Liberals keep Harper's cuts to federal health transfers

Back in 2011, the Stephen Harper Conservative government announced, without agreement of the provinces, that funding of health care transfers would be reduced by $36 billion.

Discussion of the reduced funding in 2011 that outlined health care spending up to 2024 can be found in this Globe and Mail article. The annual funding rate would be reduced from six percent annually down to three percent. The federal transfers are essential in helping poorer provinces offer health care that is consistent with the Canada Health Act and is meant to ensure the quality of care is at a reasonable level throughout Canada.

Liberal Health Minister Jane Philpott, on CTV Question Period said that the Liberals will maintain Stephen Harper's lower targets on health care transfers. Often governments will promise one thing during an election campaign but then renege on the promise after the election. This often causes considerable backlash and can hurt ratings. In this case the Liberals did not promise anything concretely during the 2015 election campaign but simply gave the impression that they might do something. Liberal leader Justin Trudeau said: "We are committed to renegotiating, to re-engaging on the health care accords, on the Canada health transfer, with the provinces ... We need a federal government that is willing to sit down and work with the provinces, not dictate at the provinces but set clear targets and expectations." The statement plays on the fact that the Conservative decision to reduce funding was taken unilaterally — a move objected to by many provinces. The statement says nothing about increasing funding.

At the time that the Conservatives announced the cuts to funding, the Parliamentary Budget Office said the cuts meant that provinces "cannot meet the challenges" of an aging population and Ontario's finance minister went so far as to call it a "frontal attack on public health care." Also at the time, the Liberals complained about Harper's health cuts that they called "dictatorial." Among Liberals who made such accusations were Bob Rae, Liberal interim leader and one time New Democratic Premier of Ontario. Rae described the cuts as "dictatorial federalism." The current Minister of Public Safety, Ralph Goodale, complained that the cut backs were announced just before Christmas and were done by brute force. Goodale also used the phrase "dictatorial federalism."

Stehan Dion, Minister of Foreign Affairs, complained about the failure of the Conservatives to work with the provinces and territories and held the Conservatives responsible for the poor health care system. Numerous other prominent Liberals also spoke out against the cuts.

Perhaps, some day, the Liberals will actually try to increase funding and negotiate a new funding formula with the provinces. However, for now the Liberals are carrying on with the health transfer policies inherited from Harper's "dictatorial federalism" and they now support the very austerity and cutbacks that they formerly spoke out against.

The announcement that the Liberals will carry on with the cuts Harper made to health care transfers comes shortly after Environment Minister Catherine McKenna's revelation that the Liberals will not seek any stronger targets for the reduction of carbon pollution than those set out by the Harper government last year.

On middle east foreign policy Trudeau mostly follows in Harper's footsteps

Stephen Harper the 22nd Canadian prime minister of Canada and long time leader of the federal Conservative Party has announced that he is retiring from politics after a nearly 18-year political career.

Harper was prime minister from 2006 until November of 2015 when Justin Trudeau and his Liberal Party won a majority government. Harper intends to move to the private sector. A spokesperson for Harper said that he has formed a consulting group to provide advice to international clients. The company, “will work in tech, finance, energy, infrastructure and manufacturing along (with) other files, in the US, Europe, Middle East and Asia".

Harper left with little fanfare. His handlers often worried about his lack of charisma as a leader and tried various stunts to make him more appealing. This includes Harper at the piano singing along with an orchestra and Yo Yo Ma the famous cellist. The video is appended. Harper was very fond of cats and there are a number of photos of Harper with kittens. An example can be found here.

A recent article traces Harper's influence on Canadian policy in the Middle East. Much of this policy is little changed by our new prime minister Justin Trudeau. Most prominent was Harper's unconditional support for Israel. Avigdor Lieberman, an Israeli minister on the far right spoke of Harper as a "true friend of Israel". Harper's government cut funding to the UN agency that supports Palestinian refugees (UNRWA) and to domestic organizations working for Palestinian human rights.

In 2014 the Canadian and Israeli governments signed a memorandum to oppose “boycotts of Israel, its institutions, and its people,” as the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement (BDS) gained prominence globally. Yet Trudeau and most of his Liberals supported a resolution against BDS moved by the opposition Conservatives. Normally, a ruling party would not support a motion coming from the opposition. The Liberals obviously want to show that they too want to protect Israel from the BDS movement.

The Harper government not only supported Israel but also tried to strengthen relations with countries in the Gulf Cooperation Council, particularly Saudi Arabia and the UAE. A Canadian company may have been involved in breaking the UN ban on military shipments to Libya from the UAE.

The Harper government signed a $15 billion contract with the Saudis to provide light-armoured vehicles. This is the largest deal in Canadian history. Did the Trudeau government decide to stop the deal from going through? Not at all, Stephane Dione, the relevant minister approved the deal. The spokesperson for Global Affairs Canada, Joseph Pickerell said: “The Minister of Foreign Affairs has signed the export permit for Light Armoured Vehicles … to be sold to Saudi Arabia,. " Many had criticized the deal due to human rights issues. Many argued the vehicles could be used against civilians. While in some other areas of foreign policy Trudeau may be diverging considerably from those of Harper, with respect to the Middle East the Liberals have acted much as the Harper Conservatives did.

In other areas, the Liberals also have yet to change Harper policy. The draconian anti-terror law Bill C 51 was actually supported by the Liberals. The Liberals are promising a wide review of the bill and security issues in general but it remains to be if the Liberals end up making any positive changes. The Rebel Media whose video on Harper is appended is actually conservative politically.

Liberals to honor Conservatives $15 billion armored vehicle deal with Saudis

In 2014 the Conservative government of Stephen Harper inked a huge $15 billion arms deal with Saudi Arabia. The deal was controversial because of the wretched human rights record of the Saudis.

During the campaign ahead of the October 2015 federal election that brought Justin Trudeau and the Liberal Party to power, the Liberals promised to sign the UN Arms Trade Treaty that is designed to regulate the international arms trade to promote international peace, reduce human suffering, and promote transparency. However, not long after winning power the Liberals said that the arms deal with the Saudis would be exempt from the deal.

After the recent execution of 47 prisoners, including a prominent Shia cleric, in Saudi Arabia, Stephane Dion, the Canadian foreign minister said:"We have said during the campaign — the prime minister has been very clear — that we will not cancel this contract or contracts that have been done under the previous government in general. We'll review the process by which these contracts are assessed in the future. But what is done is done and the contract is not something that we'll revisit."

Dion also said the contract was just part of the world in which we are and that many Canadian allies exported arms to the Saudis. He also said the government did not receive a mandate from the people to stop the sale of the weapons. Many critics of the contract claim the party is jeopardizing its principles by going ahead with the deal and it also violates its own export guidelines.

Law professor Daniel Turp of the University of Montreal and a dozen of his students have filed a class action lawsuit against the federal government in the Quebec Superior Court. The suit seeks to block shipments of the combat vehicles. The suit could force Liberals to explain how they are able to justify the sale. The group will also file a similar action in the Federal Court with three weeks.

The combat vehicles are to be produced by General Dynamics Land Systems-Canada, a subsidiary of General Dynamics, the U.S. aerospace and defense firm. The lawsuit refers not only to the Liberal election promise but also to defense export guidelines already put in place in 1986, by a Conservative government, that says: "Canada closely controls the export of military goods and technology to countries…whose governments have a persistent record of serious violations of the human rights of their citizens, unless it can be demonstrated that there is no reasonable risk that the goods might be used against the civilian population."In an open letter Turp and the students note Saudi Arabia has committed and continues to commit serious human rights violations against their citizens and that the light armored vehicles could be used against their own population. The suit argues that the government is violating its own existing export rules and that the permits for export should be rescinded.

Amnesty International notes in regard to Saudi Arabia:It is beyond dispute that there are longstanding and extensive human rights violations in Saudi Arabia.Those violations arise across the full range of rights enshrined in international law, including torture and ill-treatment, women’s equality, unjust and secretive executions, religious freedom, freedom of expression, the rights of human rights defenders, press freedom, fair trials and arbitrary detention.In addition Amnesty notes that their research shows that Saudi forces operating in Yemen have committed war crimes. Some of the weapons used have been identified as coming from the UK and the US. The UK International Development Select Committee called for Prime Minister David Cameron to halt the sale of arms to the Saudi-led coalition targeting civilian areas in Yemen and engaging in indiscriminate bombing in Yemen.

The Globe and Mail points out that some of the light-armored vehicles will actually be fitted with medium or high-calibre weapons by a European subcontractor including a powerful cannon to shoot anti-tank missiles. The vehicles will go to the Saudi National Guard. The Canadian government has described the vehicles as amounting to "jeeps." A Belgian Contractor, CMI, has a sub-contract that will amount to $4.9 billion and last 15 years.

The Saudi contract is estimated to employ about 3,000 Canadians, mostly at a London, Ontario, General Dynamics plant for 14 years. The company advertises the vehicles it is selling to the Saudis with a Canadian focus:General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS) advertises its fighting vehicle as a classic piece of Canadiana. In marketing materials, it showcases the combat machine, equipped with a machine gun, alongside photos of poutine, a Mountie, a hockey game and a moose. The advertising tagline reads: “This is Canadian.”

The Liberal government has acted exactly as the Harper Conservatives in refusing to explain how the contract can be justified under existing arms-control rules. Dion's Foreign Affairs Department refuses to make public its analysis on the grounds that it could injure the "commercial confidentiality of the deal." Well-known Liberal Lloyd Axworthy has said that the Liberals should review the deal saying:“Everybody says it’s for jobs, but I think if you start counting up the price you pay in terms of instability and repression and forceful maintenance of order, you may be paying a high price.I think the Saudis have really, in the last couple of years, really become a problem country. The degree of oppression against women and dissidents in Saudi Arabia is becoming almost epidemic.”Axworthy also claimed that the Saudis help support and export Islamic fundamentalism. Under the terms of the contract details of the deal must be kept secret.

Cesar Jaramillo, executive director of Project Ploughshares, an antiwar group based in Waterloo Ontario summed up his view on the issue: “Of course, job creation is a legitimate pursuit for any government. But there are lines that Canada should not cross in the pursuit of profit – and sustaining one of the worst human-rights violators in the world should clearly be one of them.”

Globe and Mail endorses Conservatives but pans Harper

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

+ Add Image

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

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

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

Latest two polls show Liberals with significant lead or virtually tied with Conservatives

The latest two polls listed at Eric Grenier's CBC poll tracker show quite different results. An EKOS poll shows the Liberals and Conservatives in a virtual tie while a Nanos/Globe poll shows the Liberals leading by over six percentage points.

+ Add Image	1 of 2

Grenier manages to spin the results so that he can predict that after the long campaign Justin Trudeau will likely be the next Canadian Prime Minister:After 78 days, it all comes down to tomorrow. And the polls, at least, suggest that the day will go to the Liberals, installing Justin Trudeau as Canada's next prime minister.​Up to and including those published by early Sunday morning, the Liberals have led in 17 consecutive polls, including surveys conducted by eight different polling firms using an array of methodologies.

While strictly speaking Grenier is correct, the most recent two polls give quite divergent pictures of the situation just before the election.

The most recent poll taken from October 15 to 17 by Nanos/Globe does show a signicant Liberal lead. The Liberal party has 37.3 percent of the vote while the Conservatives have just 30.5, a 6.8 percent lead for the Liberals. The NDP is well behind at 22.1. However, a new EKOS polltaken on October 15 and 16 shows a virtual tie for first with the Liberals at 33.7 percent and the Conservatives at 33.3, a difference of a mere 0.4 percent within the margin of error. While it is true that the vast majority of polls give the Liberals a significant lead, surely the EKOS poll should lead one to be a bit more cautious in claiming the polls predict that Trudeau will be the next prime minister. In contrast to Grenier, the EKOS headline says that we do not know the winner and EKOS claims that the outcome will likely be a nail-biter.

The latest poll tracker averages, however, still do show a significant Liberal lead. Up to October 17th, the Conservatives have 31.2 percent of the vote, down a marginal 0.1 from the last average. The NDP are at 22.3 down o.2 percent, and the Liberals at 36.3 also down marginally 0.1 percent. The Bloc Quebecois is up to 4.9, a gain of 0.2 from the last averages and quite significant since they run only in Quebec. Greens are down marginally at 4.4 a decline of 0.1 and other parties have gained to 0.9 up 0.2 points. Some voters must be opting to some of the smaller parties. Seat projections also favour the Liberals with an average of 137, to 122 for the Conservatives, and just 73 now for the NDP. The Bloc Quebecois has increased their seats to 5, while the Green party remains at just one seat. Perhaps, Grenier will add one or two polls later today but right now, the outlook is not quite as clear for a Liberal victory as Grenier makes out, unless one plays down the significance of the EKOS poll.

The NDP outlook does not look that favourable. The polls all put the NDP far behind as Grenier notes: "... every poll has the New Democrats in third, trailing the Conservatives by between seven and 12 points and the Liberals by between 12 and 17 points."However, neither the Liberals or Conservatives appear headed for a majority. The NDP can still play a significant role in determining the policies of any minority government.

Conservative government revenue agency signed agreement with lobby firm

The incestuous relationship between the Conservative government and business is evident in an agreement between the Canadian Revenue Agency(CRA) and the Chartered Professional Accountants of Canada(CPAC)

+ Add Image

CPAC represents and lobbies for most accounting firms in Canada. Revenue Canada described the alliance formed in November of last year as a "new era of information and collaboration" between the CRA and the CPAC. The agreement was signed by Andrew Treusch, CEO of CRA, and Kevin Dancey, head of the CPAC. The deal calls for joint committees with senior representatives from each group. This ensures the CRA will consider the accounting groups "input" into any changes to its programs, a government news release claims. Dancey said that the CPAC valued its role as a trusted adviser to the CRA.

The partnership could represent a conflict of interest. At the same time as the CRA, CPAC partnership was being formed, the CPAC was fighting a court battle against the CRA which was attempting to gain access to the files of multimillionaire clients who had stashed millions in tax havens. The CRA was attempting to get the list of wealthy clients of the huge multinational KPMG who were enrolled in an offshore tax scheme on the Isle of Man.

KPMG is one of the biggest four tax auditors in the world but also provides other services such as tax advice. In 2014 it had revenues of $24.8 billion US and 162,000 employees.Although it has headquarters in the Netherlands it has offices around the world including Canada The CRA said in 2015 it believes that Isle of Man scheme was designed to evade taxes:In 2015, KPMG has been accused by the Canadian Revenue Agency of Tax evasion schemes. "The CRA alleges that the KPMG tax structure was in reality a "sham" that intended to deceive the taxman.

Prime Minister Harper met with the both the CPAC and heads of the KPMG plus other accounting firms just three months before the deal. The meeting was recorded in a federal register of lobbying meetings. Ray Novak and two other aides were there as well. The Prime Minister's Office(PMO) claims the meeting was a routine "stakeholder" meeting. While this may be the perception of the PMO office, Dennis Howlett of Canadians for Tax Fairness saw it differently: "This is a serious problem, certainly a perception of conflict of interest. The government shouldn't be cozying up to companies that they've taken to court over very serious allegations. When they get in bed with the very companies that they're supposed to be regulating, it leads to all kinds of dangerous results,"Duff Conacher a teacher of government ethics at the University of Ottawa said the agreement could send mixed signals to the CRA staff : "It sends a very bad message. Essentially it says don't enforce laws fully and properly because the government is now a partner with this organization and you wouldn't want to make the government look bad." Howlett also claims CPAC is nervous that the government may get evidence it needs to show that the the KPMG scheme involves tax evasion, which could threaten the whole system of offshore tax havens: "They're nervous that if the government… gets the evidence they need to pursue another case against KPMG, then this whole house of cards, of sham companies and offshore banking, is going to come tumbling down."

The CRA case against KPMG mysteriously stalled for over two years and only after a whole series of stories about the issue in CBC News and Radio did a KPMG lawyer announce just recently that an out-of-court settlement had failed and that the two sides are asking for a hearing before a judge. KPMG denies that the case has anything to do with tax evasion. One CBC article gives details of how one weatlhy Canadian couple benefited from the scheme.

The CBC obtained court documents showing that in 2000 Peter Cooper and his two adult sons signed up for a KPMG tax product in the Isle of Man designed for "high net worth" Canadian residents. The scheme promised that those joining the plan would pay no tax on their investments. The documents show that between 2002 and 2010 the Coopers paid little or no tax even though they received nearly $6 million from an offshore company. The KPMG lawyers claim any money received by the Coopers were "gifts" and non-taxable. Marshall Cooper claims that when he came to Canada from South Africa in the 1990's he simply went to what he thought were the best people for tax advice. He is hardly to blame. If you were advised by one of the four largest auditing and tax-advice firms in the world to participate in a plan that could save you huge amounts of money on taxes would you say no because it looks unethical? Nor can one place much blame on KPMG, which by the way has numerous awards for good corporate citizenship. The KPMG mission is to get the best tax deals it can for its clients. It is the government that has allowed these tax loopholes to exist and even has a cozy relationship with the very firms that are subject to Canadian tax laws. The tax haven issue is global and not restricted to Canada as the appended video shows.

Civil servant, Tony Turner, being investigated for protest song Harperman

Ottawa - Apparently, working for the Harper government means that you must not write protest songs that are not politically correct according to the Public Service Ethics Code.

+ Add Image

Of course the Harper government is notorious for silencing its scientists in other ways as well. A 2014 study of media policies from 16 federal departments concluded that compared to the US, current Canadian policies place far more restrictions on Canadian scientists when it comes to talking to the media. In one instance last year, the Canadian Press sought to speak to federal government scientist Max Bothwell about his work on algae. After an exchange of 110 pages of emails to 16 different federal communications offices an article was published without the interview.

Tony Turner, was not speaking to the media without permission, he was performing with a group of mostly elderly singers, a protest song "Harperman". The song certainly suggests Harper should go and is highly critical of the prime minister as one would expect in a protest song. Most of the issues brought up are well known and established criticisms. For offensiveness it can hardly compete with Pussy Riot!

The Professional Institute for the Public Service of Canada (PIPSC) is representing Turner. PIPSC president Debi Daviau said: We will stand up for its members who face the prospect of being disciplined for exercising their democratic rights as citizens. The Supreme Court of Canada has confirmed that public service workers, like all Canadian citizens, benefit from freedom of expression.Daviau said the the position of PIPSC was that Turner had done nothing wrong:“It (the song) had no relation whatever to his duties as a public servant,” Daviau said. Our position is that we believe that Tony Turner hasn’t done anything wrong.He is simply expressing himself through a folk song like any other artist might do.”Turner, a public servant for 19 years is nearing retirement. He was recently assigned to co-ordinate a project that would map priority areas for migratory birds.

Turner has also been active in the folk music scene since 1994. He has several CDs, and his Circle of Song is to be included in a new anthology of Canadian folk songs. The Otttawa folk musicians see the situation as a fight for freedom of speech versus the duty of a public servant of loyalty to the government. Diane McIntyre who sang one of the verses in the video said:“Can’t we make jokes or say anything? Are we all muzzled? This is the politics of fear. I am an activist and singer but mostly I am a citizen and I care about democracy and freedom of speech."

Turner won a songwriting contest with Haperman and this led to a performance at the annual Gil's Hootenanny. Chris White, the artistic director of the Ottawa Folk Festival recorded the song. There is a national singalong on Sept. 17th that will feature the song and it will go ahead whether Turner performs or not. The song was posted on You Tube in June.

Donald Savoie, a political scientist at the University of Moncton claimed that the song "crosses the line of behaviour expected of public servants". He does not say why. He also questioned Turner's judgment in publicly performing it which brought even more attention to the video. Presumably, he wants to bring more attention to the song and video. That is what protests songs are intended to do. Savoie thought that the government's judgment in investigating the song brought more attention to it. This he said risks giving the video more visibility. So what? Apparently we are to understand that the video deserves a certain amount of visibility which is less than it now has. I gather that Savoie thinks the Harper government should try to minimize the effects of protest songs. Perhaps he should apply for a job with the Harper government. Harper needs good tactical political advice right now.

Why Liberals should vote for the NDP this election

In the past when the New Democratic Party had no chance of forming the government, the Liberals have often called for NDP supporters to vote Liberal in order defeat the Conservatives.

+ Add Image

During those periods, the NDP languished in third place with dismal polling numbers. However, now the NDP leads in the polls and the Liberals are in third place behind the Conservatives. The NDP should be calling upon Liberals to return the favor and now vote strategically to ensure that Harper is defeated. There are other reasons as well that Liberals should consider voting for the NDP.

The NDP leader Thomas Mulcair was himself for many years a Liberal and cabinet minister in the Quebec provincial government. Mulcair served as Minister of Sustainable Development, Environment, and Parks in the Quebec Liberal government of Jean Charest. During his tenure he promoted and passed in November 2004 a Sustainable Development Plan that included an amendment to the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms to include a right to live in a healthy environment that respects biodiversity. In 2006, after Mulcair opposed a government development plan in a national park he was removed from his cabinet position. Those within the Liberal party who supported former leader Stephan Dionne in his move to attempt a Green Shift within the Liberal Party might do well to support the perhaps more saleable environmental policies of Mulcair. Dionne led the Liberals from 2006 to 2008:The Liberals lost support on 14 October federal election, being reduced to 77 seats, down from 103 won in the 2006 election. They captured only 26.2 per cent of the popular voteThe Liberals have had a continuing leadership problem. While Dionne was the choice of those at the leadership convention and not favoured by some Liberal king makers the next leader was favoured by the establishment.

Michael Ignatieff was a top academic who left a position at Harvard where he taught to enter the contest for the Liberal leadership. He sometimes forgot whether he was an American or a Canadian. He supported the US-led invasion of Iraq and also had a rosy view of the US Empire:As a journalist, Ignatieff observed that the United States had established "an empire lite, a global hegemony whose grace notes are free markets, human rights and democracy, enforced by the most awesome military power the world has ever known."Ignatieff turned out to be far more disastrous as a leader than Dionne. In the 2011 federal election, Ignatieff lost his own seat. The Liberal party had its worst showing in history winning only 34 seats. It placed third far behind the Conservatives enabling the NDP to become the official opposition for the first time ever. Now it is time for the Liberals to vote strategically for the NDP.

The Liberals showed their affinity to the right wing of the NDP when they chose Bob Rae the former NDP premier of Ontario as their interim leader. With the election of Justin Trudeau Liberals no doubt thought that they were on their way to power again. At first, polls encouraged this view. Just days after Trudeau won the leadership a poll showed that 43 percent of respondents favoured the Liberals with just 30 percent for the Conservatives and only 19 percent for the NDP, the official opposition. In July 2014 the Liberals still had a ten point lead over the Conservatives with the NDP coming third. Just over a year later under Trudeau's leadership the NDP is now in first place several points ahead of the Conservatives with the Liberals still trailing the Conservatives and in third place. Liberals should realize for the third election in a row their party is going nowhere and their prime duty is to turf out Harper.

The Conservatives have had a field day criticizing Trudeau because of the constant gaffes he makes. He jokes about Russia and the Ukraine He admired China's ability to control the economy. He famously said that the budget will balance itself. The Conservatives take this out of context as Trudeau was claiming that given good economic growth the budget would balance itself. This is still questionable. However, the Conservatives can use Trudeau's many gaffes as part of a clever ad campaign as shown in the appended video. They hammer home the theme of "just not ready" as applying to Trudeau.

Trudeau has supported Harper's regressive anti-terror bill even without amendments. Mulcair and probably many Liberals reject the bill. Another reason to vote for Mulcair. Trudeau says he will not use the politics of fear as Harper does. Yet in supporting the anti-terror bill Trudeau is doing exactly that. While Trudeau would legalize marijuana, Mulcair would act faster decriminalizing it a day after being elected. Come on all you Liberals! Get out there and vote NDP.

Reasons for Conservative supporters to vote for Mulcair's NDP

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

+ Add Image

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Stephen Harper just not ready to be trustworthy

Ottawa - Harper has claimed that Canadian voters have a clear choice between a proven leader that they can trust, namely him, or two risky and unproven leaders, Justin Trudeau of the Liberals, or Thomas Mulcair of the New Democratic Party.

+ Add Image	1 of 2

The trouble is that Harper's past actions and present situation make the "trust" theme quite risky. The Mike Duffy trial brings into question whether Harper is trustworthy himself. Originally, Harper said that he would never appoint an unelected senator but he ended up appointing many Conservative hacks, bag men, failed candidates, and Duffy, a journalist who pushed a conservative agenda as a popular talk show host. As Liberal Dr. Carolyn Bennett said way back in December of 2010:“For someone who vowed never to appoint an unelected Senator, Mr. Harper is now the all-time patronage king, having appointed 38 Conservative activists to the upper chamber."

This in itself would make it seem that Harper might just not be ready to be trustworthy. Duffy ended up in hot water over several issues including $90,000 in expense claims. On July 17, 2014 Duffy was charged with 31 criminal offences that included fraud, breach of trust, and bribery. The trial is ongoing with Nigel Wright, Harper's former chief of staff finishing his testimony this Wednesday. Duffy has pleaded not guilty to all 31 charges. Duffy repaid the $90,000 in expenses admitting that he had made a mistake in claiming them. However, the money was given to Duffy by Nigel Wright via a personal check. There was an agreement between Duffy and the Prime Minister's Office(PMO) that Duffy would admit he was in error and repay the expenses. Originally the plan was to secretly reimburse Duffy through a Conservative party fund but when it turned out the expenses were $90,000 rather than $32,000 as was at first thought, this plan was rejected by the head of the fund. Instead Duffy was reimbursed by Wright through his personal check for $90,000.

Prime Minister Harper has denied that he had any knowledge of the plan to have Wright issue a personal check to Duffy. Yet, some of the e-mails presented at the trial suggest he did know. One e-mail said that "we are good to go from the PM". Wright explains that the phrase meant only that Harper approved a plan that would see Duffy admit he made an error and would repay the expenses. Supposedly he knew nothing of the plan to secretly use Conservative party funds for the payment nor of the later plan for Wright to issue a personal check to cover the expenses. This is possibly true since part of the role of Wright would be to ensure there would be no evidence of Harper's involvement in such a devious plan. When the dirty tricks are discovered then Harper can claim that he held Wright accountable by firing him. Wright loyally kept to this narrative in his testimony swearing that Harper knew nothing either about the plan to use the Conservative party fund to reimburse Duffy or about Wright's issuance of a personal check for that purpose. Just how did Harper think that Duffy could be induced to pay these expenses when he thought he had done nothing wrong unless he were somehow reimbursed? He doesn't care to know. This dirty work is what Wright was hired to do.

Wright has an interpretation of not lying that only a lawyer could love. Wright claims to have told Harper that Duffy was going to repay the expenses when he knew that the plan was to have the Conservative fund pay the expenses. Wright said:"I don't think I lied to the prime minister. I don't feel it was a lie. I just felt it wasn't on my list of things I needed to check with him."Wright also claimed that the important issue was that the funds be paid back not who paid them. You would think that since Duffy incurred the expenses it was important that he paid them back not someone such as Wright who was paying Duffy to do what Harper wanted. Conveniently, Harper was blissfully unaware according to Wright's narrative as to what was going on. Apparently, the PM has no obligation to keep tabs on what his chief of staff is up to, particularly when it might be illegal or immoral.

Harper has insisted that his present chief of staff Ray Novak did not know about the check written by Wright. Yet Novak was slated to be part of a conference call in which the check was discussed. In an e-mail sent to Novak Wright wrote: "I will send my cheque on Monday". Benjamin Perrin a former legal advisor to the PMO, told the RCMP that Novak was part of the conference call that discussed Wright's check. Wright claims that he was not part of the call but just "popped in and out". Wright claims he did not hear the discussion of his check to Duffy. How convenient. Wright also testified that Novak did not read the email sent to him about the check. Obviously, Harper should fire Novak since he does not bother to read important emails sent to him. How can we trust a PM who hires a chief of staff who does not even read quite important emails and just pops in and out during crucial conference calls? A leader like that is just not ready to earn our trust.

NDP ahead of Conservatives by double digits in recent poll

The latest opinion poll by Forum Research taken on Sunday after Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced an election to be held October 19, show the NDP surging ahead of the Conservatives.

+ Add Image	1 of 2

As of July 28, the CBC Poll Tracker showed the NDP and the Conservatives in a virtual tie at about 32 percent of the vote. The Liberals trailed at 25 percent. The new poll showed 39 percent would vote for the NDP. The Conservatives fell back to 28 percent and the Liberals were about the same as the earlier polls.

If these results were projected into seats won in the enlarged 338 seat parliament, the NDP would win most seats at 160, 10 short of a majority. The NDP has come a long way from last December when it managed a meagre 17 percent support, even though it was the official opposition. The Liberals then had a commanding lead of 41 percent. President of Forum Research, Lorne Bozinoff, said that he could not find a single instance of the NDP leading by double digits ever before.

In the key province of Ontario the NDP and Conservatives are virtually even, but the Liberals are far behind. In Quebec the NDP has a good lead over the Liberals with the Conservatives and Bloc Quebecois far behind the top two. In the Atlantic provinces usually dominated by Liberals, the NDP is ahead and also leads in BC. While the NDP may form the provincial government in Alberta, at the federal level, Conservatives still dominate.

The CBC poll tracker includes the new poll in a recent update and it gives perhaps a more realistic assessment of the situation, since it averages several recent polls to come up with its results. But even it shows a considerable change from July 28 in favour of the NDP. The latest figures the poll tracker gives are for vote percentage: Conservatives, 30.9; NDP, 33.2: Liberals, 25.9; Bloc Quebecois, 4.7 and Green Party 4.7. Seat projections are: Conservatives, 127; NDP 127; Liberals 82: Bloc Quebecois 1; Green Party, 1.

This long 11 week election campaign may benefit the Conservatives who are rich with cash according to some pundits. Taxpayers will be paying out more for increased administrative costs and also bigger rebates of expenses to the parties.

Harper appoints pipeline consultant to National Energy Board

Ottawa - Greg Rickford, Minister of Natural resources announced that Steven Kelly, a petroleum executive based in Calgary would become a full-time board member of the National Energy Board(NEB) an agency that helps decide if oil and gas pipelines should be built.

+ Add Image	1 of 2

Kelly, as vice-president of IHS Global Canada, wrote and submitted a 203-page report on behalf of the giant pipeline company Kinder Morgan to the NEB. The report justifies the $5.4 billion Trans-Mountain pipeline expansion.

The National Energy Board's(NEB) function is described as follows: The National Energy Board (French: Office national de l'énergie) is an independent economic regulatory agency created in 1959 by the Government of Canada to oversee "international and inter-provincial aspects of the oil, gas and electric utility industries".[1] Its head office is located in Calgary, Alberta. The NEB mainly regulates the construction and operation of oil and natural gas pipelines crossing provincial or international borders.After helping Kinder-Morgan lobby for the Trans-Mountain expansion, now Kelly will be on a board that is regulating pipeline construction. The NEB has already been criticized by the Sierra Club of Canada for creating regulations it claims benefit oil companies drilling in the Arctic.

Marc Eliesen, former CEO of BC Hydro said:“It’s utterly incredible the Government of Canada would appoint such an industry consultant to a regulatory agency that presumably is interested in the public interest, and not in the interest of multinational oil corporations.The NEB have totally become a captured industry regulator."

A spokesperson for the board said Kelly would not be a member of the three-person panel that will pass judgment on the Trans Mountain expansion. Eliesen, however, pointed out that the proximity of Kelly to the decision-makers on the board and his possible involvement in future Kinder Morgan rulings still place him in a "significant and incredible conflict of interest." Rickford however praised Kelly as having 19 years of experience providing the Canadian government and international clients with "technical, commercial, regulatory and strategic" advice for accessing oil markets. He also claimed that Kelly's background would help the NEB to fulfil its mandate to ensure the safety and security of Canadians and the environment.

For years the Harper government has been appointing oil and gas executives to the NEB while at the same time assigning it new environmental regulatory powers: More than half of the NEB board members are now petroleum industry professionals. The agency is not only tasked with reviewing the economics of pipelines —but also their environmental impacts.That latter task was given to the NEB, following a Harper government omnibus budget bill in 2012 that stripped that responsibility from the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA).

Elizabeth May, leader of the Green Party, said of the Harper appointment: "Wow. Clearly there's a flurry of appointments that Stephen Harper wants to get in place before he goes down in defeat in the election. He's picked people who are of his ideological bent, and are unlikely to provide dispassionate and neutral work on behalf of the people of Canada."

Critics of the Trans Mountain project worry not only about the environmental effects on land of the project but note that there will be increased tanker traffic through the Strait of Juan de Fuca an extremely environmentally sensitive area with shallow water. Aboriginal groups and the Mayor of Burnaby have protested the project and 100 citizens were arrested during protests against drill pipeline tests on Burnaby Mountain. From 2006 to 2014, Kinder Morgan, has been cited by the US government in 24 incidents that led to 5 federal enforcement actions. A recent study by Simon Fraser University and Living Oceans Society conclude that the Trans Mountain expansion did not meet the requirement of the NEB that projects be in the public interest: "The study says the project, which would triple Kinder Morgan's capacity to carry oil between Alberta and Burnaby, B.C., could come at a net cost to Canada of between $4.1 billion and $22.1 billion."

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."