Liberals could privatize some airports

If the Harper government had tried to privatize Canadian airports there would be a huge outcry from the Liberals and no doubt the New Democratic Party (NDP) as well, but now it seems the Liberals are seriously considering doing so.

	1 of 2
As the Metro news puts it:

 The federal government is looking at whether Canada’s major airports should be sold off to private investors as a way to raise tens of billions of dollars in new cash to fund other infrastructure projects.

Transport Canada bureaucrats are reviewing the ownership structure of Canadian airports, now operated by not-for-profit airport authorities, to assess the possibilities of transferring them to for-profit enterprises — and collect a windfall in the process.This move would give the Liberals cash for financing new infrastructure projects, which no doubt they could also sell off at an attractive price to allow investors to profit from public investments. This could ensure as well that investors will see the Liberals as a private-sector friendly party and generate more donations perhaps at the expense of the unpopular Conservatives.

Airport operators are rather nervous about the plan, fearing that the Liberals are rushing in to generate cash without weighing the potential impacts on travelers from making airports generate profits. Craig Richmond CEO of Vancouver Airport Authority said: “If you went to this model, my experience tells me in five years you would not recognize Canadian airports. You would see cutbacks on maintenance, cleaning, you would see them become much more crowded because (of) the pressures on the management to deliver that return.”Mark Laroche, the CEO of the Ottawa International Airport Authority said the change would likely give rise to higher fees and travelers would be required to pay more even as airlines are also jacking up fees to help their bottom line.

The Liberals could fund public infrastructure by selling off non-profit infrastructure such as airports. The new buzzword does not talk of anything so crass and old-fashioned as privatization it is the much more euphemistic asset recycling, as if the process must be environmentally friendly and something to be adopted by Elizabeth May leader of the Green Party. Asset recycling is said to give the private sector a stake in existing infrastructure assets, such as ports, or highways, to raise cash to be used for other investments. In other words it is a way of ensuring that existing assets can be used for private profit. An external review submitted to the Liberals last December suggested that airports would be a good starting place of an asset recycling program.

The report is by David Emerson, whose career path shows the symbiotic relationship of the Liberals and Conservatives: Emerson is a former Member of Parliament for the riding of Vancouver Kingsway. He was first elected as a Liberal and served as Minister of Industry under Prime Minister Paul Martin. After controversially crossing the floor to join Stephen Harper's Conservatives, he served as Minister of International Trade and Minister for the Pacific Gateway and the Vancouver-Whistler Olympics, followed by Minister of Foreign Affairs.

The Emerson report notes that the airport authority has worked so far. Airports are efficiently run and the authorities have invested more than $19 billion in "badly needed" infrastructure. It sounds as if things are working out well as they are. However Emerson claims the not-for-profit model is "antiquated" and puts their cost competitiveness at risk. Nothing about serving the public who use the airlines or ensuring that they have good service at reasonable prices. What is antiquated are services provided to the public without making a profit. Of course this must all be glossed over with high-sounding phraseology. The asset recycling is to be accompanied by legislation to "enshrine the economic development mandate of airports and to protect commercial and national interests" Nothing about the interest of air travelers or employees at airports. But the asset recycling miracle goes on in that it would “restore Canada to its place as a world leader in the governance of airports and in the use of competition and market forces to determine optimum investment and service levels and costs.” One can see with such a worthy theorist as Emerson, that he is welcome in both Liberal and Conservative quarters.

However, as Mark Laroche notes the system will work only by raising fees, investing less in capital or finding efficiencies. Or to put it more bluntly it will work only if the private investors can make a profit. Craig Richmond the Vancouver airport CEO noted that the value of his airport on the open market was about $6 billion and that any investors who buy it will want to get that money back. He said it can only come from the customers' wallets.

Transport Minister Marc Garneau is undertaking a review to hear feedback on the Emerson report's recommendations. No mention is made of public hearings. Apparently the government wants a review of options by bureaucrats by August. Why not hold public hearings? This is too serious a matter for that since it involves finding further means to turn public non-profit services into a source of private profit.

Pearson International Airport in Toronto with 41 million passengers a year would be a prize plum for the private sector. Airport operators claim that the high cost of air travel results from policies that are forcing passengers to pay the entire costs of air travel with no subsidy from general government revenues. This is of course in line with a market model and will ensure that the less well off will be able to fly only infrequently.

Among the private investors interested in the asset recycling process is the Ontario Teacher's Pension Plan (OTPP)

The OTPP is already invested in UK airports. It owns 100 percent of Bristol airport and almost half of Birmingham airport. It also has interests in Brussels airport and Copenhagen airport in Denmark. In order to improve profit, emissions may be increased, weight restrictions on aircraft removed, and noise levels increase. Also airports could encroach on more adjacent land.

Of course there are many supporters of asset recycling such as Michael Fenn, a former Ontario deputy minister and now a management consultant who specializes in the public sector who crows: "Asset recycling is a way to attract private-sector investment into activities that were formerly, exclusively, in the public realm. It’s something that we should pay a lot of attention to and I’m really pleased to see the federal government is looking seriously at it.”Apparently to specialize in the public sector is to find ways to turn the sector into a source for private profit. Coincidentally, Fenn happens to be a board member of Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System (OMERS) which invests in public infrastructure around the world.

Asset recycling is trending internationally with Australia at the forefront of a plan for the federal government to offer Australian states incentives for asset recycling programs. The idea of public infrastructure as designed to provide services to the public at a reasonable cost is just too antiquated in the brave new world of asset recycling. In the appended video the Australian's Green Party view on the recycling is outlined.

NDP and Conservatives in virtual tie as federal election campaign begins

As expected, Prime Minister Stephen Harper met with the Governor General today. The parliament was dissolved and writs were issued for a federal election on October 19.

+ Add Image

As of July 28 the CBC Poll Tracker shows the Conservative Party of Canada(CPC) is virtually tied with the New Democratic Party(NDP) while the Liberals, the third major party, lag behind in spite of their youthful good-looking leader Justin Trudeau. As of July 28, the Conservatives had 31.6 percent support, NDP 32.1 and Liberals, 25.6. However, the most recent seat projections by the same site give the Conservatives 132 seats, the NDP 122, and the Liberals just 81. The Quebec separatist Bloc Quebecois would win two seats and the Green Party one. Given the Canadian political system of first-past-the-post, a party could obtain the highest popular vote without winning the most seats. Seat projections can change considerably over a relatively short period to time. On July 7 the seat predictions were 119 for the Conservatives, 127 for the NDP, and 89 for the Liberals with the other minor parties being the same. Predictions for who will win in each separate riding can be found here.

The Conservatives have been regaining some lost ground lately to come even with the NDP but the Liberals appear to be stuck in the doldrums. The Poll Tracker has a graph showing support for the parties over time. The Liberals have been dropping for some time while the NDP surged but now is back even with the Conservatives. The Conservative fortunes were no doubt helped when last week the Harper government issued checks to families as part of Universal Child Care Benefit increases.

Together the NDP and the Liberals would have a large majority of seats. It would make strategic sense for the two to agree to a coalition government to replace the Harper government. A recent poll by Forum Research shows that over two-thirds of Liberal and NDP supporters are in favour of the two parties forming a coalition if the Conservatives should win a minority government on October 19. Seventy-five percent of NDP supporters are in favour of a coalition and even 68 percent of Liberals, even though the leader Justin Trudeau has consistently ruled out such a move.The NDP has said that it is open to the idea. Forum Research president, Lorne Bozinoff said: “The two opposition parties have spent the last week dancing around the coalition question, but it appears their supporters, especially the New Democrats, have no such qualms. They’re ready to get hitched as soon as a minority Conservative government is elected –– if that happens."

Ignatieff the Great Liberal Thinker...

Ignatieff may be thinking while Liberal political fortunes burn up. So far he has not been able to catch up with Harper in the polls so he and his party will be left trying to explain to everyone that Canadians do not want an election now. Now will be however long it takes for Liberal fortunes to improve considerably. This is from the GlobeandMail.

Michael Ignatieff puts his thinking cap on
with 'practical Canadians'
Jane Taber

MONTREAL – Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff told participants at his thinkers conference this morning that it felt good to get out of the Ottawa bubble and put partisan politics aside.
As he said that some of the most partisan Liberals in the country were staring right back at him – former prime ministers Jean Chrétien, John Turner and Paul Martin; former Liberal leaders Bill Graham and Stéphane Dion; former New Brunswick premier Frank McKenna; a whole host of Liberal MPs and some former party strategists thrown in for good measure. They are here for part or all of the three-day conference.
Billed as a non-partisan exercise aimed at fostering discussion and new ideas in anticipation of Canada’s 150th birthday in 2017, the crowd of about 250 looked anything but.
Mr. Chrétien spoke to reporters about what the party has to do to succeed: “Liberals have to do their best,” he offered.
Calling the conference “an accomplishment” in itself, Mr. Martin said: “For Liberals to hear what experts in a wide range of areas have to say is going to contribute to developing a Liberal vision.”
Interspersed among the Liberals were some businesspeople, leading academics, former senior bureaucrats and other experts in their fields, including former Bank of Canada governor David Dodge. He is to lead the discussion tomorrow on Canada’s financial future – perhaps he'll also talk about taxes and the economy, a subject the Liberals in Ottawa seem averse to broach.
“I look at you and you are being described as a bunch of thinkers and intellectuals,” Mr. Ignatieff told the participants. “But you are much more than intellectuals and thinkers, … you are also doers.”
He characterized the people attending the conference as “practical Canadians” who are visionary but also know how to get things done. “This weekend we can broaden our horizons,” he said. “We can put partisan politics aside and heaven knows we can get out of the bubble of Ottawa and that feels good.”
Mr. Ignatieff and his Liberal team did not have a good week in Ottawa; they botched their own motion on maternal health, losing a vote in the House because some of their own MPs opposed it. The national opinion polls have also not been kind to the Grits of late.
But never mind. The Liberal Leader said this weekend is about “reflection, debate and provocation.”
Quoting the late Lester Pearson, who held a similar conference in Kingston in 1960, Mr. Ignatieff said that “if you can’t lead you can’t listen.”
And that’s what he is here to do this weekend – except when he’s talking.
Mr. Ignatieff apologized for speaking far too long in his opening remarks and noted he has a press conference to attend at midday. Then he will be finished talking and will move into listening mode.
(Photo: Graham Hughes/The Canadian Press)

Terms of Detainee review blasted by Liberals

I do not see why Rae trusts Iacobucci that is unless he is trusting him to carry out a review in secret and help the government avoid accountability. The government wants to avoid a disaster such as happened with the Maher inquiry where much too much about what goes on in government behind the scenes was revealed. You can also trust Iacobucci to charge a fat fee. The parliament surely has the right to see the documents period end of story. The judge is just part of a department of dirty tricks dodge to avoid accountability.

Detainee review terms blasted by Liberals

CBC News
Retired Supreme Court justice Frank Iacobucci will review whether documents pertaining to the transfer of Afghan detainees can be released to Parliament. (Adrian Wyld/Canadian Press)
Liberal MPs hammered the Tory government over the guidelines a former Supreme Court justice will follow in his review of documents related to the Afghan detainee affair.

During Monday's question period in the House of Commons, Transportation Minister John Baird defended the review's terms of reference, insisting that Frank Iacobucci will have access to all relevant documents.

But foreign affairs critic Bob Rae said while the Liberals trust Iacobucci, they do not trust the government.

"And that's the difference and there’s a big difference. Mr. Iacobucci does not have the power to subpoena the documents."

He also said "the test of relevance is a test that the government itself will apply. It's not Mr. Iacobucci who determines what relevance is."

Liberal defence critic Ujjal Dosanjh claimed that the government has hired Iacobucci as "yet another lawyer" who will only be allowed to see what the government wants him to see. He also suggested the government might not allow Iacobucci's report to be made public if the government claims solicitor-client privilege.

Dosanjh also complained that there is no end date for his work to be completed.

"If the government wanted answers it would give Mr. Iacobucci the mandate to conduct a full public inquiry. Or are there horrible secrets that this government is trying to hide?" Dosanjh asked.

But Justice Minister Rob Nicholson said the government is providing "all of the documents that are of interest" and will go back to 2001, when Canada began its involvement in Afghanistan.

"Mr. Justice Iacobucci will have a complete authorization to have a look at those and he’ll report those general findings back to the house."

On March 5, Nicholson announced that the government would enlist Iacobucci to review the documents relating to the Afghan detainee affair and whether some could be made public.

On the weekend, the government released Iacobucci's terms of reference, which included which making recommendations as to what information, if disclosed, would compromise national security; deciding whether disclosing information for the purpose of public interest outweighs the purpose of non-disclosure, and whether any information is subject to solicitor-client privilege.

Opposition parties have been trying to get the Conservative government to release the documents pertaining to the handling of Afghan detainees without heavily blacked-out redactions.

The opposition wants to see if government documents contain information about allegations that some Afghan prisoners handed over by Canadian soldiers were tortured by Afghan officials.

The Tories have said some of the documents have remained censored because of national security concerns.



Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/03/15/detainee-documents.html#ixzz0iIfxKrx8

Don't Count Ignatieff out yet!

Perhaps this article is correct. Certainly Harper did survive his bout with low poll numbers. However, there does not seem to be any sign of Ignatieff recovering very much. I think that Ignatieff''s best bet is if Harper manages to make himself unpopular. So far any attempt to boost Ignatieff's image does not seem to have worked at all. He does not seem to have put forward much in the way of policy that has engendered much positive interest. The public is often fickle however and perhaps Ignatieff can hope for the New Year. This is from the Winnipeg Free Press.

We can't count Ignatieff out yet
Liberal leader sits low in polls, but so did Harper
By: Hill Talk / Mia Rabson

OTTAWA -- Michael Ignatieff was named by Forbes last week as someone to watch for in 2010.

The magazine said that if an election is held next year, the Liberal leader could become the Canadian prime minister "with the biggest international profile since Pierre Trudeau."

The honour was met by a lot of eye rolls around Parliament Hill.

The Liberals have been in a free-fall for much of the fall, and overall support is only marginally better than it was during the 2008 election. You know, that election in which their support was the worst it has been since 1867.

One recent Angus Reid poll had only one in six Canadians approving of Ignatieff. While that was up slightly from the previous month, it's still only about half the number who approve of Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

Last December, Ignatieff was touted as the saviour who would lead the Liberals back to victory. This December he spent fighting off rumours of a coup against his leadership and suggestions he will pull the plug himself and run back to Harvard with his tail between his legs.

For the moment, he seems resolved to stick it out. A good thing, as history has shown being down does not mean being out.

Even Stephen Harper could tell him that, if the two ever exchanged more than barbs.

In January 2003, 10 months after Harper was elected leader of the Canadian Alliance, the party's poll numbers had plunged.

An EKOS poll showed 10.5 per cent of Canadians supported the Alliance, compared to 52.1 per cent for the Liberals. It was down from the 25.5 per cent the Alliance received in the 2000 federal election. Even combined with the Progressive Conservatives' 13.8 per cent -- this was before the two parties merged -- the right-wing options in Canada were outstripped more than two to one by the Liberals in popular support. Comparatively, Ignatieff is doing pretty well.

And within 18 months, Harper had merged the two parties, won election as the new leader and turned more than a decade of Liberal majority rule into a minority.

Ignatieff certainly has a steep hill to climb, but as Harper showed, nothing is impossible.

Layton wants concrete action on NDP policies as price of support for Harper

The rhetorical bleatings coming from the NDP sound as if it is the NDP that would just love the Conservatives to throw them a lifeline to avoid an election. However, it seems destined not to be. Although supporting Conservatives might possibly bleed off some NDP support and open them up to Liberal attacks, probably the Conservatives simply refuse to budge because they do not see it as in their own interests. The Conservative refrain will be that Canadians want parliament to work and that the opposition will simply not co-operate. Canadians do not want an election but the big bad opposition forced it upon them with all sorts of negative consequences. This prattle is not likely to generate a majority government. The Conservatives want the parliament to work but only upon their terms and the opposition can cave in or face an election. This time it seems we will be facing an election.
The Liberals have already unveiled their great policy slogan: We Can Do Better. Perhaps the Conservatives can do better than that----in creating a slogan of course. Be Happy Vote for Harper.


Layton wants 'concrete' action on NDP policies
PM to blame if election called, says NDP leader
By DAVID JACKSON Provincial Reporter Thu. Sep 3 - 6:52 PM
Federal NDP Leader Jack Layton offered the Harper government a lifeline Thursday and said it would be the prime minister’s fault if there’s an election this fall.
But a spokesman for Prime Minister Stephen Harper dismissed the NDP overture, setting the stage for Canadians to possibly head back to the polls a year after the last federal vote.
Mr. Layton said in Halifax that he wants to see action on NDP policies that were before the House of Commons in the spring, measures to help the unemployed, seniors, and consumers and small businesses gouged by credit card companies.
But the federal leader wasn’t specific on what he meant by action, other than that it must be “concrete.”
“I’m not making any backroom deals with the prime minister,” Mr. Layton said during a news conference at a downtown hotel.
“I’m simply suggesting that it’s time for him to show some leadership, to reach out, and make Parliament work.”
The Harper government is again teetering on the brink of defeat after Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff declared this week his party will no longer keep the Conservatives alive.
Mr. Layton had taken delight in mocking the Liberals for propping up the government during spring confidence votes but talked Thursday about doing the same thing.
He said he wouldn’t see it as “propping up” the Conservatives.
“It’s a question of trying to get results for people. There’s nothing strange or behind the scenes involved here. It’s simply suggesting that the decision about whether there’s an election is the prime minister’s decision.”
Mr. Harper’s spokesman, Dimitri Soudas, suggested Mr. Layton wasn’t sincere in his offer to work with the government.
“Mr. Layton is very interested, and it’s clear to everybody, that he prefers working with Michael Ignatieff and the Bloc Quebecois rather than working in the interests of Canadians,” he said.
Mr. Harper, who spoke to reporters in Ontario prior to Mr. Layton’s appearance in Halifax, said he wasn’t interested in backroom deals. Mr. Harper said he is interested in useful, affordable ideas to help the economy.
He has said an election would interrupt the country’s economic recovery.
The minority Conservatives must look to the NDP or Bloc Quebecois to survive. Bloc Leader Gilles Duceppe has said he’ll consider backing the government on a case-by-case basis.
The NDP, in debt and trailing in the polls, is believed by political insiders to be desperate to avoid an election this fall, but the Tory response to Mr. Layton’s overture Thursday suggests Canadians are likely to head to the polls before long.
Speaking after Mr. Layton’s news conference, Liberal MP Bob Rae said politics is a contact sport, like hockey, not ballet.
Mr. Rae accused the Tories of floating “bizarre” ideas and pooh-poohed the claim that an election would create instability, noting that elections are a normal part of democracy.
“There’s an effort here on the part of the Conservatives to create an atmosphere of total instability,” he said.
“Well, you know, we’re not a banana republic. We have votes. Mr. Harper’s not a generalissimo yet. He has to get used to living in a constitutional democracy.”
Mr. Rae said there is no reason an election need disrupt Mr. Harper’s plans to meet with U.S. President Barack Obama on Sept. 16 or to attend the G20 economic summit in Pittsburgh on Sept. 24.
The latest polls suggest an election now would result in another minority government — either for the Tories or the Liberals.
The surveys put the two parties in a dead heat, with the Liberals well ahead of the Tories in vote-rich Ontario and Quebec.

Liberal prep for upcoming session, possible election

Finally the Liberals are developing a platform that will give Canadians something to judge the Liberals by--and no doubt will provide a target for Conservative critics. Notice that the party spokesperson is for the most part Ralph Goodale rather than Ignatieff. Somehow I doubt that Ignatieff will try to defeat Harper with polls as they are at present. Of course Harper could insist on goading Ignatieff to such a degree that he will be more or less forced to call an election. Harper escaped more or less unscathed from the last fracas so one never knows what he might do. The Liberals at this point seem completely vague about whether there will be an attempt to bring down Harper or not. Different Liberals say different things!

Liberals prep for upcoming session, possible election


By Juliet O'Neill, Canwest News ServiceAugust 30, 2009 2:01 PM



Federal Liberals will gather in Sudbury, Ont., on Monday to plot strategy for a parliamentary session that could plunge Canadians into a fall or winter election campaign.
They will weigh in on how soon to attempt to defeat the Harper government and discuss a campaign platform that spells out an eight-year vision of where Canada should be in 2017, the country's 150th birthday.
Liberal House Leader Ralph Goodale said the three-day caucus will cap a summer of preparations to "participate in a very vigorous session of Parliament this fall and to run an election campaign if it comes to that."
The final decision on whether to try to pull the plug on Prime Minister Stephen Harper's minority Conservative government is up to Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff.
"That decision has not been taken," Goodale said. "But there is a rising feeling in the country that this is a mediocre government and it's just not good enough."
Senator David Smith, co-chair of the Liberal campaign, played down speculation an election would be triggered at the first opportunity in early October, soon after the Sept. 14 resumption of Parliament.
"I think it would be very short-sighted of any leader of any party not to be election ready when you're in a minority situation," he said.
"That isn't to say we'll be pushing an election button every day, because I think Michael Ignatieff has consistently taken the position (that) we want to make Parliament work and we're well aware of the fact there were three elections over a four-year period - '04, '06 and '08. But we'll be holding them accountable."
Under an agreement between Harper and Ignatieff that averted a spring election, the government will face seven opposition days by the end of December, any of which could be a test of confidence.
A confidence vote would also be held if the government presents any tax or spending measures. The New Democratic Party and the Bloc Quebecois would have to unite with the Liberals to defeat the Conservatives who hold 143 of 308 seats in the House of Commons.
The Liberals' first chance to submit a non-confidence motion will be three days after the government submits its third economic accountability report during the week of Sept. 28. The second chance is between late October and mid-November.
Smith and Goodale said the Liberals would not defeat the government solely on the issue of employment insurance eligibility rules, an issue that was sent to a bipartisan working group for the summer under the Harper-Ignatieff agreement and on which little progress has been made.
"Fixing employment insurance is only one dimension of what needs to be a much larger economic and social package," Goodale said.
He said the Liberals have seen no progress on other issues on which they faulted the government before the summer recess.
As well as seeking a national standard for EI access, the Liberals accused the government of failing on delivery of stimulus funds for infrastructure projects, spelling out deficit reduction and dealing with the isotopes shortage.
"Those are all symptomatic of issues of competence, issues of honesty, issues of divisiveness in the government's style of governance and issues of values," Goodale said. "There will be a significant number of factors, not just one issue."
Some Liberals say Ignatieff will face a fatal blow to his leadership if he triggers an election and does not win at least a minority government.
A minority is considered the likeliest scenario for either the Conservatives or the Liberals, given a steady stream of polls showing equal support for both main parties and neither party shining in Quebec, where the separatist Bloc Quebecois remains strong.
Goodale said the election platform is "well advanced" and will contain a positive vision about Canada's future, using the 150th anniversary of Confederation as a benchmark for education, health and economic security.
He said the platform will be designed to contrast a positive, forward-looking Ignatieff against Harper's "negative, almost pathological partisanship."
© Copyright (c) Canwest News Service

Unions take EI surplus fight to Supreme Court

It is not just unions but also the attorney generals of several provinces. This cannot be blamed just on the Conservatives. The Liberals were heavily involved in this raiding of EI funds. In fact the Conservatives have a bill that would go a ways to solving some of the issues but still allows for a rainy day fund of 2 billion in case of an economic downturn.


Unions take EI surplus fight to Supreme Court
Last Updated: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 5:31 PM ET
CBC News
Labour unions appeared before the Supreme Court of Canada on Tuesday to argue the federal government has been improperly spending billions of surplus dollars in the unemployment insurance fund.
The court reserved judgment Tuesday afternoon and didn't set a date for a ruling.
Brought by the Quebec-based labour union Confédération des syndicats nationaux (CSN), the unions' argument is that the Employment Act fund shouldn't go into general revenue and pay for things such as debt reduction. Doing so turns it into an indirect tax and is unconstitutional, they argue.
"The reality is the government owes $55 billion to the insurance system and they need to pay it back," Barbara Byers, vice-president of the Canadian Labour Congress, told CBC News before the hearing began.
Intervening in the case are the Canadian Labour Congress as well as the attorneys general of Manitoba, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, Ontario and Quebec.
They argue that the government has misused EI funds dating back to 1996, when the act was amended to make it more difficult to qualify for unemployment benefits. Since then, the employment insurance account surplus has ballooned to $54 billion.
EI premiums are set once a year by Ottawa based on employment expectations. Some employers complain the government has been underestimating, resulting in an ever-increasing surplus that then goes into general revenues.
"The surplus has been used to pay down debt, It's been used to give tax cuts to large corporations and oil companies, it's been used for all sorts of other purposes, but not for unemployment insurance," said Byers.
"That's money that comes from workers and employers for unemployment insurance. It's not an extra tax, it's not to be spent on other things."
The Quebec Court of Appeal ruled against the unions after finding the EI premiums collected were within federal taxation powers.
In this year's federal budget, Ottawa announced the creation of an independent Crown corporation to manage future surpluses in the EI account, restrict use of the fund to EI benefits and limit premiums, while creating a cushion of $2 billion in a side account in case of a sudden economic downturn.
Auditor General Sheila Fraser has repeatedly slammed the government over its handling of EI since 1999, saying the surplus size is more than triple what would be deemed sufficient and the government is not observing the intent of EI.

This is from CTV. With the decline in the Quebec polls the threats from Dion are empty. Even though the Liberals are completely opposed to the new immigration legislation they cannot afford to oppose it. The tired old slogans about making parliament work and Canadians not wanting an election are already being trotted out by some Liberals.

Parliament to resume with more Liberal threats
Updated Sun. Mar. 30 2008 5:13 PM ET

The Canadian Press

OTTAWA -- The election guessing game resumes Monday with Stephane Dion continuing to hold out the possibility that he'll finally pull the plug on Stephen Harper's minority government.

The Liberal leader's threat rings increasingly hollow, coming in the wake of disappointing byelection results and a new round of internecine sniping among party militants in Dion's home province of Quebec.

Indeed, some top Liberals have urged Dion to cut the incessant sabre rattling and frankly admit the party is in no position to fight an election this spring. They fear that repeatedly threatening an election and backing down -- a pattern that Dion has followed throughout the fall and winter -- is only making him look indecisive and exposing the party to ridicule.

But Dion is determined to keep his options open as Parliament resumes after a two-week Easter break.

"It's unavoidable that it will be an issue, will we have an election or not ... It's part of life when you're in a minority situation,'' the Liberal leader said in an interview.

Dion said Liberals will take the plunge when he concludes the time is ripe "for us to replace this very bad government.''

"We'll choose our time, and we need to be ready at any time.''

He shrugged off suggestions that he's courting ridicule.

"I don't worry. I don't see anything ridiculous in what I have said. It's completely normal for a party to take into account timing issues. In politics, timing is a lot.''

Some top Liberals believe Dion's threat of a possible spring election is aimed primarily at imposing some discipline on unruly party members. Others privately suggest he may actually have to follow through on it to avoid an open rebellion over the summer.

He'll have plenty of opportunities to bring down the Harper government should he choose to do so.

Eight opposition days are scheduled before Parliament breaks for the summer, any one of which could be used to propose a motion of non-confidence in the government. Indeed, the spring sitting opens with three consecutive opposition days -- Liberal, Bloc Quebecois and NDP.

While neither the Liberals nor the Bloc intend to propose confidence motions this week, the NDP is weighing the pros and cons of proposing one on Wednesday.

Embarrassing the Grits

New Democrats are tempted to immediately embarrass the three new Liberal stars -- Bob Rae, Martha Hall Findlay and Joyce Murray -- who'll be sworn in on Monday. The trio won byelections on March 17 promising to stand up to the Tory government and would doubtless find it awkward to be forced to abstain on their first test.

"As you know, we've brought those kinds of motions before and certainly we don't rule them out. We'll assess each opportunity,'' NDP Leader Jack Layton said in an interview.

Aside from opposition days, the government will face a series of confidence votes throughout the spring on its budget implementation bill and spending estimates.

Liberal insiders say the budget bill -- which contains controversial provisions giving the government the power to pick and choose immigrants -- is the most likely to provoke an election. New Canadians are the bedrock of Liberal support, and Dion will be hard pressed to allow the changes to pass unchallenged.

However, he likely has a couple of months to decide since the bill must still be debated and sent to committee before returning to the Commons for a final vote.

On budget matters, both the NDP and Bloc have made it clear they'll vote against the government.

Layton said the fact that his party didn't fare well in the byelections -- ending up virtually tied with the upstart Green party in three of four ridings -- hasn't altered his determination to defeat the government.

"Look, all we're doing is saying we're voting against what we don't believe is right. That's what we're going to do. If it's a confidence motion . . . and the House falls, then voters will tell us whether they agreed that we should've stood up to the Conservatives or not.''

For his part, Conservative House leader Peter Van Loan evinced little concern that the government could fall over the next three months. He seemed more interested in the potential for leadership jockeying on the Liberal benches as Rae, onetime NDP premier of Ontario, grabs some of the spotlight from deputy Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff, his erstwhile college room mate and leadership rival.

"There will be a different tone now that you'll have at least two folks on the other side who are waiting to become leader of the Liberal party,'' Van Loan said.

Dion countered that Rae and the other two new MPs will showcase one of the big differences between himself and Harper.

"I have a much better team than him and I am much more collegial than him, much more as leader able to work with the others without (feeling) threatened by them. The real strength of a leader is not to have a one-man show.''

Rae's arrival may end up highlighting another difference between the two parties: their prescriptions for curing Ontario's slumping economy.

Liberals intend to go on the war path against Finance Minister Jim Flaherty and his recent charge that Ontario's high corporate taxes make it "the last place'' to invest. But Van Loan signalled that the Tories intend to counter any criticism by reminding voters of Rae's high-deficit, high-tax tenure as premier during a severe recession in the early 1990s.

"We remember his record on the economy very well, and if Liberals want to embrace those kinds of policies, which it seems they want to do, then that'll only reinforce the idea that the best economic managers in the country are the people who are in government right now in the Conservative party.''


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Government promises "co-operation and compromise" on Afghan plan

This is from canada.com. It should read co-operation and co-optation. The Liberals are totally hopeless and spineless on Afghanistan. They will do everything possible in order to avoid defeating the Conservatives on the issue. I really hope that the Conservatives do move a vote on Afghanistan up before the budget vote. This will force the Liberals to defecate or get off the throne. It was the Liberals who got us into Afghanistan and Kandahar and who extended the mission by allowing enough Liberals to vote with the Conservatives. Vote NDP, Green, Bloc Quebecois, Communist, Libertarian, Christian Heritage. Don't waste your vote on Liberals or Conservatives. When the election comes make your vote count!



Government promises 'co-operation and compromise' on Afghan plan

Juliet O'Neill
Canwest News Service
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
CREDIT: CNS file
A Canadian soldier from the NATO-led coalition looks at a villager during a patrol near Sperwan Ghar base in Panjwaii district of Kandahar province, southern Afghanistan.
OTTAWA - The government promised to welcome in a spirit of "co-operation and compromise" today a Liberal counter-proposal for the Canadian military mission in Afghanistan that would end combat operations in a year, two years before the minority Conservative government proposes.
Despite the assurance of compromise made by Conservative government House leader Peter Van Loan shortly after Liberal Leader Stephane Dion claimed "strong support" from his caucus for a package of amendments, the two sides remained at loggerheads over interpretation of the troop withdrawal date in a government confidence motion.
The government says the mission would end in 2011. The Liberals object to a separate clause which provides for a review and possible renewal of the mission by legislators after that - saying the clause makes it a "never-ending mission" to the Liberals. Still, the government argues it just doesn't want to tie the hands of a future Parliament.
Dion emerged from a caucus meeting of more than two hours during which he urged Liberals "to take the high road" in a debate over the military mission that could become a theme in an election campaign while Canadian Armed Forces are taking casualties in Afghanistan.
Van Loan passed on an opportunity to squelch speculation that the government may put the Afghanistan motion to a vote before a vote on the budget, the issue on which the Liberals would prefer to trigger an election. Both are confidence motions that could bring down the government and both would be voted on in March.
Dion is set to release the text of the Liberal counter-proposals today. They fix an end to combat operations in February 2009, extend the military mission for two years for non-combat security duties and training, and would give NATO notice now that Canada is withdrawing all troops in 2011.
The Liberals would appoint a "special envoy" to Afghanistan and establish a parliamentary committee to which ministers involved in the Afghan file - defence, foreign affairs and development - would have to report monthly. Liberals want to tip the aim of Canada's military from combat to security for reconstruction and development.
Van Loan insisted the government motion does not comprise an endless mission though it states a review would take place in 2011.
"Any future Parliament can make whatever decisions it wants," Van Loan said at a late-night news conference. "Our government's position is that we are seeking approval to 2011. We believe the mission can be completed by that date."
The Conservatives and Liberals tangled over the issue in Commons question period earlier Monday. Pressed by deputy Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff on whether the government is proposing "a limited mission or an endless war," Van Loan confirmed the government wants to leave legislators in 2011 the option of renewal.
"We are not going to tie the hands of a future Parliament," he declared.
Dion, who condemned the proposal as "an open-ended mission and a recipe for disaster," said he would propose clear, thoughtful and exhaustive amendments today.
Most MPs left the caucus meeting smiling and reporting unity. Keith Martin, a Vancouver MP who earlier sought a free vote on Afghanistan, gave the thumbs up sign. Toronto MP Jim Karygiannis said the amendments reflected what his constituents want. And Roy Cullen, a Toronto MP, said the meeting was good.
Cullen was one of the MPs who presented Dion with a tough internal audience. He has been uncomfortable with the notion of leaving Canadian Armed Forces in the main combat zone of Kandahar without undertaking combat operations.
"If you're out there with some people that are building a road and suddenly you're attacked with mortars or whatever but people are hiding somewhere away from the road, what do you do?" he asked in an earlier interview. "Do you just sort of stand guard and put on your helmets or do you call for the 'search and destroy' people?"
Cullen said both Liberals and Conservatives should be willing to compromise. "I'd like to see us acting in the best interests of Canadians instead of being so partisan about it.
"It seems to me what's lost in this equation, apart from everyone protecting their ego and being seen as tough and determined and very categorical, is what in the hell is the best for us and what's best for Afghanistan," said Cullen.
Ottawa Citizen
© Canwest

Warren Kinsella: How Dion can get his groove back

This is from the following site.

Principled, honest, decent and fearless? What planet does Kinsella live on. Dion has just chickened out and swallowed all his principles and saved the Conservatives, all because his party is down in the polls and doesn't want an election.
The Liberal party position is just to end the combat aspect of the Afghan mission not to withdraw as Kinsella claims. As the Conservatives have pointed out the Liberals are the ones who through their inaction have made it impossible to meet Kyoto targets. Of course it is a good idea to do the best possible and not simply throw in the towel as Harper has done but the Liberals are not angels on the environment.
Kinsella seems to have been mesmerised by Liberal goofy slogan such as: The People do not know Dion. Trouble is the people now know him pretty well. He cannot stand up to people in his own party. He lost his chief aide. He caved on saving his authenticity by saving the Conservative Throne Speech. On and on....


Warren Kinsella: How Dion can get his groove back
Sad. That is the only way to describe the plight of Liberal leader Stephane Dion. But it's not all his own doing. For Mr. Dion's Liberal party, the Gomery Commission was a shattering blow --discrediting federalism and the perception that Liberals could manage government, all at once. The party has yet to recover from it.

The selection of Mr. Dion as Liberal leader last December in Montreal was the right decision. Principled, honest, decent and fearless, Mr. Dion was one of the few Quebec Liberal politicians to emerge from the sponsorship affair personally unscathed. He was respected in English Canada for his battles with the separatists, and his environmental credentials positioned him as the right candidate at the right time.

But the intervening months, as we all know, have not been kind to Mr. Dion or his party. Listless, divided, drifting, the Liberal party seems to be headed sooner or later for a punishing defeat at the hands of the better-funded, better-organized Conservative machine of Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

But it need not be that way. Here are a few modest suggestions for the beleaguered federal Grit leader that, if implemented, would go some way to lifting his and Liberal fortunes:

-Policy: On the key issues of the day --Kyoto, Afghanistan and federalism-- Mr. Dion and his party are well positioned. In all three cases, he needs to clearly distinguish himself from the other political parties.

He can do that by saying, to all who will listen: "We are the party that will ratify Kyoto, not kill it. We are the party that will bring back our young men and women from Afghanistan within a year of our election, and not at some distant date in

the future. And we are the party that opposes dismantling federalism by stealth, as Stephen Harper promised to do in his Throne Speech. Under a Liberal government, Ottawa will not become the headwaiter to the provinces."

-People: As with the two other opposition leaders --including the aforementioned Mr. Harper -- the Canadian people do not yet know Stephane Dion. That is how it is when you are in opposition. Mr. Dion needs to launch a populist charm offensive, travelling regularly to regional media markets, holding policy conferences so that the media and voters can get to know him. He shouldn't change who he is (a "strategy" that never works, anyway).

-Press: As the Post's freelance media observer, I can assure Mr. Dion of one thing: The national media are not fans of the current Conservative regime. As one former prime minister once said to me: "In this job, you don't end up liking the media very much. The key is to never show it." For reasons best known to himself, Mr. Harper shows it. Mr. Dion, therefore, needs to coddle and cajole the press corps whenever and however possible. It may sound hokey, but it'll work. Like everyone else, journalists do not want to be treated like criminals for doing their job.

-Party: Since December, the Grits have been in desperate need of new blood. Too many Martin-era advisors cling to Mr. Dion's robes, mainly because none of them could find meaningful work anywhere else. Too many Members of Parliament seem to be watching the clock, loitering in the House of Commons to bolster their MP pensions. Dion needs to clean out the stables, bringing in better, experienced staff, as well as a younger gang of candidates, as diverse as the country they would hope to serve. In Ontario, Mr. Dion need look no further than the Dalton McGuinty team, whose battle-ready veterans know how to take him to the next level. (Full disclosure: During the election campaign, I fought on a voluntary basis with Team McGuinty myself. But I might add that I have no personal interest in returning to federal politics.)

-Finally, the Dion Liberals need to quit their whining. Sure, opposition is no fun. Sure, it's frustrating. But the last election, as I recall, was mainly about sending the Liberal Party of Canada to the penalty box for a while, so that it can learn a few lessons. Until it learns those lessons, the Liberal party will remain what it is. Which is to say, mired on the opposition benches and sad.

-Warren Kinsella's new book, The War Room, is published this month by Dundurn

Dion not eager for fall election

Dion may not be eager for a fall election but he is eager to show that he is a bare-faced lier and ready to grovel in the mud before the Conservatives. Either that or he is suffering premature memory loss and maybe bladder control after the THrone speech. Here is one of the four conditions that Dion gave for supporting the throne speech not long ago. The press seems to have a bad memory too:
On Afghanistan, Dion said the Throne Speech must make it clear Canada intends to end its combat role in Afghanistan in 2009
Well let' see. Harper gave his answer. F.... you. And then he set up a panel to look into the issue, a panel your buddy Rae welcomed and headed by a Liberal hawk. There were three other conditions including the re-introduction of an environment bill that will never see the light of day.
Now apparently Dion will not vote against the speech unless it promises to privatise the post office cut the minimum wage and abolish the public school system or other things of that sort!
Harper's trap is not the fall election but the revelation that the emperor has no clothes. The Liberals are revealed for the naked cowering unprincipled pitiful degenerates that they are. That is the meaningless trick that Harper is playing on them but the Liberals are so hapless they cannot even understand that. Meanwhile Dion shows his courage and leadership by promising a bigger corporate tax cut than the Conservatives.
Dion says he will think of the interests of Canadians when he decides to vote for or against the throne speech. Complete garbage. He will think of what he considers the Liberal interest and as he sees it apparently it is to swallow whatever Harper feeds him and wait until better polls --but the prospect is only for worse polls unless Harper really makes a horrible slip but that is not likely. Harper and his managers are light years ahead of the Liberals in strategy and tactics.
Dion better be right that people underestimate him and that he will eventually triumph but the signs don't point in that direction.


Dion not eager for fall election
TheStar.com - Canada - Dion not eager for fall election

Liberal leader says he will `think about interests of Canadians' in throne speech

October 15, 2007
Jim Brown
THE CANADIAN PRESS

OTTAWA–Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion says he's sure Stephen Harper is itching to hit the campaign trail this fall, but that doesn't mean the Grits will give him the excuse he needs to do so.

"It's clear he's looking for an election," Dion said yesterday in an interview on CTV's Question Period.

He signalled he's not eager to help the Prime Minister on his way by voting down the Conservative throne speech that will open a new parliamentary session tomorrow.

"We will look at the throne speech as a whole, as we have always said, and we will think about the interests of Canadians," said Dion.

That could mean the official Opposition will topple the government if its legislative agenda is an "outrageous" one animated by a "very right-wing radical" ideology, said the Liberal leader.

But assuming Harper adopts a more conciliatory tone, Dion said his party would try to "make Parliament work" and let the Tories continue to govern for the time being, even if the Grits don't agree with everything their opponents do.

The Liberals have been licking their wounds since they suffered three by-election losses in Dion's home province of Quebec last month, and opinion polls show the party lagging well behind the ruling Conservatives at the national level.

The effort to recover lost ground wasn't helped by the publication on the weekend of former prime minister Jean Chrétien's memoirs, which lambasted one-time leadership rival Paul Martin.

Dion tried to downplay that development, insisting the divisions that once split the Liberals into warring factions are a thing of the past. Others, however, were only too ready to make political hay from the book.

Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles Duceppe accused Chrétien of ``lying" to Quebecers in the 1995 sovereignty referendum by telling them, on the eve of the vote, that the fate of the country was at stake – when in fact, as he wrote in his memoirs, he had no intention of accepting a pro-separatist verdict.

Duceppe also reiterated he won't support Harper's throne speech unless the Tories meet a series of demands that includes a firm commitment to end Canada's combat role in Afghanistan and to abolish the use of federal spending power to create national social programs in areas of provincial jurisdiction.

The Tories are expected to use the throne speech to outline plans to curtail the spending power, but not to do away with it entirely – a proposal that would be unpalatable in the rest of the country.

Harper has moved to buy time on the Afghanistan issue by appointing a five-member panel, chaired by former Liberal cabinet minister John Manley, to study the options and report early next year.

That has failed to win over NDP Leader Jack Layton, who like Duceppe has been hinting for weeks that his party is virtually certain to vote against the throne speech.

"Most Canadians think that Mr. Harper is going in the wrong direction," Layton said yesterday in his own interview with CTV. "The NDP is prepared to take him on."

Dion, by contrast, has been waffling in public while Liberal strategists circulate word privately that they're considering ways to show displeasure with the Tories but stop short of bringing them down and forcing an election.

One possibility is that the Liberal front bench will vote against the throne speech but backbenchers will either be absent in sufficient numbers to let it pass, or will accomplish the same goal by abstaining when the roll is called.

Even an effort by Harper to box Dion in on one of his pet issues – the environment – has apparently failed to force his hand.

Conservative sources say the throne speech will declare the greenhouse-gas emission targets in the Kyoto protocol unattainable. The aim is to force Dion either to oppose the speech and precipitate an election, or to back down publicly from his long-standing support for Kyoto.

But David McGuinty, the Liberal environment critic, has already dismissed the tactic as a meaningless trick. "The Liberal Party of Canada isn't going to be goaded into the boxing ring with Stephen Harper," McGuinty said last week.

Liberals welcome creation of Harper panel on Afghanistan

This is from the Liberal Party's website! A little while ago I thought that Stephane Dion said that Harper had to commit to quit the combat component of the mission in Feb. 2009 or else he would vote against the Throne Speech. Harper had to make clear his intentions now. Setting up this panel makes it crystal clear that Harper has no intention of revealing his intentions now regardless of what the Liberals say or do.
Imagine Rae welcomes the panel, a masterful stroke by Harper to sideline the Liberals and mock them. In placing Ignatieff and Rae in high positions Dion may be assuring his own shipwreck.

Creation of Panel Shouldn’t Stop Open Debate and Discussion in Parliament on Afghanistan
October 12, 2007
TORONTO - Liberal Foreign Affairs Critic Bob Rae today welcomed the Conservative Government’s creation of a panel to study Canada’s mission in Afghanistan.

Mr. Rae also insisted that the creation of the panel should not stop the Harper Government from having an open discussion in the House of Commons about the Afghan mission.

“If the panel serves to encourage an open, public and thoughtful debate about the mission beyond 2009, we support it,” said Mr. Rae, who was appointed Foreign Affairs Critic by Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion.

Mr. Rae was responding to Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s announcement today creating a five-person panel to decide on the future of Canada’s presence in Afghanistan after the 2009 deadline.

Mr. Rae said there can be no reconstruction in Afghanistan without security, but Canada’s current combat mission cannot be expected to continue indefinitely.

“There needs to be an open and transparent discussion in NATO as well as in Canada,” he said.

Liberals say they won't vote down Harper government over throne speech

I thought they were going to wait and see what was in the speech. There seem to be conflicting signals coming from the Liberals but as of now it seems that they are so chicken about going to an election they will swallow any poison pill that they do not think is fatal even though it will make them and everyone else puke. If I were the Liberals I would go to the polls now. Unless they want to be constantly repudiating everything they supposedly stand for, fighting among themselves, and retreating ever more as their polls plunge they had better defeat the Conservatives right now.



Liberals say they won't vote down Harper government over throne speech

OTTAWA - Liberals won't bring down the Harper government over next week's throne speech, even if it effectively abandons the Kyoto climate-change pact, the party's environment critic says.

"The Liberal Party of Canada isn't going to be goaded into the boxing ring with Stephen Harper," David McGuinty said Friday. "We're not that gullible or foolish."

McGuinty was responding to a report that Tuesday's throne speech will describe the Kyoto targets for slashing greenhouse gas emissions as unattainable. That could put Liberal Leader Stephane Dion, who has cast himself as the champion of Kyoto, in an awkward position.

Sources have told The Canadian Press that the prime minister believes Liberals are so desperate to avoid an election that they'll accept the throne speech even if it contradicts Dion's position on Kyoto.

With Liberals still trying to regroup in the wake of three humiliating byelection losses in Quebec last month, party insiders have said there's little chance Dion will opt to bring down the Tory minority government over the throne speech.

More likely, Dion and his front bench will vote against it while most Grit MPs absent themselves, allowing the speech to pass without a Liberal endorsement.

Insiders say it makes sense for Dion to wait for a more opportune moment to topple the government over an issue that plays to Liberal strengths.

Harper last week appeared to set the stage for a series of perpetual confidence votes this fall, saying he will designate not only the throne speech as a confidence matter but all major legislation that flows from it.

However, he seemed to soften his confrontational tone Friday. He said the government reserves the right to decide what constitutes a confidence matter, adding: "We're not going to abuse that right."

In addition to the traditional confidence votes on budgetary matters and the throne speech, Harper said there'll be others on matters deemed to be "principal objectives" of the government, particularly those that have been held up for some time by opposition parties.

He raised his government's crime legislation as an example.

"You know, I don't think you can consider something confidence that isn't significant enough to fight an election over if you were defeated on it."

McGuinty said Harper has been saying for months that Kyoto is unrealistic and such an admission in the throne speech wouldn't be any different.

"That's nothing. That's the Chicken Little, defeatist stuff we've seen for 20 months," he scoffed.

If Harper really wants to prod Liberals into defeating his minority Tory government, McGuinty challenged him to declare that the government is going to repeal the Kyoto Implementation Act. He predicted such a move would prove deadly to Tory electoral hopes.

"Who's really trapped here? Let them go to the Canadian people (with that)," McGuinty said.

Later in the day, Saskatchewan MP Ralph Goodale told Regina radio station CJME that the Liberals haven't decided one way or another what its members will do.

He said they won't know until after they hear what's in the speech.

Showdown: Harper sets his election trap

The Liberals are going to consider "What's best for Canadians" in reacting to the throne speech. Emotively pleasing rhetorical garbage seems to be clogging the political landscape. Since the public is now showing much concern for the environment we should ask that politicians should at least limit their littering even though they think people don't mind it.
If this article is correct the Conservatives are not going to be so taunting to the Liberals as to force them to vote against the throne speech but taunting enough that they must swallow their principles and pride if they are to vote for it. As of now I would bet the Liberals will swallow their pride and principles without even gagging. Of course the Liberals are now promising to suck up to Bay St. even harder than the Conservatives by promising an even larger corporate tax cut than the Tories!
Vote for the NDP, Greens, Communists, Libertarians, Christian Heritage, anyone but the Libs or Tories..!

Showdown: Harper sets his election trap
TheStar.com - Canada - Showdown: Harper sets his election trap

October 14, 2007

CONSERVATIVES

Election ready and confident, Stephen Harper has thrown down the throne speech gauntlet


OTTAWA — Since his first Speech from the Throne 20 months ago, Prime Minister Stephen Harper has made a high art of treading thin political lines and carving off even thinner wedges of territory in which he can plant the Conservative party's flag.
He has courted ethnic votes across the country, ramped up support for the military, shifted focus on the environment and championed a get-tough approach to criminal justice. This is to say nothing of the many efforts Harper has made to win over Quebec voters.

His second throne speech, which will be delivered Tuesday evening, is expected to trumpet those causes as promises both made and kept, and to build on them in small but meaningful ways. Harper has promised a tax cut, a limit on Ottawa's ability to spend money in provincial jurisdictions, more crime bills and additional initiatives to protect the environment.

But the Prime Minister's framing of the debate that begins with the throne speech also promises to kick off a frantic period of political jousting in the capital. It will ensure that MPs are never more than a phone call away from Parliament Hill. They will be keeping their flashy election signs even closer.

In his search for a stronger hold on power, Harper has laid down an aggressive ultimatum to opposition parties that puts the trigger for an election in their hands, but ensures that he remains the one directing the firing squad.

His audacious threat to make every piece of legislation that stems from the speech subject to a confidence vote – meaning a defeated bill would spark an election – appears designed to force the hand of a Liberal party in disarray that is ill-prepared for an election. It comes from an election-ready government that, as of last week, was said to be writing the throne speech, campaign platform and debate preparation all at the same time.

The question, then, is how do the Tories hasten an election without calling it, and make sure that it happens on its own terms?

Conservative insiders expect a speech that is "pesky as opposed to pugilistic" for opposition parties, meaning that the Prime Minister will plant a few landmines in the document, but nothing that could be held against the Tories by voters still nervous about the party's direction in government.

The speech, for example, will reportedly state that Canada's targets under the Kyoto protocol are "unattainable" in an attempt to antagonize Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion and the other parties who have repeatedly called on the government to meet its treaty obligations. "He can't do anything that is too far afield that it could be turned into a campaign anvil by the Liberals against the Conservatives," said one backroom Conservative, who suggested that Harper has more room to antagonize the opposition in areas like crime and the economy as opposed to the environment or health care.

"We are still vulnerable, I believe, on social issues because the default mechanism of Canadian conscience is to the Liberals or NDP."

Three senior cabinet ministers from Ontario – Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, Health Minister Tony Clement and Environment Minister John Baird, who is also the political minister for the province – refused repeated requests to discuss how the government's new parliamentary agenda will address the needs of Canada's largest province.

Flaherty, through a spokesperson, sent a statement to the Star that said nothing of what Ontarians could expect other than to see the government "continue working together to build a strong Ontario in a strong Canada."

This, despite the fact that Harper himself laid out the major markers less than two weeks ago and ministers from other provinces, particularly Quebec, have made their own announcements related to upcoming initiatives:

The throne speech will contain "significant" tax cuts stemming from the recently announced $14-billion surplus and a number of measures to boost the economy. Those are expected to come in a mini-budget later this month or early in November.

The government will reintroduce most of the crime legislation left stalled in the last Parliament and introduce a few new ones. Justice Minister Rob Nicholson laid out plans to add tougher sentences and pre-trial detention measures to the Youth Criminal Justice Act. Transport Minister Lawrence Cannon said the speech would follow through on a long-standing promise to Quebecers to restrict Ottawa's ability to spend money on programs that encroach on exclusive provincial jurisdiction, in areas like education. The Liberals and NDP oppose this. The Bloc is demanding the "elimination" of these spending powers, a request Harper says he "will not be fully satisfying."

There will be a new commitment to address Arctic sovereignty, with a possible announcement in the weeks ahead about increased monitoring of the Northwest Passage. The popular sea route is seeing increased traffic and dispute about its status as an international waterway as global warming heats up the often ice-blocked route.

The Prime Minister will also dodge opposition demands for a declaration that Canadian troops will leave Afghanistan's violent Kandahar province after February 2009. He instead launched a five-member study group to look at the future of the mission late last week.

One government official said Harper's pledges around Arctic sovereignty and Afghanistan are "part of a bigger strategy of making people proud of their country again" – something that is emerging as a pre-election theme. Harper has ramped up this angle over the past months with the refrain that, under his rule, "Canada's back."

But it is just as likely that the government's throne speech gambit will lead Canada back to the polls.

The NDP and Bloc Quebecois are almost certain to vote against the government in a series of confidence votes starting this week. The Liberals are the most hesitant, and the party is reportedly considering having some of its MPs not show up for the votes so they can vote against the government without forcing a campaign. That sign of weakness is not lost on either the government or on other opposition parties as they try to stake out firm ground. "I call on Mr. Dion to make sure that his members are in their seats, and that they take their responsibilities to pass judgment on Stephen Harper and his government," said the NDP's Jack Layton.

"If Mr. Dion is not prepared to stand up and be the opposition to Mr. Harper and the direction that he's taking the country in, we are."

- Allan Woods





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




LIBERALS

Stay on script - `what's best for Canadians' - and don't take the bait, insiders urge Stephane Dion

OTTAWA – On Parliament Hill, it often seems, everyone's a political strategist.

It's a tendency that becomes even more acute when there's a perceived crisis – the current one, of course, being the situation with the federal Liberals and leader Stéphane Dion.

Dion had his own problems with party disarray since last month's dismal Liberal showings in Quebec by-elections. Worse, in recent days, Prime Minister Stephen Harper handed the Liberals even more reasons to get in strategic knots.

Harper has presented Tuesday's throne speech as a time-elapse threat to Dion's leadership, daring him to accept the whole thing, and all the legislation that flows from it, or topple the government and plunge Canada into a fall election.

Then, late this week, just to make things even more troublesome, Harper appointed a former Liberal deputy prime minister, John Manley, to advise on Afghanistan policy – one of the more powerful issues the Liberals had in their lineup of Conservative vulnerabilities.

Stroke by stroke, Harper seems to be painting Dion into a corner, where he has to choose between an unwanted election or humiliating capitulation to a Conservative minority that is trying to govern as though it had a majority.

Suddenly, all the chatter in Ottawa now is on Dion's strategy. What will he do? More importantly, what should he do?

The irony, for those familiar with Dion, is that advice-taking is reportedly not the Liberal leader's strong suit. But it's said that he is listening now, especially to those who say he has to resist any temptation to provoke a fall election. Apart from a few pro-election hawks, most Liberals are saying they need more time to get the party's act together.

This is why you will be hearing virtually the same words from Liberals in the days leading up to Tuesday's throne speech. They have come up with the "script" and it sounds like this:

"We will take into account all the aspects of the throne speech with only one thing in mind – the interests of Canadians," Dion told reporters in Toronto on Friday.

"We have to decide what's in the national interest," Deputy Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff said in a recent interview with CTV.

The subtext here is simple to decode: Canadians don't want an election; Liberals will pay attention to that interest and decide accordingly. In other words, they will say that Harper is concerned about his own fortunes while Liberals are concerned about Canadians.

Additional consensus is also emerging around how Dion should handle these Harper dares, simply in terms of style and "messaging."

Liberals should not be drawn into playing this season's politics on Harper's terms, say the experienced hands behind the scenes. If the Liberals can shift the debate away from strategy and on to policy – or even better, to values – they believe the government is on shakier ground.

"The Harper Conservatives are out of step with Canadians on Afghanistan, climate change and the need for an able national government. And they have no economic policy whatsoever at a time when the rising dollar is forcing a massive structural adjustment," says Scott Reid, who served as communications director to former prime minister Paul Martin.

"These are the issues that matter to Canadians – not parliamentary poker games."

Reid says here's what he'd like to tell Dion: "Make a decision on the vote now, announce it early and take your inevitable lumps with a press gallery that is corn-fed on political strategy. Then start putting the government on the defensive about its policies, not Liberal party politics. The government should be on trial, not the opposition."

Peter Donolo, former communications director to prime minister Jean Chrétien, says Dion has to concentrate on his strengths and not let Harper frame next week's politics around the Liberals' perceived weaknesses.

Dion has integrity and authenticity on his side, says Donolo, who agrees Liberals have to keep Canadians' eyes focused on policy differences with the Conservatives. In fact, he's quite upbeat about Dion's chances if he can do his own "framing" of the issues and put Conservatives' ideas under scrutiny.

"It means becoming the default party of those who would never think of voting for Harper and those who would worry about handing Harper a majority. That's pretty well close to half the electorate right now," he says.

Dion also should be doing as Chrétien did when his fortunes were flagging before the 1993 election, Donolo says – widen the emphasis to the Liberal "team."

To some extent, that has already started to happen, with Canadians seeing Ignatieff and other former Liberal leadership contenders coming out before the cameras to serve as the face of the party.

The appointment of Bob Rae as foreign affairs critic is also part of this. Rae, a former premier and leadership contender now seen almost as a statesman, is an asset the party needs to be putting in the front window, most Liberals agree.

"He's got this dream-team thing going for him and it's still there," Donolo says, noting that it reminds the public of the way Harper is a one-man government, keeping ministers and MPs under wraps.

"The contrast to the other guy (Harper) will be very positive."

The emphasis on the team approach also quells some of the restive rumours about lingering in-fighting between the Dion camp and the old Rae and Ignatieff leadership teams. Serious people in the party – especially Rae and Ignatieff personally – have made it abundantly clear that there's no time or appetite for this mischief right now.

Less obvious to politics-watchers will be the strategic changes underway behind the scenes – structural and operational discipline, mainly, overseen by the new principal secretary, Johanne Senecal, a respected, long-time aide to Dion and Chrétien.

Most Liberal insiders are coming to the belief that the party actually needed those Quebec by-election losses to shake the organization right down to the foundations.

Are things working better? The tests begin this week. What Liberals do seem to realize is that they can't do strategy from their armchairs any more. The potential is there for even bigger losses than the Quebec by-elections and that means, as the old saying goes, now's the time for all good men and women to come to the aid of an embattled party.

- Susan Delacourt