NDP set to gain some seats in Saskatchewan in federal election

When the recent federal election was called, Saskatchewan had 13 Conservative MPs and one Liberal. The NDP did not have a single seat. This time around the NDP looks to be winning several urban seats and one northern riding as well.

+ Add Image

Saskatchewan, in the past, has been a stronghold of the NDP and the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation(CCF) before it:In 1944, the CCF formed the first social-democratic government in North America when it was elected to form the provincial government in Saskatchewan.[5] In 1961, the CCF was succeeded by the New Democratic Party (NDP)

Not only did the CCF and NDP form provincial governments but they also sent MPs to Ottawa. The CCF had a very strong base within the rural farming community as well as within cities. Early policies were strongly socialist and the Regina Manifesto called for the replacement of capitalism by the cooperative commonwealth. By the time the party transformed itself into the NDP in 1961 it had become more a reformist party with some of the leaders seeing it as a Canadian version of the UK Labor Party. In the 21st century the party has turned even further right in the hope it can achieve electoral success. In Saskatchewan, the NDP lost out to the right-of- center Saskatchewan Party in the November provincial election of 2007. In the November 2011 provincial election the Saskatchewan Party under Brad Wall won 49 of 58 seats. In the federal election of the same year the NDP did not win a single seat. Yet the NDP is making somewhat of a comeback in Saskatchewan at the federal level. While the Liberals appear not set to make gains, its one seat in Regina seems quite safe with an 80 percent chance of a win.

Predictions are that the NDP could gain up to five seats this election. However, the margin of expect victory is slim in four of the five ridings with only about a two thirds chance of winning. One northern riding seem a more certain win an 80 per cent chance. Most of the Conservative ridings are quite safe except for some with a considerable number of urban voters such as Regina Qu'appelle.

While Saskatchewan has the same number of seats as in the last election a number of boundaries have changed. Many urban ridings that previously had considerable numbers of rural areas and voters included now are entirely urban. Joe Garcea, a political scientist at the University of Saskatchewan, said: "I think that there are many more constituencies up for grabs than ever before, Of the new boundaries Garcea said: ".. you don't get that urban-rural split. Some believe that that may help the NDP because the Conservatives were getting a lot of their support in such ridings in the rural areas."

Saskatchewan still has a number of enterprises left over from periods when it was more socialist-oriented. Cooperatives and credit unions are ubiquitous both in rural and urban settings. There is a provincial bus company, provincial power corporation, telephones, and government monopoly auto insurance, The right-of-center Saskatchewan Party won power by adopting some of the popular NDP social programs. After doing badly in an election in 2003 the Saskatchewan party caucus all voted in favor of the NDP's Crown Corporation Public Ownership Act that provided legislative entrenchment for the ownership of major crown utilities and services. The left borrows from the right to get elected and in Saskatchewan the right returned the favor.

In urban areas of the prairies, in particular, Harper's policies are becoming less and less popular providing an opportunity for opposition parties to gain seats. The NDP may start to regain some of its power in the province that gave birth to its predecessor the CCF. Don't expect a second edition of the Regina Manifesto soon though.

Liberals gaining ground as NDP lead shrinks in latest polls

New CBC poll-tracker averages show the NDP lead is shrinking, the Liberals are gaining ground, and the Conservatives have sunk to third place.

+ Add Image	1 of 2

The CBC poll-tracker of averages now has three polls in September to add to its averages. The results up to September 2 are: Conservatives, 27.7 percent of the vote down 1.7 percent from last average; Liberals 29.5 percent, up 1.8 percent; the NDP 32.1 percent up 0.9 percent.

Seat projections based upon the above averages are: Conservatives 101; NDP 122; Liberals 114 and Green party one. The NDP are nowhere near the 170 seats needed for a majority. The Conservatives have now dropped to third place in seats as well as popular vote percentage. On social media the Conservatives at first appear to be doing well as shown by graphs here. The Liberals appear to outperform the NDP. However, the data may be misleading as a lot of traffic on Conservative social media is created by critics who lose no opportunity to try to counter Conservative claims. Some of the Conservative media campaign is tried and true. A photo op shows Harper holding a baby.

The NDP appears to be losing considerable support in BC while the Liberals are gaining considerably more support in Ontario. Compared to the last election the Liberals are projected to win 47 more seats.

The most recent poll by Leger in the Globe and Mail this Friday shows: NDP,31 percent; Liberals, 30 percent and Conservatives at 28 percent. On Saturday a Forum poll in the Toronto Star showed: NDP, 36 percent; Liberals, 32 percent and Conservatives at a dismal 24 percent. TheEKOS poll published Friday found: NDP, 30.2 percent; Conservatives, 29.4, and Liberals with 27.7. The NDP appears unable to pull away from the pack while the Liberals are gaining. However, all three main parties are quite close in the polls.

August 24 poll averages show NDP in slim lead

A recent poll by Nanos, Globe and Mail, CTV shows the three main parties in a virtual tie although other recent polls still show the NDP ahead by several points. Nevertheless the NDP vote percentage has gone down since the last CBC poll-tracker averages.

+ Add Image	1 of 2

The Nanos poll shows the Conservatives at 30.1 percent of the vote, the NDP is at 29.1 percent and the Liberals at 29.9. The Nanos poll is in contrast to two other recent polls that still have the NDP leading by several points. Nanos polls for some reason in several cases give lower values for the NDP than other polls as can be seen by the list of polls at the CBC poll-tracker.

Nevertheless the poll averages also show a decline for the NDP and the three parties closer in the polls. The most recent poll-tracker results averaged on August 24 are: Conservatives 29.4 percentage of vote, a slight gain of 0.2 from the last polls; the NDP at 32.3, a significant drop of 1.5 from last time; and the Liberals at 28.3 the largest gain of 0.8. Seat projections show the NDP still ahead with 126 seats, followed by the Conservatives with 118 and the Liberals trailing with only 93. The Green Party would win one seat and the Parti Quebecois none.

In the previous elections in 2008 and 2011, Harper was able to successfully claim that his Conservative government was best suited to guide the economy. This time around with the Canadian economy in the doldrums if not recession and the stock markets tanking, this advantage appears to be declining. The economy is still a crucial election issue. A recent Ipsos Reid poll showed that 76 per cent of Canadians considered the economy "absolutely critical" to determining their vote. Three quarters also said the same for creating jobs. An Abacus Data polls shows that only 43 percent of Canadians think the economy is good or very good. Two years ago 67 per cent thought this. The numbers of those who think the country is on the wrong track have increased while those thinking it is on the right track, still 36 per cent, has declined. While one third think the economy is still growing, 64 percent think it is shrinking. There are more detailed results at the Abacus site with quite helpful figures.

On the issue of leadership on the 15 issues tested, on all 15 a majority of respondents thought Mulcair or Trudeau would make more acceptable decisions than Harper. However, on the economy, respondents in three of four recent polls gave Harper an edge of one or two points over Mulcair and the NDP. An IPSOS poll showed a wider lead of 36 to 28 percent for Harper. If the vote were on the economy alone Harper might win at most a small minority victory and perhaps not even that as he no longer has a huge advantage on the issue. With Canada facing economic troubles and the energy sector in particular badly hit, the opposition is sure to blame Harper for this situation even though much is beyond his control. Likely, emphasis will continue on the issue of ethics in opposition attacks on Harper. Polls so far do not show any negative results for the Conservatives in response to the revelations at the Duffy trial.

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.

NDP leads polls ahead of 2015 federal election

Just four months from an expected federal election in October, the left-leaning New Democratic Party (NDP) is widening its lead over the Conservatives and Liberals, according to a new Forum poll.

+ Add Image

Led by Thomas Mulcair, the NDP now leads in three electorally important provinces of B.C at 54 percent, Ontario, 34 percent, and Quebec, 36 percent. In the poll the NDP had 36 percent support nationally to 28 percent each for the Liberals and Conservatives. The Bloc Quebecois, a separatist party based solely in Quebec, has five percent support , while Elizabeth May’s Green Party , managed only two percent of the vote.

The NDP has a quite significant lead but then much can change in four months. Back near the end of May an EKOS poll gave the NDP 29.6 per cent of the vote, versus 29.1 for Harper's Conservatives, and 26.1 per cent for Justin Trudeau's Liberals.

The situation looks particularly unpromising for the ruling Conservatives, as only nine percent have them as their second choice as against 23 percent for Liberals and 22 percent for the NDP. Among party leaders, Stephen Harper had the worst rating with only 30 percent of respondents thinking that he did a good job. Justin Trudeau had a 38 percent favourable rating with Thomas Mulcair of the NDP at 50 percent.The Forum poll surveyed 1,268 Canadians between June 22-23. Results are considered accurate within three percentage points 19 times out of 20. Forum Research president, Lorne Bozinoff, said:“The movement in the NDP’s favour is slow, but it’s gathering momentum. They’re firmly in first in Quebec and B.C. and at parity in Ontario, which are three of the four biggest provinces.”

In spite of having a young new leader, Justin Trudeau, the popularity of the Liberal party has fallen from a peak in July of 2014 when it was 10 points ahead of the Conservatives and the NDP came in third. Among several possible mistakes made by Trudeau are his support for the Conservative anti-terrorism bill, even without any amendments.

Another poll conducted for Global News by Ipsos has similar results to the Forum poll. The poll was of 2003 Canadians between June 19 to June 23. The poll shows the NDP has 35 per cent support. The Liberals had 29 per cent and the Conservatives 28. The Conservatives are still the most popular in Alberta in spite of the recent NDP win provincially. Often voters in Canada choose to support different parties provincially and federally, although until the recent NDP win, Alberta was always Conservative provincially as well. The Liberals lead in the Atlantic provinces.

Professor Barry Kay of Wilfrid Laurier University and his team at the Laurier Institute for the Study of Public Opinion and Policy (LISPOP) did seat projections based upon a compilation of several polls. Leader of the NDP , Thomas Mulcair, would become Prime Minister, a historic first for the NDP. The NDP would win 130 seats in parliament with the Conservatives at 119 and the Liberals only 86. In Quebec, Mulcair's home province, the NDP would take 60 of 78 seats with the separatist Bloc Quebecois winning only two. The parties are already running ads to support their cause.

NDP may remove references to "socialism" in preamble to party constitution

The New Democratic Party, the main opposition party in the Canadian federal parliament, may rewrite to preamble to the party constitution. The preamble still has a few phrases that make favorable reference to "socialism".

The predecessor of the New Democratic Party(NDP), the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (CCF), had as its party platform a document that would make many present NDP members run for cover. The document was called the Regina Manifesto. The term "manifesto" became a cause of great concern because it was associated in the public mind with the Communist Manifesto. It made no difference that the official party line and the early leaders were all staunchly anti-communist.

The CCF was founded in 1932 and the Regina Manifesto adopted the next year at a convention in Regina. The Manifesto as well as calling for pensions, universal health care, and the nationalisation of major industries also said:

" No C.C.F. Government will rest content until it has eradicated capitalism and put into operation the full programme of socialized planning which will lead to the establishment in Canada of the Cooperative Commonwealth."

The CCF Saskatchewan provincial government was able to introduce the first free hospital care system in North America in 1946.

By 1956, the CCF changed its position to that of a social democratic party that accepted capitalism and a mixed economy. The Winnipeg_Declaration replaces the socialist aim of eradicating capitalism with the following:

"The CCF will not rest content until every person in this land and in all other lands is able to enjoy equality and freedom, a sense of human dignity, and an opportunity to live a rich and meaningful life as a citizen of a free and peaceful world."

The NDP was founded in 1961 and combined the old CCF with the labor movement. The preamble to the constitution of the party makes several references to democratic socialism, the principles of socialism and association with socialist parties around the world. It is this preamble that has caused the difficulties. The preamble is not that long so I will post it so that you can compare it with the revised version that was not voted on at the last convention:

The New Democratic Party believes that the social, economic and political progress of Canada can be assured only by the application of democratic socialist principles to government and the administration of public affairs.

The principles of democratic socialism can be defined briefly as:

That the production and distribution of goods and services shall be directed to meeting the social and individual needs of people within a sustainable environment and economy and not to the making of profit;

To modify and control the operations of the monopolistic productive and distributive organizations through economic and social planning. Towards these ends and where necessary the extension of the principle of social ownership;

The New Democratic Party holds firm to the belief that the dignity and freedom of the individual is a basic right that must be maintained and extended; and

The New Democratic Party is proud to be associated with the democratic socialist parties of the world and to share the struggle for peace, international co-operation and the abolition of poverty.

The 2011 NDP convention was held just weeks are the NDP made huge electoral gains to become the Official Opposition for the first time ever. In order to broaden the appeal of the party, the party brass and others wanted to scrap any references to socialism. The furthest the revision would go is to refer to social democratic principles. Here is the revised preamble:

The New Democratic Party believes that social justice, equality, and environmental sustainability are vital to achieving a strong, united and prosperous Canada for all.

To that end, the New Democratic Party is dedicated to the application of social democratic principles to government.

These principles include an unwavering commitment to economic and social equality, individual freedom and responsibility, and democratic rights of citizens to shape the future of their communities.

New Democrats hold firm to the belief that individual freedom and dignity are basic rights that find the fullest expression in healthy and prosperous communities, where individuals can realize their full potential and contribute to a stronger Canada.

Established in partnership with the Labour movement in 1961, the New Democratic Party is the voice of working people in the Parliament of Canada, advocating and implementing laws that advance their collective and individual interests.

New Democrats are proud to stand in solidarity with its allies around the world working for international peace and justice, ending discrimination and exploitation, eliminating poverty and ensuring that wealth and power are in the hands of the many and not the few.

Any reference to socialism or any suggestion that capitalism might be replaced by socialism is entirely lacking. Most of the document is rhetoric of the sort that most any progressive party might produce, including the Liberal Party of Canada. Note that the reference to production not being for the sake of profit is also eliminated. There was no vote on this amendment at the convention as Brian Topp, who was then Federal Director, moved to send the motion back to the federal council for further consideration.

Amazingly, over the next few months, the preamble actually disappeared from the copy of the constitution that was posted on the NDP website! Without any explanation or acknowledgement that anything had happened it just as mysteriously reappeared.

The current federal director of the NDP Nathan Rotman said that the motion that had been referred to the federal council and there had been a small group of party elders and others who had consulted on the issue. This panel will report it conclusions at the upcoming meeting in February. They will then put forth a motion to be voted upon or they may wait to see if any riding associations put forth amendments to the constitution.

I would expect that some riding associations will suggest amendments in line with what the party brass want and just as certainly there will be strong opposition especially from the Socialist Caucus. Whatever the wording change, the reality is that the NDP has moved rightward for decades. As James Laxer wrote in an e-mail:

“Like other social democratic parties in the West, the NDP has adopted much of the outlook of the neo-liberalism that is the dominant ideological strain in the market-centred era of globalization.The NDP has been able to challenge the Liberals as a less corrupt, more principled and somewhat more progressive party that occupies centre-left ground.”

As I understand it, socialism is the socialization of the major means of production, distribution, and exchange plus production on the basis of need not profit. The New Democratic Party has nothing to do with that. Indeed a former New Democratic Premier of M anitoba, Gary Doer, now serves as the Conservative government's ambassador to the US and the present leader of the NDP, Thomas Mulcair, was a former minister in the Quebec Liberal government. Whatever changes in wording are ultimately made, the NDP will still be called socialist by many in the media while not being socialist at all.

Progressive Conservatives win majority again in Alberta

From the polls it looked as if the Wildrose party might win a minority or even majority government. However the polls were wrong. In fact the popular vote was running at almost 44 per cent for the PCs and just around 36 per cent for the Wildrose as I am writing this at just about ten thirty PM central time.

The CBC has just declared that there will be a majority Conservative government even though many ridings are still too close to declare who is elected. But the figures show the situation: The Conservatives are leading in 60 seats the Wildrose in 19 the NDP in 4 and the Liberals in 4. The NDP has doubled their numbers if they actually win whereas the Liberals seem to have lost several seats.

Some Liberal voters may have decided to vote PC to keep the Wildrose out but the NDP vote percentage held. Over the weekend many who earlier intended to vote for the Wildrose must have changed their mind or perhaps the undecided voters chose to vote for the Progressive Conservatives. I did not think that the strategic voting campaign was working but perhaps it did have some effect although not on New Democratic Party voters. The Conservatives have been in power in Alberta for over 40 years.

UPDATE : Results here as of April 24th
Progressive Conservatives elected in 61 seats and leading in one, Wildrose Party elected in 17, NDP elected in 4 and Liberals elected in 4. Popular vote:: PC 43.9 , Wildrose 34.5, NDP 9.8, Liberal 9.6.

The Cat Reporter at the NDP convention

This is a funny video a sort of takeoff on some right-wing cliches about the New Democratic Party. The reference to socialised medicine being forced on Canadians fifty or so years ago refers not to the NDP but its predecessor the CCF (Cooperative Commonwealth Federation) which initiated the first universal health care system in North America in the province of Saskatchewan.

The colour orange is associated with the NDP and is predominant in their signs. The surge in voter support for the party in the last election was called the Orange Crush. The cat reporter plays on this.

The video is produced by Rabble.ca. Rabble has a number of accounts of the convention some favorable but others critical. Murray Dobbin has a very caustic article on the choice of Thomas Mulcair as leader. His article is here.

The NDP has been moving right for years. Given that it is now the official opposition its main emphasis will be to become the government. To this end it will do whatever it thinks will attract the necessary votes. There is a socialist caucus within the membership but it remains to be seen if it will have much influence over policy.

The NDP to the rescue..

After bad mouthing the Conservatives for aeons and complaining about the Liberals propping up the Conservatives for a similar length of time, the White Knight socialist Layton gallops to the rescue of the right wing Harper because Harper is willing to give a few crumbs to the unemployed. I guess Layton is a supporter of trickle down Harperism. Never mind parliament is working, for Harper that is. Meanwhile the way is cleared for Ignatieff to come down with the harshest anti-Harper rhetoric since it is perfectly safe. I am waiting for Ignatieff to condemn the harmonised sales tax as a burden on consumers. This is from the Star.



Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff says the Conservatives are undermining national institutions.
October 01, 2009 bruce campion-smithOttawa bureau chief
OTTAWA – Prime Minister Stephen Harper has survived a Liberal move to topple his minority Conservatives but suffered a withering attack over his policies and style of government.
Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff delivered one of his most passionate speeches to date Thursday as he condemned the Conservatives' "terrible record of failure" and tried to persuade voters why Harper should be dumped after almost four years in office.
But Harper remains in power thanks to the tacit help of the New Democrats, who abstained from the late-day vote, denying the Liberals and Bloc Quebecois the votes they needed to defeat the government.
The non-confidence motion was defeated by a vote of 144 to 117, sparing Canadians an election just a year after the last one and what would have been the fourth trip to the polls in five years.
There was little drama in the vote since the NDP had already signalled they would not oppose the government, reversing a position that had seen the party fight just about every initiative proposed by the Conservatives.
Instead, they now say they will avoid defeating the government until improvements to employment insurance are passed.
But the Conservatives took a bruising during a day of debate when all opposition MPs lined up to take aim at the government's record and style of politics.
"This is a government that uses every opportunity to treat its adversaries as enemies, every opportunity to sow division for partisan gains and every opportunity to use public money to spread untruths," Ignatieff said in the Commons.
On issues such as the economy, climate change, swelling unemployment and Canada's position on the world stage, the government has failed Canadians, he said.
"The Conservatives have lost control of the public finances," Ignatieff said, citing a growing deficit he said could reach $60 billion by Christmas.
"All Canadians must understand that this deficit is going to hang around the necks of Canadians like a stone," he said.
He rattled off a list of complaints, charging that the government is more concerned with promoting its own image than getting Canadians to work or protecting them against the H1N1 flu pandemic.
He wrapped up his speech warning that the Conservatives have a "starve-the-beast ideology" to permanently weaken the institutions of the federal government. That risks changing Canada "beyond recognition," he said.
"If this ideology prevails in this country it will permanently weaken the tissues that bind our society together," Ignatieff said.
"This is an unworthy way to govern this country, and we stand against it," he told the House of Commons.
Harper shrugged off the Liberal gripes and accused Ignatieff of "flailing around trying to justify an election that nobody wants for a reason nobody understands.
"This government has important measures before the House, tax measures to help the Canadian economy, to help homeowners and the population. It has important measures before the House to help the unemployed and help workers," Harper said.
Liberals are vowing they will not support the government in future confidence motions, leaving the government on uncertain ground in the months ahead.
"If there are confidence votes to be taken, we will be voting no," Liberal House Leader Ralph Goodale said.
The vote came on a day when a new poll showed little change in voters' preferences. The Angus Reid/Toronto Star poll showed the Conservatives at 37 per cent, Liberals at 27 per cent, NDP at 17 per cent, Bloc Quebecois at 11 per cent and Greens at 6 per cent.
The poll of 1,000 Canadians was done Tuesday and Wednesday and is considered accurate within 3.1 per cent, 19 times out of 20.

Elizabeth May claims Harper may provoke an election

Actually it looks as if Ignatieff has decided to force an election if he is able to do so. He has ads out and is unveiling parts of a policy platform on the economy. Harper may be happy enough to face off though with Ignatieff being blamed. Of course this is a bit ridiculous anyway since all three opposition parties must vote against the government. If Ignatieff tries to pull back from confronting Harper he may find himself being faced with bills that he cannot swallow as Harper will take advantage of the Liberal decline in the polls to dare them to pull the plug. This is from the Chronicle Herald.

May says Harper may spark election
By STEPHEN MAHER Ottawa BureauFri. Sep 25 - 4:46 AM

OTTAWA — Green Party Leader Elizabeth May is predicting that Prime Minister Stephen Harper will find a way to engineer an election this fall, even as he attacks Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff for trying to send Canadians to the polls.
"Wouldn’t it be just like Harper to decide that things are looking good for him right now and force Jack Layton into a compromise that even Jack can’t twist himself into," said Ms. May.
Conservatives were quick to dismiss her suggestion.
"This is totally inconsistent with anything I’ve heard and everything we’re working on," said one senior Conservative strategist.
"That’s absolutely ridiculous," said Conservative party spokesman Fred DeLorey. "We do not want an unnecessary and wasteful election. The economy is our No. 1 priority and we will continue to implement our economic action plan."
At the beginning of the month, Mr. Ignatieff said that his Liberals would no longer vote for the Tories on confidence measures, which could have led to an election. But the Tories announced a plan to put $1 billion more into employment insurance over three years and the NDP said they will support the Tories at least until that is passed.
Most observers concluded that the risk of an election had been averted until at least the spring, after the Winter Olympics in Vancouver.
But Ms. May said she has begun to suspect that Mr. Harper is likely to strike soon, while Mr. Ignatieff is still paying a price in the polls for threatening to spark an election.
"I think one is wise never to assume that Stephen Harper won’t do the most take-no-prisoners style of politics possible at any moment," she said.
An Ekos poll released Thursday showed the Tories at 37 points, the Liberals at 29 and the NDP at 14, continuing a trend of rising Conservative fortunes.
Ms. May points out that Mr. Harper wrong-footed then-Liberal Leader Stephane Dion a year ago by breaking his government’s own fixed-date election law and going to the polls when the Liberals looked weak. She said she thinks there is a 50-50 chance he will do it again.
"Why would he not say Ignatieff is plummeting in the polls since this whole thing started?" she said. "Our ads have ramped up. His ads aren’t doing much for the Liberals. We can go to the polls now and everyone will still blame Ignatieff. That’s the key thing. If we go to the polls now, voters will still think it was the Liberal guy who did it to us."
Parliament Hill insiders say the NDP is in financial trouble and is not ready for an election, which is why they’ve been forced to back the Tories now.
Brad Lavigne, a senior NDP strategist, wouldn’t comment. "I don’t speculate on hypotheticals," he said.
Ms. May said it would be hard for Mr. Layton to keep his caucus behind him, money problems or not, if Mr. Harper tries to push a poison pill down their throats.
"Jack has already got Joe Comartin, Peggy Nash and lots of people in that caucus not so happy," she said. "So what the heck is he going to do if Harper says OK, the next confidence measure includes — who knows what he’ll do? — something to do with women’s rights, some commitment about military engagement in Afghanistan."
Ms. May, long a harsh critic of Mr. Harper, said the he likes to control the agenda.
"He likes being in control," she said. "That’s why he brought in a ways and means motion on Sept. 18, to jump the gun on the Liberal motion. Stephen Harper’s signature character definition is he’s a control freak. In the vagaries of a minority government, he doesn’t want to have a government that depends on reaching out to other parties, achieving consensus, moving forward based on giving a bit here, giving a bit there. He sees the exercise of governing as a tactical endeavour in which winning the election is everything."
A spokesman for Mr. Harper declined to ponder Ms. May’s theory.
"Liz May who?" said Dimitri Soudas.
( smaher@herald.ca)

Jack Layton goes from kingmaker to bystander

This is from the Star.

One of the reasons for Layton's lacklustre performance is surely that the press for the most part treats Canada as it had just two parties, the Liberals and Conservatives. This is a way of framing discussion without any government control so that only two parties count and need to be funded by those who benefit most from the system. Of course in provincial politics the situation may be different as the NDP has had power in some provinces.
There is little coverage of the federal NDP, or the Green Party, although once in a while there will be some. Other parties such as the Christian Heritage Party, the Libertarian Party or the Communist Party (the CPC!) get virtual no press. They have little money for promoting their policies either.
Anyway if Layton failed to give birth to a coalition government at least he has become a grandpa. Meanwhile Ignatieff gave birth to a Conservative Liberal coalition that should have been aborted at the earliest stages.

Jack Layton goes from kingmaker to bystander TheStar.com - Canada - Jack Layton goes from kingmaker to bystander
Bubble has burst for NDP leader since coalition, and party has lost its momentum from 2008 vote
June 27, 2009 Richard J. BrennanOTTAWA BUREAU
OTTAWA – Jack Layton looked like a kingmaker when the Liberal-NDP coalition threatened to topple the Conservative government last fall, but eight months later he is struggling for attention.
By throwing in his lot with the Liberals, led then by Stéphane Dion, the NDP leader saw a chance for real power. However, his ambitions came crashing down when Governor General Michaëlle Jean agreed to Prime Minister Stephen Harper's request to prorogue Parliament, sending MPs home.
Since his power play, Layton's party has lost the momentum it had during the 2008 election and his personal popularity has nosedived.
While part of the NDP's decline can be traced back to Layton's role in the failed coalition, it is the growing strength of the Liberals led by Michael Ignatieff that is really pushing the party to the margins.
When he was compared to the hapless Dion, Layton looked good but the changing Liberal dynamic has voters wondering what he stands for, other than opposing everything the Conservative government proposes.
It used to be that Harper treated Layton with obvious deference – considering him an ally in the fight to keep the Liberals on the ropes – but now Harper routinely attacks Layton, accusing the NDP of being irrelevant.
"The problem for the NDP is that the lowest-level game being played in this Parliament is by the NDP," Harper told the Commons last week. "The NDP does not seem to accept that the people of Canada re-elected this government, and this government wants to work with other parties. As long as the NDP decides it will oppose everything before it even knows what the proposals are, it will remain completely irrelevant to Canadians."
Pollster Nik Nanos said when the Liberals get wind in their sails, the New Democrats' numbers decline.
"The slow climb of the Liberals has in large part been at the expense of the New Democrats," he said. "When the focus is on Michael Ignatieff and Stephen Harper, Jack Layton basically gets pushed off the agenda and it is much more difficult for him to have profile."
During the 2008 election, Layton consistently placed second to Harper as the person who would make the best prime minister. NDP support at the time spiked at 22 per cent, compared with 15 per cent now.
"The election is a bit of a false indicator for Jack Layton, because a lot of that had to do with the weakness of Stéphane Dion," Nanos said.
A serious recession should be a time for the New Democrats to make political hay, but rather than picking one specific thing to go after the government for, they have chosen more of a shotgun approach, accusing the government in general terms of taking the country in the wrong direction.
While the shine may be off Layton's public image, he is not expected to be subjected to a leadership review at the party's national convention in Halifax, Aug. 14-16. With the possibility of an election this fall, he's likely to be given one more kick at the can in light of the party's numbers in the 2008 election.

NDP calls on Harper not to trade away human rights

No Canadian government is likely to let human rights issues interfere much with trade. Harper is very selective in his human rights concerns. He is quite happy to chime in on human rights in Burma since no one is going to contest that and Burma is not in any situation to retaliate. He is also on the side of the angels or prayer wheels when it comes to Tibet. However in Colombia he just ignores human rights when he thinks he can get a trade deal and perhaps even help buddy Bush also push through a US agreement. Saudi Arabia is an ally of the US and a big oil supplier so Harper is not about to ruffle any Sheik's turbans. In the case of Khadr Harper could care less. Defending Khadr would be a political liablity.

Published on NDP (http://www.ndp.ca)
Created 2007-11-22 14:59
NDP calls on Harper not to trade away human rights
OTTAWA – Today, NDP International Trade Critic Peter Julian (Burnaby-New Westminster) was joined by NDP Foreign Affairs Critic Paul Dewar (Ottawa Centre) and NDP Status of Women critic, Irene Mathyssen (London-Fanshawe), to voice their grave concerns about the Harper government’s trade negotiations with governments such as Saudi Arabia and Colombia that violate human rights. They called on the federal government to respect international human rights law and to consider the human rights impact of trade and investment policies for all bilateral trade negotiations.

“We need to ensure that international investment respects human rights and takes into account the dignity and interests of the people whose lives will be affected. Our federal government sends troops to Afghanistan, supposedly to protect women’s rights, and then it sends Minister Emerson to Saudi Arabia to negotiate privileged trade relations with a country that is committing egregious human rights abuses against women,” said Julian. “This is sheer hypocrisy. Does the government think the life and dignity of a woman in Saudi Arabia is worth less than that of an Afghan woman?”

In the latest of a series of human rights abuses, a nineteen-year-old woman in Al-Qatif was sentenced to 90 lashes for having been in the company of an man who was not a relative shortly before she and her companion were brutally gang raped by seven men. Through the appeal process, the court increased her sentence to 200 lashes and six months of imprisonment because of “her attempt to aggravate and influence the judiciary through the media.” Furthermore, her lawyer’s licence to practice has been revoked. Despite international outcry, the Ministry of Justice in Saudi Arabia has defended the decision.

"This government needs to act in cases like this to protect women and protect the integrity of international trade," said Mathyssen. "Instead, our government is tacitly supporting this sentence aimed at silencing women.”

“Saudi Arabia is Canada’s second largest customer in arms trade,” said Dewar. “Business as usual with this country undermines Canada’s credibility on democracy building and human rights.”

The minister of international trade, David Emerson, went to the Middle East this month to help foster closer economic ties between Canada and the Gulf Cooperation Council, which includes Saudi Arabia, and the Harper government is fast-tracking a bilateral free trade deal with the Colombian government with no democratic consultation, despite Colombia’s disastrous human rights record.





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

© 2007 New Democratic Party, all rights reserved. Authorized by the registered agent for Canada's NDP.

http://www.ndp.ca/page/5919

NDP does not disclose all donations

John Courtney a retired U of S poli sci prof. agrees. . There seems no good reason for the NDP to have acted in this manner except to not bother listing donors. THe other parties do so. I believe that Sask. Party may actually have filed a complaint. It could be a bit of an embarassment but is not that big of an issue. Surely everyone knows that the Sask. NDP is a third way type that will get money and support beyond the confines of solid working class comrades etc. If some Sask. companies should buy tickets for an NDP dinner no one is going to ostracise them!

Election 2007 News

Calvert NDP Breaks Election Law by Hiding Millions of Dollars in Donations
$2.5 Million in Hidden Donations to NDP Since Calvert Took Office
Friday - October 19, 2007
The Calvert NDP has violated The Elections Act by refusing to disclose the sources of over $2.5 million in party donations since Lorne Calvert took office.

Saskatchewan Party candidate Nancy Heppner today demanded that Lorne Calvert immediately disclose his $2.5 million hidden donation list.

“The law is clear,” Heppner said. “Every donation of over $250 must be disclosed. The NDP has broken the law by collecting over $2.5 million in hidden donations since Lorne Calvert took office and he needs to explain why.”

The NDP has stated that, if a donation is made through the sales of tickets to an event and no tax receipt is requested, the donor list does not need to be disclosed.

That’s simply not the case, according to The Election Act.

Jean Ouellet, the province's chief electoral officer, said Section 250 of The Election Act indicates that a party's annual return must set out the amount of money provided by individuals, corporations, trade unions, associations or other group of persons, in the fiscal year for use by the party. The name of the donor and the specific amount contributed are required when the contribution is in excess of $250, the act says.

“Tax receipts have absolutely nothing to do with whether you have to disclose donations,” Heppner said. “You can’t hide donations by simply not issuing a tax receipt.”

The NDP has collected over $2.5 million through sales of tickets to events since 2001 without disclosing the names of the donors. Heppner said both the Saskatchewan Party and the Liberals comply with the Act by providing full disclosure of the names of all donors, including those who donate by purchasing tickets to events.

For a complete backgrounder, click here.

Heppner said the Saskatchewan Party will consider filing a formal complaint with the Chief Electoral Office if Lorne Calvert does not release his hidden donation list immediately.

“The NDP seems to think the law doesn’t apply to them,” Heppner said. “What is Lorne Calvert hiding?”

-30-

For more information, Saskatchewan Party, Regina, 359-1638 or 1-800-966-9611.

The NDP on Federal Bldg. sale and leasing

Here is another article on the Federal Bldgs. sale in which Peggy Nash of the NDP points out some of the pitfalls of the project. The article itself explains some of the reasoning for the sale. Of course the government reaps in a lot of money but then the companies involved take in much more over the terms of the contract and no doubt at the end the property will probably be even more valuable.

FEDERAL PROPERTY

Sale of government buildings heads to cabinet committee
DANIEL LEBLANC

July 30, 2007

OTTAWA -- The Harper cabinet will decide today whether to move ahead with the sale of nine federal government buildings worth about $1.4-billion.

Sources said that after a four-month bidding process, Public Works Minister Michael Fortier is ready to bring proposals for the buildings to cabinet's operations committee today.

If Mr. Fortier convinces the operations committee to go ahead, the proposals will face a final hurdle at the cabinet committee on planning and priorities, chaired by Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

Mr. Fortier is apparently happy with the proposals for the prime buildings, in Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal.

"If we don't have a good deal, we won't do it, that's for sure," he said last March when he announced the sale.

Government and industry sources said Ottawa stands to reap a significant amount of money from the sales, because the commercial real-estate market is hot in those cities. "The stars are aligned," one official said of the planned sale.

Critics, however, have blasted the plan, focusing on the fact the Conservative government is promising to lease the buildings from the new owners for up to 25 years.

"It may look good on the books, in the short term, that there is a big sale price. The question is whether this is in the long-term interest of Canadians, because we're going to be on the hook for these lease arrangements," Toronto-area New Democrat MP Peggy Nash has said. "Would any of us sell our house and lease it back for 25 years?"

The government has countered that the sales will be beneficial for taxpayers, and has hired the Deutsche Bank to provide independent advice on the financial wisdom of the plan.

A tree-hugger on the Ontario election

This is from this site. The article is by Lloyd Alter. It illustrates how an NDP supporter can come to support the Green Party.

Frank de Jong and the Green Party of Ontario

What's not to like about the Green Party?

Energy Policy: "Instead of squandering billions of tax dollars on expensive, heavily subsidized nuclear energy, or allowing coal-fired plants to continue to pollute the air we breathe, the Green Party believes Ontario can build a sustainable energy future through a combination of conservation, efficiency and renewable energy programs."

Sustainability:"we can restore the health and vitality of our communities by supporting each other through simple everyday actions: by buying locally produced food and other goods; by walking, cycling or riding public transit instead of driving short distances; by working in the communities where we live; and by conserving energy and resources wherever possible."

Climate Change "By combining personal action with regulations, market mechanisms and incentives, Ontario will dramatically reduce greenhouse gases and start to turn back the clock on climate change. Every purchase of a toothbrush, a vegetable, an automobile or a house is an economic decision that influences climate change. Simple changes to our tax structure will make it easier for businesses and consumers to modify their lifestyles and purchasing habits. We believe this can best be achieved by shifting taxes off climate change-neutral choices and onto climate change-inducing choices.We think Ontarians should pay for what they burn, not for what they earn."

What is not to like is that the first-past-the-post electoral system makes it really hard for new parties to get members elected. The green party can get 15% of the provincial vote; if everyone lives in one riding they will get elected but spread it out and they don't. In parts of Europe and New Zealand they have a mix of proportional representation so that smaller parties can have some representation in the house, and there is a referendum on this during this election. Until such a time when one can vote for the party as well as the candidate, many will feel that a vote for the Green Party is a wasted vote. It isn't, candidates lose in every election , but it is a tough hurdle. ::Green Party of Ontario

John Tory and the Progressive Conservatives

When Moses led the Israelites out of Egypt, they had to wander in the desert for 40 years so that nobody who was a slave in Egypt would enter the promised land. That is how a lot of people felt about the Ontario Progressive Conservatives; they can wander in the political wilderness for 40 years until every last member of their last government is dead and gone. Then the Tories went and voted in the eponymous John Tory as their leader; he seems like a nice guy and gained a lot of respect and profile in his run for mayor of Toronto.

You want to like him, but then he opens his mouth. He promises the earth but with no new taxes, saying he will "find efficiencies and eliminate fat" but his predecessor Mike Harris cut all the fat and much of the bone and muscle, and the Liberals who followed have not been exactly on a binge to put it back.

Environmental policies as stated in their "Plan for Ontario's Future" are vague. He wants to "tackle all aspects of the environmental challenge... air pollution and greenhouse gases, conserving green spaces for future generations, protecting our water supply and reducing toxic contaminants."

He promises a clean energy system- of nuclear and renewables, and coal. "Dalton McGuinty has refused to take this key environmental step, (putting scubbers on existing coal plants) insisting that he was going to close the coal plants instead – an unrealistic promise that no-one was surprised to see him break. The reality is that independent authorities tell us we’re going to be still relying on coal for a while yet."

and:

"Look at how we can use the latest technologies being developed and used in other jurisdictions, such as gasification and carbon sequestration, to reduce those emissions and pollutants even more. Adopt a realistic plan to replace dirty coal power with clean alternatives, with the understanding that it would be irresponsible to reduce our energy capacity without a plan for its replacement. "

He also says that all new government buildings should be 30% more efficient, a very weak target, and new government vehicles will all be E-85 capable.

We like his decentralization plan, "to use great architecture to help renew and revitalize critical downtown areas across Ontario. New or renovated buildings can serve as community icons as well as community centres for business, education, arts and tourism. We’re going to build Ontario again, so let’s make it both smart and beautiful." But that is about it.

Mix clean coal fantasies with Tory's proposals for full funding of religious education and you have got a loser here. Sorry John, another 36 years of wandering is ahead. ::Ontario Progressive Conservatives read also John Lorinc's take on Tory in ::Spacing Votes.

Howard Hampton and the New Democratic Party



Well, that is a strong start. Hampton is driving around Ontario in his Escape Hybrid, saying that "Nuclear plants are expensive, unreliable and risky." and "We have a fresh idea -- a safe, clean, affordable and reliable supply of publicly owned and publicly controlled electricity, focused on an aggressive approach to renewables, energy efficiency and energy conservation. This approach worked in California where the state built the equivalent of 12 power plants with energy efficiency investments, replacing the need for 12,000 megawatts of generation capacity – or almost 50 per cent of Ontario’s peak demand on a hot summer day. We can make it work in Ontario too."

Not much information about exactly what they are going to do, perhaps more information will come during the campaign. Hampton doesn't like big oil:

"The NDP stands up for consumers. We believe in strong, effective consumer protection – safeguards only the province can provide – to make sure no big business can swindle, cheat or rip off hard-working ordinary folks." and suggests "Gas price regulation is a fresh idea that will make a real difference for drivers. It will stop gas price volatility, eliminate opportunistic price gouging and deliver fair, stable and predictable fuel prices – and lower gas prices over the long haul."

Please Howard, explain to me how "an aggressive approach to renewables, energy efficiency and energy conservation" jives with "lower gas prices over the long haul."?

The NDP started as the party of Labour, and historically has had internal conflicts between it's young green urban voters and it's support of unions and workers. The nuclear industry has shrunk to a point that it no longer worries about the nuclear workers any more, but forestry is big. When it comes to the protection of the boreal forests, some say that the NDP is supporting the industry rather than the environementalists. According to Murray Campbell in the Globe and Mail,
environmentalists see Hampton as: the paragon of green policies in the south but has a different message once he enters into Shield country.

They began thinking this way when they noticed the NDP was calling for the closing of all Ontario's coal plants - except for the one in remote Atikokan. Their displeasure deepened recently when they read the party's replies to a questionnaire sent out by a forest-industry organization.

All three parties were asked identical questions by the Ontario Forestry Coalition, which represents the industry, municipalities and labour unions. It was formed to press the government to help the forest industry, which has lost 10,000 jobs in recent years.

Environmentalists involved in boreal-forest issues judge the NDP's response to the coalition's survey as by far the brownest response of the three parties in that it reflected the forest industry's positions. ...Tim Gray, a former executive director of the Wildlands League and now program director at the Ivey Foundation, said he found the NDP's response "disturbing and surprising."


So what is a TreeHugger to do?

It used to be simple in Canada; The NDP was the natural home of the left-leaning intellectual wanting to change the world and build a new Jerusalem. I, my family and my father before me have voted NDP since the party was founded. Not once, in all those years, has my candidate actually been elected, so I am used to the sacrificial vote.

I also live in the Davenport riding, where Green Party leader Frank de Jong is competing for his seat. Being a leader usually means a higher profile and a better chance of being elected, even with a courageous if suicidal promise to end 140 years of funding for Catholic schools in a predominantly Portuguese and Italian part of town.

It has been a difficult decision. The Liberals have done a creditable job in their first four years; the Conservatives remain conservatives and are not even in the room; The NDP has been my political home all of my life. However the the political climate is changing as rapidly as the real climate; I am voting for Frank de Jong and the Green Party of Ontario.

Sask. Party to privatize some health care services if elected?

It seems that the Ssskatchewan Party will probably win the next election in Sask. At least they are ahead in the polls by a good amount. I will see if I can find the data. Reports often claim that privatization is more efficient. Sometimes it might be but often due to lower wages, cutting corners, and also lowering quality of service. At least the Sask. Party Representative recognises the BC experience with privatisation is primarily negatvie. However, it is easy to say this now but the story could change after a report recommending some privatization.

Saskatchewan Party denies privatization plans
Last Updated: Friday, August 24, 2007 | 9:42 AM CT
CBC News
The NDP is accusing the Saskatchewan Party of planning to privatize the provincial health-care system, despite party claims to the contrary.


The NDP claims the Saskatchewan Party, led by Brad Wall, pictured, wants to privatize the provincial health-care system. Saskatchewan Party members deny the accusation.
(Jennifer Graham/Canadian Press)
NDP Finance Minister Pat Atkinson said on Wednesday that Saskatchewan Party Leader Brad Wall was advocating an efficiency review of the system, something done by British Columbia's Liberal government before it privatized a number of health-care support services.

"What does an efficiency review mean?" asked Atkinson. "Because I believe it's code for something other than what Mr. Wall is saying to the public."

Atkinson claimed Wall has secret intentions to outsource many of the services around health care to private corporations. Those services include home care, laundry, cleaning and hospital food.

Continue Article

"Can he assure us that those support services for seniors and disabled people will not be privatized?" she asked.

Dan D'Autremont, the Saskatchewan Party's MLA for Cannington, said the NDP is just doing some pre-election fearmongering.

Last week, the NDP launched a campaign attacking the Saskatchewan Party as a wolf-in-sheep's clothing. D'Autremont said these allegations are simply part of that strategy.

"This is all about the big scare the NDP run in health care every election," he said. "We fully support publicly funded and publicly administered health care."

D'Autremont said his party believes the health-care system could be more efficient, but has no intention of taking the province in the same direction as British Columbia.

"The B.C. experience has shown that it doesn't work. It doesn't save any money. It doesn't provide efficiencies."

D'Autremont said people should be more concerned about the long health-care waiting lists Saskatchewan people have endured under the NDP.

Hargrove Fetes Ontario Liberal Premier

Hargrove obviously has no real commitment to the NDP. He sees it only as a vehicle to promote his specific union issues. Given the Liberal record as portrayed in the article and given the way in which he has caved in to corporate demands he is feted by the Liberals and even corporate leaders. He is the ideal leader for the times. He is the TINA (there is no alternative) position union leader of the year!

World Socialist Web Site www.wsws.org

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



Canadian Auto Workers bureaucrats fete Ontario’s Liberal Premier
By Carl Bronski
1 May 2007


In yet another example of the inexorable shift to the right of the Canadian Auto Workers union bureaucracy, CAW President Buzz Hargrove ushered Ontario Liberal Premier Dalton McGuinty onto the podium of a CAW National Council meeting in Port Elgin, Ontario, April 13.

“I believe this (Liberal provincial) government has done an incredible job for people,” gushed Hargrove. McGuinty’s appearance marked the first time in the CAW’s history that an Ontario premier had been invited to address the CAW leadership. Hargrove went on to tell the 800 delegates assembled at the union’s Lake Huron retreat that he was “absolutely thrilled” to introduce McGuinty, whom he characterized as a “champion” of the automobile industry.

Ontario’s Liberal premier returned the compliments. “The CAW,” he affirmed, “has always been a force for good across Canada and we are rolling in the same direction.”

Hargrove’s embrace of McGuinty is the CAW bureaucracy’s response to an unprecedented crisis in the auto industry that threatens the jobs, wages and pensions of tens of thousands of current and former auto workers. It is the political corollary to the union’s imposition of a new round of concessions at various Big Three plants and its agitation for protectionist measures to defend “Canadian jobs” at the expense of workers in other countries.

The feting of McGuinty is the latest in a series of steps that the leadership of the CAW, the country’s largest industrial union, has taken to forge closer ties with the Ontario Liberals and their sister party and the Canadian bourgeoisie’s traditional national party of government, the federal Liberals.

In the 1999 Ontario election, Hargrove and the CAW called for a “strategic vote” for the Ontario Liberals in select ridings, in the name of defeating the provincial Tory government of Mike Harris, a position effectively endorsed by the leader of Ontario’s social democratic party, the New Democratic Party or NDP. Continuing the same tack, Hargrove declared in 2003 during the election campaign that ultimately brought McGuinty and his Liberals to power, “People know how to bring about a change in government and you don’t do that by voting for someone who doesn’t have a prayer of winning. We are looking at information riding by riding, to see where there are opportunities to knock off a Tory.”

With Hargrove’s full support the NDP sustained a federal Liberal government headed by Paul Martin, who previously had imposed the greatest social spending and tax cuts in Canadian history, in office for six months in 2005. But Hargrove ran afoul of the NDP leadership when he publicly stumped for Paul Martin and Belinda Stronach, daughter of the boss and principal owner of Magna International, and had his union explicitly call for the reelection of a minority Liberal government in the January 2006 federal election.

Hargrove responded to a subsequent NDP decision to expel him for having endorsed a rival political party by successfully pressing for the CAW and its locals to disaffiliate from the NDP. This ruptured a decades-long relationship between the CAW and Canada’s social democrats. The latter, it should be added, were not too upset to see the severing of the NDP-CAW tie, since they, in response to pressure from big business and the corporate media, have been anxious to refute allegations that they are organizationally and financially dependent on the unions.

In keeping with the CAW’s orientation to the Liberals, last month’s CAW Council meeting endorsed “strategic voting”—that is supporting the election of Liberal governments—in both this October’s Ontario election and the next federal election, so as to prevent Conservative victories. “We need strategic voting to ensure we don’t have a majority Conservative government,” affirmed Hargrove.

But the CAW, or at least its president, does not rule out supporting select Conservatives. After McGuinty’s unprecedented appearance before the CAW leadership, Hargrove told the press that he fully expects to have union members working for all three national parties, including the Conservatives, but only “a small amount for the Tories.”


The Ontario Liberal’s right-wing record

While Hargrove and the CAW bureaucrats laud the McGuinty Liberals, under Liberal rule workers in Canada’s most populous province have continued to see their living standards eroded, social services slashed, and jobs lost.

On coming to power in 2003 McGuinty announced, in the tried and true manner of incoming governments, that because the deficit was larger than the ruling Tories had admitted, Liberal election promises were no longer applicable.

Refusing to roll back the all-out legislative assault on working people undertaken by the previous Conservative governments of Mike Harris and Ernie Eves, McGuinty upped the ante even further by imposing a $900 per person healthcare “premium” that has a disproportionate impact on working people and the poor.

Making further inroads into the province’s public healthcare system, McGuinty removed restrictions on private healthcare facilities and ended provincial funding for eye exams, physiotherapy and chiropractic services. His government also reneged on other election promises, removing the cap on hydro electricity rates and refusing to end the Tories vicious clawback of Child Benefit Supplements to the poor that takes $2,700 per year out of the wallets of single mothers on welfare.

A social advocacy group recently issued a report harshly criticizing the McGuinty Liberals for failing to address the plight of the poor in Ontario. According to the Interfaith Social Assistance Reform Coalition (ISARC) the poor in the province are worse off now than they were when the Liberals took office. And while the government has made very public certain changes it has introduced, such as a meager raise in the minimum wage to $8 an hour and a 5 percent increase in welfare rates, the report points out that these measures hardly make up for the erosion in their real value due to rate freezes of a decade or longer. The report also cites the fact that construction has begun on only 6,724 of a promised 20,000 affordable housing units.

Of course none of this is news to Hargrove and the CAW leadership. Why then is Hargrove so enamored of the McGuinty Liberal government? Because it has faithfully upheld the interests of the Big Three, funneling hundreds of millions of dollars in government subsidies into the coffers of Ford, General Motors, and DaimlerChrysler, opposing the federal Conservative government’s plans to reach a free-trade pact with South Korea, and lobbying for new regulations limiting greenhouse gas emissions to be tailored for the auto industry.


The CAW and the assault on jobs and wages

No less damning is the CAW bureaucracy’s response to the massive restructuring now taking place in the North American auto industry.

In March Hargrove and the CAW leadership exhorted workers at the DaimlerChrysler assembly plant in Brampton, just northwest of Toronto, to agree to a significant package of concessions that they had strongly voted down in a February plant-wide vote. Riding roughshod over its own constitution that restricts re-votes on matters duly settled, Hargrove and his assistant Bob Chernecki made it clear to the membership that they must vote to accept $5,000 in annual givebacks through the elimination of shift premiums, the intensification of work practices, and the contracting out of union janitorial jobs or accept the consequences. Should they reject the concessions, Chrysler would move auto production out of Brampton without opposition from the union bureaucracy. “It’s just a matter of smart bargaining,” explained Chernecki.

After a heated meeting in which denunciations of the leadership were hurled from the floor, the autoworkers, bitterly noting their total abandonment, ratified the concessions. “A lot of us voted ‘no’ to speak out against the unfolding mistrust with our union,” said Dan Ciurlia, a 27-year plant veteran. “We understand the big threat of globalism. We understand that our jobs can go away. People are scared. But we are being told to make decisions with really no information and very quickly. The workers want to know if the union leadership is truly going to stand up for us.”

A grateful DaimlerChrysler summed up the role played by the union in forcing through the concessions package. “We could not have moved forward without the CAW,” said company spokesperson Dave Elshoff.

When Chrysler announced cuts of over 2,000 jobs in Windsor, Brampton and West Toronto earlier this year Hargrove characterized the attack on his membership as “a real disaster,” but refused to fight the cuts, advising those members on the chopping block to “take whatever package they could get.” And last fall when Ford announced a 21 percent production cut and plans to shut nine plants in North America over the next two years, including an engine factory in Windsor, Ontario, the CAW president called it a “mixed result,” since the job cuts fell disproportionately on US workers.

The CAW leadership, with the support of various middle class radical groups, presented the breakaway from the UAW in 1985-86 as a rebellion against the right-wing leadership of the International. In reality it was a bureaucratic manoeuvre aimed at derailing an incipient rank-and-file challenge to wage cuts and plant closures and at facilitating closer collaboration between the union bureaucracy and auto bosses on both sides of the border.

For years, the CAW bureaucracy has sought to impress upon the auto bosses the importance of the so-called “Canadian advantage”—i.e., the fact that their labor costs are significantly lower at their Canadian than at their US operations, due to the differential in the value of the Canadian and US dollars and Canada’s state-funded public health insurance scheme, Medicare— “the gift that keeps on giving,” according to one Wall Street financial analyst.

But under pressure to take action to prevent major job losses and fearing the erosion of their dues bases, the CAW bureaucrats are becoming ever more blatant in their appeals to the Big Three to recognize that they are the provisioners of cheap labor.

During the 2002 round of collective bargaining, Hargrove lobbied the Wall Street and Bay Street financial houses to pressure the automakers to concentrate their job cuts in the US. During a conference call with J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., Hargrove opined: “The real challenge for all of us if we want to make money is to try to demand that the companies pay more attention to those countries or those communities where the obvious quality, productivity, cost and profitability numbers are there.”

The response of the CAW bureaucracy to the current financial crisis of the Big Three has been to deepen its longstanding corporatist relationship with the auto bosses and the big business Liberals. In the name of a “national auto strategy,” the CAW lobbies the federal and Ontario governments to make further tax concessions and outright grants to the Big Three to assist them in competing against Toyota, Honda and other foreign-based automakers. Meanwhile it works to pit North American workers against each other in a fratricidal struggle over jobs, actively campaigning for the Big Three to close US and Mexican facilities in preference to those in Canada, while urging Ottawa to adopt aggressive trade war measures against Asian automakers.

Hargrove has already indicated that in the scramble among billionaire investors to seize control of DaimlerChrysler, so as to squeeze out new profits through massive jobs and wage and benefit cuts, he is considering throwing the CAW’s support behind a bid being prepared by the Canadian Magna boss Frank Stronach, who for years the CAW reviled for his aggressive antiunion tactics.

The most far-reaching conclusions must be drawn from the dead end into which workers have been driven by the CAW labor bureaucracy. The defense of jobs, working conditions and living standards can be taken forward only through the building of an independent political movement of the working class based on the struggle to unite workers internationally and reorganize economic life along democratic and egalitarian—that is, socialist—principles.






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

Copyright 1998-2007
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved