year.
In Alberta last month, two men were charged in a scheme that police say robbed about 4,000 investors of up to $400 million. And in Quebec, Montreal investment dealer Earl Jones is facing fraud charges over an alleged Ponzi scheme that led to the disappearance of over $50 million in investors' savings.
Critics of the Conservative initiatives have suggested they will do little to actually discourage white-collar crime.
Duff Conacher, a coordinator for Democracy Watch, said last week that the U.S. experience shows that high penalties do not decrease the rate of corporate crime, even in countries with a national securities commission.
"The regulators either don't have the resources or the tough enforcement attitude to have a high chance of catching fraudsters," Conacher said.

Canada Ruling Conservatives well ahead in new poll.

This is from Reuters via Canada.com. I wonder if this polling organisation has connections to the Conservatives since it seems to regularly give them larger margins than other pollsters according to this article. With these results and the rather uninspiring results of the recent byelections we can expect Dion to sit on his hands while making bleating sounds with his mouth.

Canada ruling Conservatives well ahead in new poll
Reuters
Published: Tuesday, March 18, 2008
OTTAWA (Reuters) - Canada's ruling Conservatives have taken a commanding lead over the opposition Liberals but do not have enough support to obtain a majority government in the next election, a poll showed on Tuesday.

The Strategic Counsel survey for the Globe and Mail and CTV put support for the Conservatives at 38 percent, down one percentage point from a poll done by the same firm a month ago. The Liberals were steady at 27 percent.

The Strategic Counsel regularly gives the Conservatives large leads. Polls by other firms show either a narrow Conservative advantage or a tie between the two parties.


Under Canada's first-past-the-post electoral system, a party needs to capture around 40 percent of the public vote to stand a reasonable chance of winning a majority of the 308 seats in the federal Parliament.

The Strategic Counsel poll of 1,000 Canadians was conducted between March 13 and 16 and is considered accurate to within 3.1 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.

(Reporting by David Ljunggren; Editing by Bernadette Baum)





© Reuters 2008

Tories revive terror measures

The Liberals seem not to be even mounting token opposition to the omnibus crime bill or these terror measures. Why would Harper bother to provoke an election when he can coast along relying on the Liberals as if he had a majority?

Tories seek to revive disputed terror measures

Dion opposed extension in spring but now poised to give his support

Oct 24, 2007 04:30 AM
Tonda MacCharles
Ottawa Bureau

OTTAWA–The Conservative government has tweaked two extraordinary anti-terror powers of arrest and interrogation in a bid to revive the lapsed measures – and win support from a weakened Liberal party seeking to avoid confrontation.

The Commons voted last spring to let the two controversial powers expire, five years after they were first enacted in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. But the government yesterday tabled a bill to reintroduce the anti-terror measures, with slight amendments.

Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion, who last spring opposed extending the powers, citing concern for individual Charter rights and the need for a more comprehensive reform of anti-terror legislation, now appears poised to support the reintroduction of the measures.

"We need to work with the government," Dion told reporters. "We are committed to make sure that this Parliament will work. So we'll see if the government took into account our criticism of last spring."

Reversing the usual practice of bringing legislation to the Commons first, the government yesterday tabled its bill in the Senate.

It proposes the powers of preventive arrest and investigative hearings be extended for another five years, and allowed to "sunset" after that unless explicitly renewed by parliamentary vote. It also allows for, but does not require, another parliamentary review.

The Conservatives have introduced what they call a new "safeguard" for investigative hearings. The law will require that before police seek such a hearing – which compels a witness to testify before a judge – investigators must show they have exhausted reasonable attempts to get the evidence needed "by other means."

"The legislation's very clear that these are tools of last resort and that the police have to now completely demonstrate in every instance to a judge that they have exercised all the options, they've done everything possible to use other means and that, again, this is a matter of last resort," said Justice Minister Rob Nicholson.

But the government did not act on a recommendation by a Commons committee to limit the use of such hearings to cases of an imminent terrorism offence. Under the Conservative proposal, the hearings may still be used to investigate past acts of terrorism, such as the Air India bombing.

The other proposed amendment would change the name "preventive arrest" to "recognizance with conditions." The measure calls for a detained person to see a judge within 24 hours, but still allows for a terror suspect to be arrested and detained without warrant or bail for up to 72 hours, if no judge is available or a bail hearing cannot reasonably be held. The suspect may also be subjected to strict release conditions or 12 months in jail.

The government has not substantively changed this tool. It can still be invoked if police "suspects on reasonable grounds" that the arrest and detention of a suspect is necessary to prevent a terrorist activity.

But the government did agree to act on a Senate committee recommendation for "enhanced reporting" on the use of the powers.

The law would now require the federal attorney general to give a more complete annual report to Parliament on the use of both powers, and to give a detailed explanation of whether the powers are still warranted.

Nicholson defended the move to introduce the measures directly into the Senate, where last spring the Liberal majority found itself at odds with Dion and voted to support a three-year extension of the powers.

Yesterday, Liberals were at pains to appear conciliatory.

Dion, his public safety critic Ujjal Dosanjh, Senator David Smith, and justice critic Marlene Jennings all commented favourably on the government's proposals.

"I think those are important changes," said Dosanjh. Jennings said she was "pleased" the government had introduced the bill into the Senate first, given the senators' expertise in the area.


Smith said the Senate committee might only need weeks to deal with the measures before sending them to the Commons for examination.

NDP Leader Jack Layton said yesterday his party, which last spring voted against the measures, still objects to their revival.

"The NDP believes that in a number of respects, our government has overstepped the bounds of what's appropriate in terms of ensuring that human rights are protected, " said Layton.