Global News – Decision 2008 – Analysis

Squandered loonies

jgreen — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 00:49:00 GMT

By Gordon Henderson
The Windsor Star

Prime Minister Stephen Harper waves to supporters at his election night headquarters in Calgary, Oct. 14. (Andy Clark/Reuters)

Thirty-seven lost days and 300 million squandered loonies later, there's one simple election question that has yet to be given a satisfactory answer in either of our official languages.

What the hell was that all about? To put it more delicately, why were Canadians, who had more important things to do this fall, from raking leaves to watching their life savings vanish, subjected to this pointless political circus?

I don't know about you, but I deeply resent being fleeced out of $300 million in taxpayer money by self-centred politicians, beginning with Prime Minister Stephen Harper, who would rather roll the campaign trail dice than face the daily grind of trying to build a constructive consensus in our fractured Parliament that would put Canada's future ahead of partisan point scoring and grudge settling.

What could Canadians have done with the $300 million poured down the electoral drain - all for an "enhanced" minority that still lacks real clout - because Stevie Boy wasn't prepared to obey his own law and wait for the fixed election date next October?

We could have built a state-of-the-art regional hospital. We could have built two engineering schools. We could have built two-dozen elementary schools. We could have saved the lives of thousands of African children who die every day from bad water and treatable diseases. We might even have saved a Big Three plant or two and kept industrial centres like Windsor from imploding.

We could have done many useful things. But Harper and his minions chose instead to engineer a crisis where none existed, one that required a visit to the Governor General and the unleashing of the electoral dogs.

I happen to think that Harper, apart from being an icy control freak who throttles dissent, has been a reasonably competent prime minister, so much so that I wanted his minority government to go the distance.

But it turns out he's no different than all the others, just another power-hungry, me-first opportunist prepared to spend whatever it takes to gain total control and avoid the bleak art of compromise and negotiation.

What made him do it? Bruck Easton, former president of the late and lamented Progressive Conservative party and the best MP Windsor never had - and now a Liberal - believes Harper was acutely aware the economy's best-before date was imminent and hoped to get to the polls before it turned rancid. "I thought this was a David Peterson exercise. He wanted to get the election in (former Ontario Liberal premier Peterson lost a shocker to Bob Rae in 1990 on the eve of a crushing recession) before the economy went bad," said Easton.

He also thinks the Harper Conservatives were tracking the Barack Obama phenomenon and, mindful that Canadian Conservatives (with the exception of Joe Clark) historically only hold power while Republicans are in the White House, wanted to seal the deal before the Democrats win in November.

But as much as anything, said Easton, the Conservatives were tired of not controlling Parliament, especially committees dominated by opposition MPs who were "having way too much fun."

The Harperites almost made it. They were halfway home and playing footsie with majority status when the Wall Street meltdown began. "Everything just blew up and now the whole world is blown up. Everybody is bailing out banks," said Easton, a tax and investment lawyer.

The economy is in for rough times. And so is Parliament. Easton expects the daggers will be out for both Harper and Liberal Leader Stephane Dion, and the next year will witness an increasingly nasty and dysfunctional House of Commons, culminating in an October election.

In other words, we'll still get the fall election Harper promised us originally. What we've just experienced was a $300-million trial run.

It must be nice to have that kind of money, our money, to throw away on an unprincipled dress rehearsal.

Dion scarier than Harper, Canadians decide

jgreen — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 23:47:00 GMT

By Mike Blanchfield
Canwest News Service

A Liberal supporter looks down as election returns come in at Liberal leader Stephane Dion's election night headquarters in Montreal. (Shaun Best/Reuters)

OTTAWA - Stephen Harper is not so scary anymore.

But Canadian voters - faced with the sudden emergence of a global economic meltdown in the middle of the election campaign - clearly decided Tuesday that Liberal Leader Stephane Dion probably was.

Many Liberals will be thinking that, too, and that means at least another year of leadership soul-searching as Dion's stint at the head of his party is now effectively over. At best, he will last no longer than the spring, when the party convenes a leadership review.

"There's no other way to look at it," said former Liberal MP John English, a Lester Pearson biographer and political scientist. "It's a bad day."

But for the country and its new two-term Conservative prime minister, the way forward appears smooth in the months ahead.

Harper will be able to govern comfortably as the Liberals turn inward, perhaps for as much as the next year, to figure out who will lead their party. The overall result - not to mention the re-election of Dion's main leadership rivals, Michael Ignatieff and Bob Rae - signals the imminent start of a new Liberal leadership campaign.

That will leave the NDP in the seat of the unofficial opposition for at least the next six months of Canada's new minority parliament.

English said it would be at least 18 months, if not two years, before Canadians go back to the polls. In the interim, "We will have a Conservative government that will govern as the previous one did: as a majority."

As the Liberals are sorting out their party leadership, the NDP will be given the opportunity to shine as the Tories' only "real opposition" in Parliament, said Lorne Nystrom, a former New Democrat MP.

Harper's guiding hand on the economic levers of the country was clearly preferred over Dion's Green Shift carbon tax, which the Conservatives managed to paint as a tax grab and a risk not worth taking.

"In the last two elections, the Liberals were able to scare people about Harper," said John Reynolds, a former Conservative MP and campaign co-chair for his party's 2006 election win.

That gave the Liberals a minority in 2004, and managed to convince voters to hold the Conservatives to a thin minority in 2006.

"It backfired this time for the Liberals," said Reynolds. "I think they (voters) got scared of Dion."

Added Conservative strategist Goldy Hyder: "In uncertain times, you don't take any risks. Canadians decided not to take any risks. They stuck with who they know. But at the same time, they said you have to function in a minority to make this work."

Along with Harper, the other big winner Tuesday night was NDP Leader Jack Layton. He may not have made the big seat gains he was hoping for - he didn't come close to knocking the Liberals out of second place - but with the Grits now destined for a new period of leadership flux, the NDP profile will rise. Layton's job is also safe, even though he raised hopes that he could bleed more left-of-centre votes away from the Liberals.

"The expectations were kept pretty much under wraps," said Michael Cassidy, a former Ontario NDP leader and longtime provincial politician and federal MP.

"This is a real comeback for the NDP."

But in a campaign that started out being a referendum on leadership, Harper was the clear winner.

"It's very good for the country," said Reynolds.

"I think he's solid as he can be."

Arts cuts, lack of action on economy derailed Tory majority hopes

jgreen — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 23:35:00 GMT

By David Akin
Canwest News Service

Jean-Christophe Surette, Dave Loisier and Frederic Melanson protest cuts to arts and culture outside a Conservative rally in Moncton during the election campaign. (David Smith/Canwest News Service)

OTTAWA - Stephen Harper lost his chance at a majority government on Aug. 8, a month before the election was called, when Canwest News Service first reported the Conservatives were about to trim funding to government programs that helped Canadian artists and cultural workers.

A senior government official, speaking then on condition of anonymity, said the cuts had been approved because grant recipients included "a general radical," "a left-wing . . . think-tank," and a rock band that used an expletive in its name.

On the morning the story was published, the communication directors for each minister dialed in for their daily 7 a.m. conference call.

Canwest News Service has learned some on that call, annoyed about the leak, demanded to know who had authorized it.

"I told (the source) to leak it," said Guy Giorno, the prime minister's chief of staff, who had, until then, never participated in the morning communications conference calls. "I authorized it and it was the right thing to do."

By the end of the campaign, senior Conservative strategists were grumbling about Giorno's decision.

The $45-million arts cuts, small as they might be compared to overall government support of the arts, became a symbol for what Harper's critics called that party's small-mindedness and political pettiness.

In Quebec, Bloc Quebecois Leader Gilles Duceppe used the cuts as an effective wedge issue to re-inflate what had been sagging support for the separatist cause. Most of that re-ignited support came at the expense of the Conservatives.

"The majority fell short because his Quebec strategy didn't pay off," said Darrell Bricker, chief executive officer of pollster Ipsos Reid. "He (Harper) was looking to double his seats in Quebec."

Bricker said Conservative support in Quebec faltered because of the arts cuts but also because Stephane Dion had a better campaign than many expected and the Liberal leader was able to energize the federalist vote for the Grits.

During the campaign, Harper vowed to tighten restrictions for young offenders, changing the rules so it would become possible to jail a young offender for life. Again, Duceppe exploited this campaign pledge to attack a Conservative agenda he said was out of touch with Quebecers' values.

"It made the radical right-wing agenda argument look possible," Bricker said. "(The Conservatives) are a party that still has a tin ear in Quebec."

And while the Tories were not battered in that province, as some had feared; the Conservatives did not add to their base, as they had planned.

Still, the party made enough gains in Ontario and other provinces to boost the number of Tories in the Commons to build a stronger minority - just a handful of seats away from a majority.

But for most Conservatives, a victory is still a victory and that means it is unlikely there will be any challenge to Harper's leadership when Conservatives meet for a party convention in Winnipeg next month.

Harper, advisers and friends say, genuinely enjoys being prime minister and is speaking the truth when he says, as he did several times during the campaign, that he is happy to have any mandate. He is still relatively young - if this Parliament runs to its next fixed election date in four years, he will be 53-years-old - and he can be expected to lead his party into one more election.

But even though he may be the leader, Harper is likely to make some changes among his key advisers.

National campaign manager Doug Finley has run two elections for Harper and the results were nearly identical in both - a Conservative minority government. Within the Prime Minister's Office, deputy chief of staff Patrick Muttart has provided much of the political strategy and, while a win is a win, the party may begin to wonder if they are the right men to lead the Conservatives to a majority.

The Tories, for example, may have seen their last election with a weak and disorganized Liberal opposition and a future campaign strategy may have to contend with a new Liberal leader and a restructured party.

In Ontario, the other province where the Conservatives had hoped to make the big gains that would lead to a majority, the wheels began to fall off in mid-campaign, about the same time stock markets were crashing.

The Conservatives had set up their pitch to Ontario voters to make it about Harper's leadership but Ontarians saw a different ballot question.

"The Conservatives tried to humanize Stephen Harper and people weren't interested in that. They wanted to know what, if anything, are you going to do?" said Peter Woolstencroft, an associate professor of political science at the University of Waterloo.

Harper criticized his opponents for "panicking" in reaction to the fiscal crisis but it became clear many voters were looking for someone who was ready to do something - anything - about their heightened anxiety over their economic future.

"Harper was saying trust me," Woolstencroft said. "But he doesn't yet have enough trust."

Canadians not ready to give the NDP power in Ottawa

jgreen — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 23:09:00 GMT

By Mike De Souza
Canwest News Service

The emotion is plain on NDP leader Jack Layton's face as he and wife Olivia Chow watch disappointing NDP returns come in. (Peter J. Thompson/Canwest News Service)

TORONTO - New Democrats across Canada had heightened expectations for the elections on Monday night that were dashed when the ballots were finally counted.

For decades, the NDP was considered to be the conscience of Canada's Parliament, never expected to govern the country. But when he took over the party leadership in 2003, Jack Layton wanted to change that reputation.

"The NDP knew when they elected Jack Layton that they were taking the party in a new direction and now they are seeing the results of that choice," said Kathy Brock, a political scientist from Queen's University in Kingston.

The NDP won 29 seats in the 2006 election and failed to make substantial gains this time.

Layton identified everyday issues and concerns of average, middle-class Canadians, making an effort to reach out beyond his party's traditional roots in organized labour, she said. So instead of tailoring the NDP message to blue-collar voters and labour unions, Brock said Layton made a conscious effort to reach out to the middle class, families, youth, and build up the party's base in the country's largest urban centres.

The party even raised millions of dollars under Layton to buy a three-storey building in downtown Ottawa that now serves as its permanent headquarters as well as a source of rental income from a ground floor pharmacy.

"It's an example of Jack Layton's ability to build a foundation for the long term in our party," said NDP spokesperson Brad Lavigne.

To the delight of the party faithful, Layton ran this campaign with a consistent message that he was running to be the prime minister. But although he consistently earned top marks in surveys about leadership, Canadians were still not ready to give his party more power in Ottawa.

Brock noted that in a volatile political landscape, the NDP and Green party support is the most vulnerable among the five federal parties and is always in danger of being marginalized by the Liberals and Conservatives.

"The NDP is going to have take a good look at what its objectives are and see if the best advantage rests with keeping Jack Layton as their leader or whether they need a change in strategy," she said. "There are always people waiting in the wings, and there are always people in the party who think they can do a better job than the current leader."

Under the party constitution, Layton is required to face a leadership test at the next NDP convention. But after five years at the helm of the New Democrats, Layton has never faced any serious challenges to his leadership, and most party supporters maintain he's the best person for the job.

"I wouldn't think that he would have any problems," said Dick Proctor, a former NDP MP who also served as Layton's chief of staff. "I think that Canadians have been very proud of Jack's leadership. I think they're proud of the campaign that has been run by him, this time out. So I don't foresee that there would be a call that it's time for him to move on."

He suggested that the party might have been in better shape in the 1990s if former leader Ed Broadbent had not decided to leave politics. But instead, the party was reduced to a historic low of nine seats in the 1993 election.

"In 1988, we had our single best showing (winning 43 seats)," said Proctor. "I still think it's one of the greatest tragedies of our time that Ed Broadbent chose to leave political life, leave the leadership of the party, shortly after that election campaign and I think that really took the wind out of our sales for a decade or more."

Tories win a majority of sorts

aterry — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 22:49:00 GMT

By Don Martin
Canwest News Service

Supporters cheer while they wait for Conservative leader and Canada's Prime Minister Stephen Harper at his election night headquarters in Calgary on Tuesday. (Chris Wattie/Reuters)

CALGARY - The Calgary convention centre crowd was strangely muted until their leader took the stage, party faithful clearly disappointed at finishing just shy of absolute power.

They needn't fret. The Conservatives have won a majority in political power if not in name.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper finished close to his dream of painting half the Commons seats a dark blue on Tuesday night with about 142 seats, less than a dozen shy of his end-to-dysfunctionality control goal for Parliament.

Riding an unexpected jump in economy-spooked Ontario's support, which gave them six new seats ringing the Liberal's Toronto fortress, the Conservatives are now set to lead the an absolute-power minority, perhaps the strongest in history.

To the relief of campaign-weary Canadians, who voted their displeasure with the lowest voter turnout in history, this result ends the threat of another election for two years or more.

With the Liberals a fading force, losing popular vote in four consecutive elections, and a do-over leadership convention on the horizon for 2009, Harper will have an even weaker Liberal opponent to tackle with even less money to fight back.

His crime and economic agenda can confidently run roughshod over the Liberals, whose defining position is going to be the fetal curl until the Official Opposition gets its act together, which could take years.

There will be grumbles that Harper had his three strikes at elevating the Conservatives into the majority stratosphere and has hit an electoral ceiling of voter support.

There will be people who argue breaking the spirit of his own fixed election laws and squandering $300-million for an election when only about three dozen seats changed hands was a waste of time and effort.

And there's bound to be a backlash against Quebec's fickle election voting behaviour, embracing do-nothing Bloc Quebecois while denying the Conservatives a critical payoff.

That may well be the big aftershock of this vote - how a minuscule arts funding cut and an optional youth sentencing provision could derail the Conservative's cruise-control to a majority, this after the government crafted so many policies and programs to appease Quebec.

The next time the prime minister advocates a Quebec-only benefit or directs great gobs of political payola toward that province, he will face grinding-teeth objections from inside his western base.

But Harper's leadership is obviously secure given the strong results with apparent gains in every other region of the country.

He can, if he wants, take a fourth grasp for a supersized mandate, although given a victory speech that basically echoed the agenda he left behind to force the election, might not be necessary to accomplish his goals.

The discipline of power and Harper's legendary control tendencies will keep any disgruntled MPs with leadership ambitions cowering in the corner until the prime minister decides to leave.

The same cannot be said for Liberal Leader Stephane Dion. He had competition from defeated Green Leader Elizabeth May for the night's biggest loser, but at least May lost a seat she couldn't win and her party's share of the vote went up.

Dion had no such comfort to fall back on after losing 19 seats to finish below what even John Turner posted in 1988. He lost Atlantic heavyweight Robert Thibault and Toronto maverick Garth Turner to the Conservatives, while giving his rivals a toehold on P.E.I. for the first time in more than 30 years.

The third minority in a row opens up multitudes of options as Canada's political parties regroup over the election post-mortems to see if it's finally time to form a coalition of the willing on the left to finally challenge Conservatives settling in for a long run in power.

Dion cannot last, of course. He may try, insisting he's no quitter, but if he refuses to leave voluntarily he will suffer the same mutiny of caucus support experienced by former Canadian Alliance leader Stockwell Day in 2001. At best, he's a marker holding a symbolic leadership until a convention to crown his replacement can be organized. I'm betting he's gone within a month, replaced by interim leader Ralph Goodale.

New Democrat Jack Layton, for his part, can claim better than expected results and will stand pat, waiting for his next deluded run to become prime minister. He was in danger of losing his only Quebec seat, thus getting rid of a wannabe leader Thomas Mulcair, and at this writing had a shocking lead for an Edmonton, where caucus chair Rahim Jaffer was behind at press time.

He also deserves considerable credit for resonating with voters with hard-targeted message on jobs long before the rest of his opponents grasped the ballot box issue.

And so, with another minority the ultimate result of this oddball dirty campaign, the question remains: Has the dysfunctionality of Parliament that prompted this election been resolved - or merely extended?

Canadians have seen and heard their share of gaffes

aterry — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 17:13:00 GMT

Ashley Terry
Canwest News Service

A Conservative party official said Sunday that leader Stephen Harper would not be answering questions from reporters. (Chris Wattie/Reuters)

Two days before the election, a Conservative party official said leader Stephen Harper would not be answering questions from reporters.

The official was quick to note that the decision was not being made to avoid gaffes in the final hours, but because the Prime Minister had a tight schedule.

When he was still taking questions from the press, Harper avoided any major missteps that could have threatened his campaign. Instead, his team filled in and dished out a few gaffes themselves.

The infamous puffin that appeared pooping on Dion on a Conservative website kicked off the campaign, and Harper doled out the first Tory apology. Only two days later, Harper’s communications director Ryan Sparrow apologized for saying criticism of the Prime Minister by a dead soldier’s father was politically motivated.

The Conservatives had five gaffe-free days before Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz’s tasteless comments came to light and Canadians heard Conservative apology No. 3.

The next day, officials in Transport Minister Lawrence Cannon’s office told aboriginal protestors they could meet with Cannon “if you behave and if you’re sober” – apology No. 4.

Before the end of September, two Conservative candidates had resigned and Canadians heard apology No. 5 from the Tory camp, this time from staffer Owen Lippert. He lifted an Australian speech on the war in Iraq and gave it to Harper to read in the House of Commons in 2003.

Harper himself took some heat for his comments about the floundering economy and Dion’s flubbed CTV interview two days before the moratorium on questions. But with the campaigns at an end, it appears the Conservative team should not have been muzzling Harper, but that he should have been muzzling them.

The Liberals had a slightly better record, but had a few gaffes of their own. Grit staffers, assailed for being disorganized and unprepared for this election, managed to avoid saying or doing anything worthy of apology. Their candidates, however, did not.

Liberal candidate Ricardo Lopez pulled out of the Beauharnois-Salaberry riding over comments he made about aboriginals and on the same day, Simon Bedard quit his Quebec riding over comments he wrote about aboriginals in the Oka crisis.

The Liberals dumped candidate Lesley Hughes after she apologized for an article she wrote several years ago saying there was a 9/11 conspiracy and Israeli businesses were alerted before the attacks.

The NDP also lost three candidates to gaffes. Two Vancouver candidates quit after they were shown in videos using illegal drugs, and candidate Julian West quit after a complaint emerged alleging he exposed himself to young women 12 years ago.

But all of the parties emerged without the kind of major, campaign-ending gaffe that Canadians have seen in the past.

Harper’s comments about Dion’s CTV interview fail to compare to the Conservative attack ads on Jean Chretien that essentially killed Kim Campbell’s flailing campaign in 1993. The ads were interpreted by many as an attack on Chretien’s facial deformity rather than his competence and the Liberals cried foul – as they have done this time around – citing Dion’s hearing problem.

In the debates where he was literally attacked from all sides, Harper avoided looking like John Turner in the 1984 leaders’ debate, where a flustered Turner lost the election by failing to explain Trudeau patronage appointments.

Even puffingate was tame compared to a Tory communications department gaffe during the 2004 campaign – a press release with an overzealous headline that accused Paul Martin of supporting child pornography. The Tories retracted the headline but Harper refused to retract the release and the Conservative campaign went from professional to ugly.

Visually, there was nothing on par with Robert Stanfield’s famous football fumble in 1974 on a North Bay, Ont. tarmac as his plane was refuelled. There wasn’t even anything to compare to Harper’s leather cowboy outfit of 2005, or Duceppe’s photo op at a cheese factory in 1997 where he sported a hairnet that looked like a shower cap.

When it comes to gaffes, although the Tories ended up with egg on their faces more than any other party during the campaign, Canadians have seen much worse.

The apathetic voter is Harper's best friend right now

jgreen — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 16:48:00 GMT

By Don Martin
Canwest News Service

An Elections Canada worker watches as Prime Minister Stephen Harper places his vote in the ballot box in Calgary, Alberta, Oct. 14. Canada typically has a two-thirds voter turnout rate. (Andy Clark/Reuters)

The tours have gone to ground, the last of the staged-for-television rallies held, the incessant chatter of e-mail traffic from the war rooms has virtually (and thankfully) ceased while the thunder sticks have been packed away for the next campaign.

Photo-ops of the leaders in home ridings, their hands poised with a marked ballot at the slit of the box while beaming a forced bravado, will be Tuesday's only events.

Then comes the long wait until an envelope is handed to them containing a victory or concession speech for the podium.

But it's apathy, not the smears or jeers of rival leaders, that becomes their greatest threat now, particularly for those aiming to knock off the incumbent prime minister.

In a close election where the prevailing judgment by the public is one of disgust at 36 days of sucker punches and cheap shots, the most important voters may well be the ones who opt for none-of-the-above and stay home.

Canada is now routinely recording only two-thirds voter turnout and, if disinterest manifests itself as a no-show epidemic Tuesday, this election could dip below 60 per cent for the first time in history.

Beyond serving as the ultimate snub to democracy, apathy is doubly costly because a vote for any party gives them much-needed taxpayer funding of $1.95 a year to finance the next campaign which, if the expected minority government is re-elected, might be only a year or two off, perish the thought.

But a lethargic electorate is the Conservatives' best friend. Their get-out-the-vote ground game is without equal. I doubt there's a supporter in a key riding anywhere in Canada who hasn't been helpfully directed to their polling station by a Conservative volunteer and offered a ride if required.

The only chance for the Liberals, who seem perilously thin on the ground in important regions, is to hope that a vote against Prime Minister Stephen Harper is a motivated vote, particularly if the rumble of a last-minute surge in Conservative support points to a stronger minority mandate or even, if every break in Ontario squeakers went their way, seizing the holy grail of majority rule.

The iffy voter turnout was a key consideration when I surveyed my collection of ten cross-country anonymous operatives Monday. It can trigger swing variables in dozens of ridings, yet while this insightful group derives from a variety of party allegiances, they all agree this $300-million exercise will likely just buy several more years of the same old same old.

They all expect Conservatives minorities ranging from 115 to 145 seats in a 308-seat House of Commons. That means another four-way-divided Parliament requiring the government to find a partner to do anything, where committees remain gridlocked by partisan bickering and election speculation never ends. If there was ever a compelling reason to vote in a Conservative majority, that's it.

The allegedly non-partisan Election Prediction Project, which drills into polls to decipher local riding entrails, says the vote is finally locking in and pegs the number of too-close-to-calls contests at less than 25 ridings.

It now calls for a status quo Conservative minority of 125 seats (versus 127 at the writ drop) and incremental Liberal setback of 94 seats (down from 95).

That will still mean the unsheathing of Liberal knives aimed at Leader Stephane Dion's back and would place Stephen Harper on probation after three shots at failing to win over Quebec to land a majority.

Given that Harper was up against the weakest Liberal leader in generations and had the sovereigntists on their knees in Quebec, all the while outpolling all others with a commanding leadership advantage on economic management, even a similar win would be widely seen as a personal loss.

That said, I'll foolishly advance a prediction, having bet several dinners on 138 seats for the Conservatives, 88 for the Liberals, 54 for the Bloc Quebecois and 27 for the New Democrats and one independent MP with a dramatic rise in the Green party's votes that, darnit, is spread too thin to give Elizabeth May any seats to call her own.

Then again, the smart money would bet I'm wrong.

Economy ignited mean-spirited campaign

jgreen — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 15:35:00 GMT

By Norma Greenaway
Canwest News Service

Prime Minister Stephen Harper and wife Laureen wave as they board the Conservative campaign plane in Charlottetown, P.E.I. Oct. 13. The message on their placard was one of the more benign in what turned out to be a sometimes mean-spirited campaign. (Chris Wattie/Reuters)

OTTAWA - Stephen Harper flirted with a majority. Jack Layton flirted with official Opposition status. Gilles Duceppe flirted with irrelevance. Elizabeth May flirted with resonance. And, before it was over, Stephane Dion - brutally dismissed by some early in the campaign as a dead man walking - was flirting with power.

Those were among the story lines during what will be remembered as a mean-spirited five-week federal election campaign that lacked a galvanizing issue until a U.S.-bred market and credit crisis went global.

The meltdown swamped the election landscape in Canada, tightening a race the Conservatives initially thought would end in with a stronger minority mandate, and possibly even a majority, compliments of a Liberal leader they considered weak and a fading Bloc Quebecois.

After a final, spirited sprint, the leaders will settle in Tuesday to await the voters' verdict on an election that was "mostly about nothing," as political scientist Patrick Smith put it, until Harper and his rivals got "whacked" by the Wall Street meltdown in the midst of Week 4.

The phoney war that marked the first three weeks - during which the Conservatives held a solid lead in the polls and dipped briefly into majority territory - was over.

Suddenly, the economy was front and centre and Harper, who had sold himself as a strong and steady hand on the tiller, wasn't invincible anymore. His opponents, among them a feisty and quick-witted May, piled on with new-found aggression during two televised debates on Oct. 2 and 3 and in the days that followed.

A probable ballot-box question finally took shape: Who do you trust to lead the country through uncertain economic times?

It's not the economy in terms of: "It's the economy stupid," said Smith. "It's the economy, and who might best be able to see us through this."

The financial meltdown meant a campaign that had generated little more than a few good sweater jokes and mini-flaps over a pooping puffin, nude-swimming and acid-dropping candidates became a pitched battle over which leader and party was best equipped to steer the country through uncharted territory.

Until then, even the more serious blunders, most notably Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz's unseemly and insensitive joking about victims of the listeriosis outbreak, appeared to have little or no impact on the Conservatives' popularity.

By week four, a backlash had built in Quebec against the prime minister's cuts to a handful of arts and culture programs, and his renewed push to toughen treatment of young offenders.

Conservative support in the province plummeted, and the once-sinking Bloc was back in business.

Harper's hopes of tripling the 11 seats the Tories hold in Quebec and scoring a majority in the 308-seat House of Commons all but evaporated.

Political historian Norman Hillmer of Ottawa said the wave of economic anxiety that swept Canada after the U.S. meltdown challenged Harper's strategy of running on a platform of "more of the same" and forced the prime minister's team to retool the message.

He also threw $25 billion into the pot as late as Friday, money designed to make it easier for Canadian individuals and business to borrow money.

Despite the late-campaign fireworks over the economy and the more than $350 million spent by the government and the political parties to run the election, most analysts predict Canada will end up with a minority Conservative Parliament that looks a lot like the one that was dissolved for the election.

At that time, the Conservatives held 127 of the 308 seats, the Liberals held 95, the Bloc held 48, the New Democrats held 30 and Independents held four. Four seats were vacant.

Duncan McDowell, a history professor at Carleton University in Ottawa, said that as long as the Bloc is alive and kicking, it's almost impossible to imagine a majority federal government being formed.

"You subtract 45 to 50 seats out of 308 and it takes a Nobel laureate in mathematics to try to find a majority in that," McDowall said in an interview. "That is the new norm."

Still, there is enough uncertainty over how the votes will shake down Tuesday that people are hedging their bets.

Indeed, by the time Canadians were tucking into their Thanksgiving dinner, the prospect of a Liberal minority could not be ruled out.

The latest Ipsos Reid poll, conducted last week for Canwest News Service and Global National, said the Conservatives had 34 per cent, the Liberals 29 per cent, the NDP 18 per cent, the Bloc nine per cent and the Green party eight per cent.

Darrell Bricker, CEO of Ipsos Reid, said the numbers are so volatile the campaign could well be headed to a photo finish.

"The economy has taken over as an issue," said Smith, a professor at Simon Fraser University in Burnaby, B.C.

"It intersects with leadership. And the questions the Liberals raised in the 2006 election, 'Can you trust Stephen Harper?' still resonates."

On the stump, the leaders sharpened their message for the last lap of the race.

Dion, who leaned on Liberal heavyweights such as Jean Chretien and Paul Martin to buck up his economic credentials, stepped up his attacks on Harper as a do-nothing, "laissez-faire, I don't care" leader who puts too much faith in free markets.

He disparaged Layton's strategy of portraying himself as the prime-minister-in-waiting, and rejected as outdated his plan to finance new social spending by cancelling $50 billion worth of business tax breaks promised by the Conservatives.

Harper struggled to overcome what critics dubbed an "empathy deficit" and a suggestion the stock market collapse offered some bargain shopping.

Heading into the holiday weekend, he scrambled to persuade voters he had a heart while repeatedly assuring them the Canadian financial institutions were on sound footing and the economy was well positioned to survive the storm.

Harper also intensified his assaults on Dion and Layton as tax-happy, spendthrifts who would plunge the country into recession with their "fantasyland" election promises. In particular, he targeted the Liberals' Green Shift carbon tax as something that would devastate the economy.

Shifting poll numbers as the campaign drew to a climax added genuine suspense to the outcome, but so did a feeling that many Canadians did not really make up their minds until the weekend.

"I really, honestly believe that having the long weekend - the Thanksgiving family oriented holiday across the country before the vote - may be the most decisive part of the campaign," said David Mitchell, a political historian who is a vice-principal at Queen's University in Kingston, Ont.

Lacklustre campaign leads to questions over voter turnout

jgreen — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 14:04:00 GMT

By Meagan Fitzpatrick
Canwest News Service

Voter turnout has been on a steady decline in Canada over the last two decades. (Dan Janisse/The Windsor Star)

OTTAWA - After polls close Tuesday night Canadians will wait to see who wins but historians, academics and political observers will also keep an eye on another result - the number of Canadians that exercised their democratic right to vote.

Voter turnout has been on a steady decline in Canada over the last two decades with the exception of the 2006 federal election that brought Conservative Leader Stephen Harper to power with a minority government.

When Canadians were called to the polls in January of that year, 64.7 per cent of eligible voters cast a ballot, compared to 60.9 per cent in the previous 2004 election.

The number of Canadians who vote on Tuesday will indicate whether the last voter turnout was an anomaly or the start of an upward swing in voter participation.

Political observers offer mixed predictions on which way the trend line will go.

At the outset of the campaign, political scientist Andrew Heard said he would have guessed voter turnout was headed for a downturn because the campaign was mostly being framed around the track records and personalities of the party leaders and little else.

"These are not things that get people excited to turn out and vote," said the professor at Burnaby, B.C.'s Simon Fraser University.

But as the campaign unfolded, the economy emerged as a dominant issue and Heard suspects that might give more people a reason to vote.

"I think the relevance of voting is being heightened by this... it's catalyzed people's interest," he said.

Talk of the economy has given some definition to what was otherwise a mostly lacklustre campaign but whether it's enough to get more Canadians voting, pollster Darrell Bricker isn't so sure.

"It was a bit of a Seinfeld election at the start, it was an election about nothing and now it has become an election about something," said Bricker, president and CEO of Ipsos Reid. "It may have some impact at the end but most indications are that (voter turnout) should be down."

Bricker's firm has been tracking voter intention and he doesn't expect the turnout to climb.

"The dynamics of this campaign are a little different than the last one. In the last one there was a real fear that Harper would win a majority so I think a fair number of people showed up just to stop that," said Bricker.

The latest polls in this campaign however, show a majority is almost certainly out of Harper's reach.

"A Conservative minority is what most people expect and that's what is about to happen so there's no sense of real urgency around the vote."

If voter turnout returns to its pre-2006 levels, Canada will not be alone in its drop in voter participation. It is a trend that many other western democracies are experiencing. It's not just at the national level either, voter turnout has been slipping in provincial elections in Canada also.

Elections Canada published a study in 2003 that included the results of a survey of non-voters who explained some of the reasons why they stay home on election day.

Among the reasons: they felt there was a lack of choice, that voting wouldn't change anything, they weren't concerned with the issues of the campaign, they simply weren't interested, or they had other priorities.

There are also sociodemographic factors that studies have correlated with lower voter turnout including age, income, education level and place of birth.

Of all the factors that can influence whether people vote, political scientist Lawrence LeDuc, who has studied the issue extensively and helped author the Elections Canada study, says two major trends have coincided to account for the declining turnout in Canada.

For one, young Canadians have been voting in smaller numbers over the last 10 to 20 years and when young Canadians do enter the electorate, they do so later in life.

"They tend to tune out politics. Politics just doesn't have as much relevance for the younger generation as it has for older people," said LeDuc, a University of Toronto professor.

LeDuc said the other main driver behind dropping voter turnout is a lack of competition in the Canadian political scene.

That sense among voters began to emerge in the early 1990s when the Liberal party went on to win three consecutive elections, the Progressive Conservative party was collapsing and there was no party that was a solid opposition to the Liberals.

The 1993 election was when voter turnout dropped below 70 per cent and it has never recovered.

"You have this uncompetitive politics at two levels," said LeDuc. "You have it nationally in that the same people are always in power and you have it locally in the sense that there are lots of uncompetitive constituencies. That trend over a period of 10 years or so meant that for a lot of people voting just didn't seem worthwhile."

LeDuc said the tight race in this election and the economy as a dominant theme could have positive effects on voter turnout but overall, he expects it to be about the same as 2006 or down slightly.

In terms of the youth vote, he wondered whether spending time with family over the Thanksgiving weekend will have any effect on getting young people to the polls.

"We know that family matters... especially for first time voters," he said.

The culture card: How the arts could cost the Conservatives

jgreen — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 16:09:00 GMT

By Janice Tibbetts
Canwest News Service

Stephen Harper may have dashed his hopes of winning a majority with cuts to arts programs. (Chris Wattie/Reuters)

OTTAWA - In the end, Stephen Harper may have dashed his hopes of winning a majority for a paltry $15 million.

That's Quebec's share of $45 million in Conservative cuts to arts programs, which exploded into a major election issue for a party that had banked on significantly increasing its seat count with a breakthrough in Quebec.

"I would hazard to say that culture stopped the Conservative majority in its tracks," declared Ottawa pollster Nik Nanos.

How did it happen that targeted cuts to certain arts programs captured centre stage, effectively erasing almost three years of Conservative courtship of Quebecers, including an official declaration recognizing the province as a nation within Canada?

In the lazy days of August, when Harper was publicly warming up to a fall election, the cultural chill was quietly beginning to bubble in the arts community nationwide, which had just learned the Conservatives had killed certain arts-and-culture programs.

The cuts amounted to only a fraction of the $3.8 billion the government spends on arts and culture. One was a $4.7-million program to promote Canadian culture abroad, which a Conservative government official said at the time was killed because most of the grants "went to groups that would raise the eyebrow of any typical Canadian."

The recipients list was broad, including the Toronto rock band Holy F---, several Quebec dance troupes and the Royal Winnipeg Ballet.

"These cuts are small compared to what we are afraid of, which is an overall indifference toward the cultural industry," said Richard Hardacre, president of ACTRA, the union representing performing artists.

The cuts came on top of another irritant to the arts community - a piece of legislation that denied tax credits to films deemed to be offensive.

The initiative, which the Conservatives shelved in their election platform last week, was widely decried as censorship and cast suspicion on the Conservative motives in supporting arts and culture.

By the time Harper hit the campaign trail on Sept. 7, riding high in public opinion polls, his cuts were being vocally condemned at the high-profile Toronto International Film Festival.

There was also a handful of demonstrations across Canada, but the outcry was escalating rapidly in Quebec, where the Conservatives were hoping to at least double or even triple the 10 seats they won in 2006.

Perhaps one of the most damaging setbacks for the Tories was a widely viewed YouTube video by Quebec singer Michel Rivard that comically spoofed out-of-touch anglophones in Ottawa making decisions about arts programs they neither understood nor appreciated.

Enter Gilles Duceppe, who was able to capitalize on a growing sentiment that the cuts were an affront to francophone culture. The Bloc Quebecois leader also bundled the program cancellations with Harper's crackdown on youth crime - a perennial hard sell in the province - to portray the prime minister as being out of step with Quebec values.

The anger morphed into an anybody-but-Harper movement after the prime minister, as he was promoting his crime agenda in Western Canada in mid-campaign, told reporters that ordinary Canadians can't relate to gala-going artists, an assertion that galvanized the communities in Toronto, Vancouver and other urban centres.

"I don't know what he was thinking," said Nanos, who believes that day, Sept. 23, was a tipping point in the campaign.

Canada's three largest cities - Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver - are home to 64 per cent of the 1.1 million Canadians employed in the arts and culture sector. The Harper Conservatives, with their strong rural base, did not win a single seat in the three cities in 2006.

Nor were they even competitive in any of the Top 20 constituencies across Canada where the cultural industry is employed, according to an analysis by punditsguide.ca - an independent website that tracks federal election data.

"When the election was launched, they probably had written off those seats anyway," speculated Alain Pineau, national director of the Canadian Conference for the Arts.

The Conservatives have acknowledged publicly that the cuts to some arts programs were politically motivated, but they say that the overall budget for culture has increased under the Tory watch.

Federal budget figures show that spending climbed from $3.3 billion in the last year of Liberal power to $3.8 billion in 2007-2008.

But critics contend that the money has been shifted from culture to things such as the 2010 Vancouver Olympics, which also falls under the auspices of the federal Heritage Department.

A former Conservative political analyst blames the Tories' lack of an "early warning system" for failing to grasp the impact of their cuts before it was too late, just as they failed to react early to fear over the economy.

"It was the first crack in the wall and the pressure of the economic story caused the wall to break open," he said, referring to criticism the Conservatives were also slow to gauge public angst about the economy, which has been cited as the reason behind their Ontario slide.

Harper's post-Thanksgiving election looking like a turkey for Tories

aterry — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 12:58:00 GMT

Don Martin
Canwest News Service

Stephen Harper's majority dream appears to have died in Quebec. (Chris Wattie/Reuters)

TORONTO - He never technically panicked. But with the polls turning sour in the final week of this craziest of volatile campaigns, Stephen Harper's invocation of his rival as a potential prime minister was the closest this headstrong leader will ever get to a political anxiety attack.

This election was to be the Conservative vindication, a return to the golden age of majority control as a pan-Canadian party, strong in every region and all-powerful in Parliament. Any reference to Prime Minister Stephane Dion would only qualify as a lame joke.

But, unless every poll is wrong, that won't happen Tuesday. A minority government that forced an election to win big seems, as much as anyone can foreshadow a result amid so much poll fluctuation, poised to end up another minority government within 10 seats, give or take, of its 129-seat count at dissolution.

That would make this modest change a mighty expensive seat-swapping exercise given the $300-million-plus cost of this election.

But for a well-prepared campaign with a leader towering in credibility over his rivals, even a solid win will be an emotional loss if it doesn't give the Conservatives half the Commons seats and thus sufficient control to end the procedural dysfunctionality Harper claimed was handcuffing Canadian democracy.

The majority dream appears to have died in Quebec. With all other regions showing incremental gains or losses, the rebounding strength of the Bloc Quebecois put on ice Conservative hopes for a 20-seat gain.

For that, the Conservatives can only blame themselves.

After investing enormous personal and political capital into wooing Quebec, pushing through the mostly-symbolic notion of a Quebecois "nation" and making almost every decision through the prism of ensuring a positive impact on that province, Harper appears set to suffer severe suitor rejection en francais.

Incredibly, it seems a minuscule $45 million arts cut - a single percentage fraction of the total arts spending - was enough to undo 32 months of goodwill to that province.

Also cited for the reversal of Conservative fortunes was a tough-love youth sentencing provision, which would've allowed judges to impose adult sentences on 14-year-olds if the province agreed.

With Quebec now seemingly a writeoff for the Conservatives, the brass ring became southern Ontario, where the outcome is still in play.

Still, having election predictions swing between gains or loses for the Conservatives this late in the game is a major head-scratcher.

There really were no defining turning-against-Harper moments of this campaign, where the Conservative's modest platform promises were a prudent fit with bad times.

He was riding a war machine that was a steamroller of meticulous preparation and planning that should've flattened a hapless Liberal campaign running on borrowed funds and lacking even a campaign jet at election takeoff.

Before forcing the vote, his government had covered all the important bases. They invested heavily in ethnic outreach and apologized profusely to offended minorities.

They gave a dignified resolution to the native residential school tragedy. They delivered significant tax breaks to selective demographics with vote-getting potential and continued to roll out fat fiscal surpluses.

And then came the pinch-me-I'm-dreaming Liberal development for Stephen Harper. At the precise moment the economy started to tank, the Liberals announced they'd stand for re-election on a carbon tax platform, which Harper figured had everything but a trap door and a noose for that party's election chances.

Harper would've loved a referendum on the Liberal Green Shift, but no government could have anticipated how external factors would rewrite this election script so profoundly.

Ironically, the first signs hit just as the prime minister was visiting the Governor General to force the election a year ahead of his fixed date.

Word landed during his coffee chat that U.S. government-sponsored mortgage agencies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had been placed under the control of the U.S. Treasury.

Unfortunately, those sub-prime mortgage casualties were merely the distant sound of bad news waves hitting the outer breakers.

The campaign trail quickly paled by comparison as global bank bailouts were unleashed, the market crashed, the dollar collapsed and oil prices fell down a deep well.

Harper's don't-worry-be-happy approach couldn't last. He was forced to abandon his natural aloofness and invoke his mother's stock market misfortunes to prove he was not a cold political rock in a sea of public pain and confusion.

His government, which had planned to stick with a hands-off plan, scrambled Friday with a $25-billion mortgage prop-up for the banks and warn the country to brace for another year of economic sluggishness.

Even so, a simple question of voting for the best leader for a lousy economy should've given the Conservatives advantage enough to give them the majority.

But once again, the trivial stuff intervened, in a repeat of those tactical mistakes late in the 2004 and 2006 campaigns that sent voters scurrying back to the Liberals.

A culture of self-defeat seems to be embedded in the DNA of Stephen Harper, whose small misspeaks have big electoral ramifications.

He shouldn't have defined his arts funding reallocation as a cultural battle against snobbery and galas. His exuberant Conservative backroom straddled the lines of good taste several times and put the most unlikely phrase of "puffin poop" into the headlines.

He made callous-sounding references to the market crash as having decent "buy" potential in a scrum. And then Harper's crowning boo-boo - an unfortunate sneer at the hapless Dion as he stumbled with English incomprehension through out-takes of an interview this week, which suggested a hard heart still beats inside the cultivated sweater-vest image makeover.

There's no denying the Conservatives have delivered a steady, disciplined government that gave critics precious little ammunition to target them as driven by hard-right ideology.

But if the polls accurately foreshadow Tuesday's results, Quebec is a lost cause for Conservative gains, with only modest swings in Ontario, Newfoundland and British Columbia.

People sitting down for their family dinners this holiday weekend have the power to declare Stephen Harper a one-term wonder or render Stephane Dion a single-election loser.

In the end, this election will be a referendum on the character of the two contenders for prime minister and their ability to serve as the comforting, competent face of a government amid economic ruins.

Only one of those men will survive the post-Thanksgiving vote to fight another election. The other will become a turkey stuffing footnote to political history.

Harper should have let botched interview speak for itself

aterry — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 11:46:00 GMT

By Barbara Yaffe
Canwest News Service

Liberal leader Stephane Dion had trouble comprehending and answering a question by a CTV interviewer and asked that the interview be restarted twice. (Shaun Best/Reuters)

VANCOUVER - In a campaign that has been buffeted by the unexpected, Tuesday night's botched TV interview with Stephane Dion seemed not out of place.

Things were going wonderfully for Liberals, climbing in the polls to the point that folks were starting to muse about a possible Grit minority - when Dion, during a media moment, was caught looking like a complete doofus.

Whereupon Conservative Leader Stephen Harper, in that way of his, sought a partisan advantage. And, as a result, both party leaders lost ground.

First, let's be clear: CTV was on solid footing in a decision to air the segment which showed Dion in a mental meltdown as he attempted to answer a simple question about how he'd handle the current economic crisis were he PM.

Dion couldn't get his tenses straight. It appeared to reflect not a language but a conceptual problem: What would he do if he'd been prime minister during the past two and a half years? Or if he were going to become prime minister after next Tuesday?

The confusion, punctuated by a laughing outburst by Dion and subsequent intervention by a Liberal aide, persisted so that the interview, at Dion's request, had to be restarted three times.

That's what happened. And whatever it said about the Liberal leader, voters surely were entitled to make up their own minds.

Some will conclude Dion was only being human, that perhaps the interview came at the end of a long day. The leaders jet through time zones and keep to pretty daunting schedules during a campaign.

Others will assert that those who want to lead are not human, they are politicians and if they cannot tolerate the bright lights they shouldn't be putting themselves in front of TV cameras.

Had Dion's mistake not then been torqued by a prime minister seeking to gain advantage from it, it might have damaged Dion, and Dion alone.

But Harper, in this election campaign, has been his own worst enemy.

Whereas the Reform and Canadian Alliance parties once used to be damaged by loose-lipped caucus members, this Conservative party keeps getting throttled by a leader who has shut everyone up but himself.

His remark this week about buying opportunities on the stock market was dumb, as was an earlier assertion that Dion wants a recession in Canada.

Canadians believe Harper is a strong leader but they're uncomfortable with his coldness, his extreme partisanship. With or without the sweater, he is Mr. Nasty.

True to form, he donned the meany mantle once again Thursday, moving quickly to show reporters travelling with him the tape of the Dion stumble. And he made himself available for a scrum in which he took shots at Dion.

He didn't need to. The tape spoke for itself and was on the public record. All Harper's comments did was reinforce people's feelings that this prime minister is really not a nice guy. He travels the low road every time.

He and his party have taken endless cheap shots at Dion, who Canadians view as an insipid leader but believe is honest and sincere. It's like picking on the school weakling.

At a party in Vancouver Thursday night, I heard people talking about the Dion interview but there was just as much talk about Harper's reaction.

Bashing an opponent is the mother's milk of politics. American Democrats certainly have been trashing John McCain during the presidential campaign; but have you noticed?

Whenever Barack Obama is personally asked about McCain, he takes the high road, exuding respect. It's as phoney as a $2 bill, and it works.

Today's buzz: 'This man has no class'

jgreen — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 16:43:00 GMT

By Shannon Proudfoot
Canwest News Service

A technician prepares Liberal leader Stephane Dion for a television interview in Toronto October 10. (Shaun Best/Reuters)

The buzz: The Conservatives' announcement of a $25-billion plan to buy back mortgages from the banks was overshadowed Friday by sparring between party leaders over an awkward interview and the ability to shepherd the country through shaky economic times.

The spark: On Thursday, Stephane Dion asked a couple of times to restart an interview with a Halifax TV reporter after he became flummoxed by a question about what he would have done differently than Stephen Harper had he been prime minister during the recent economic upheaval. The Liberal camp asked that the false starts not be broadcast and the TV station initially agreed, but later decided to air the segment.

The critique: Harper delayed the departure of his campaign plane on Thursday evening to speak to reporters about the interview, seizing on the exchange as evidence of the Liberal leader's unreadiness to govern.

"When you're running a $1.5-trillion economy, you don't get a chance to have do-overs, over and over again," he said. "And I think what this incident actually indicates very clearly is that Mr. Dion and the Liberal party really don't know what they would do about the economy."

The rebuttal: The Liberal leader said Harper's comments about the on-camera confusion - which Dion says was caused by a hearing problem and struggles with the English language - were a shot below the belt.

"It was not about our pensions, our savings, our jobs," he said. "It was to not miss an opportunity to come with a low-blow attack against his main opponent. This man has no class, and he has no plan."

The pile-on: Other party leaders defended Dion, with Bloc Quebecois Leader Gilles Duceppe saying the bar is set higher in Ottawa for francophones attempting to communicate in English than for anglophones struggling with French.

NDP Leader Jack Layton criticized Dion's record as Opposition leader, but expressed empathy for his interview troubles, saying "I've struggled with questions, too."

Elections are emotional things, but voters love a winner

jgreen — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 16:20:00 GMT

By Richard Foot
Canwest News Service

Liberal leader Stephane Dion, greeting voters at a coffee shop in Oakville, Ontario, October 10, grew stronger as the campaign progressed. (Shaun Best/Reuters)

For Sir Isaac Newton, momentum was a simple concept with a precise definition - the product of mass and velocity.

For politicians, it is a confounding mystery of the democratic process, an elusive, invisible force with the power to make or a break a campaign. George Bush Sr. called it the "Big Mo," and just as he once did, politicians everywhere still seek its magic.

Is the Big Mo at work in the Canadian election? Has the quickening of support for the opposition parties, as suggested by opinion polls - and the sinking of Conservative support back into minority territory - been the result of momentum shifting in the closing weeks of the campaign?

"There's little question there's been a shift of momentum away from the Conservatives toward the other parties, including the Liberals," says Don Mills, president of Corporate Research Associates, a Halifax polling firm.

"It's quite unusual to have in the midst of a campaign the kind of shift that's happened here. Usually a party enters the beginning of a campaign with momentum and builds on it. But in this case, the Liberals entered the campaign without any momentum, and now they've suddenly found some."

Darrell Bricker, a Toronto pollster and president of Ipsos Reid Public Affairs, is less certain about a shift away from the Conservatives.

The Liberals are still fetching less than 30 per cent support in most polls, short of the 31 per cent of votes the party received in the 2006 election. That hardly amounts to momentum, says Bricker.

"It doesn't look like anybody's had any real momentum in this campaign," he says. "The Tories came out of the blocks really well - looking organized, looking like they were winners - and then they hit a wall. They weren't able to get real momentum going. They had a really good start and then just faded away."

Bricker says true momentum happens when a political leader or campaign "catches the mood of the moment, when there's a sympathetic connection between what the campaign is saying and what people want to hear.

"It's not a rational thing, like voting for a candidate on a certain issue. It's more emotional, like responding to a call for action."

Consider 1984, when Brian Mulroney won the largest landslide in Canadian history.

"There was a bandwagon effect in '84," says Bricker. "There was an overwhelming sense there needed to be change in the country. Mulroney and his young family were just in touch with the times. He seemed like the guy who represented what Canada wanted to be."

Momentum works, says Jay Cost, a blogger on the popular American website Real Clear Politics, because of "voter inattention and ignorance."

Knowledgeable voters tend to support candidates whose policies they like - or if they're voting strategically, who have a good chance of defeating someone whose policies they dislike.

But most people tend to know little about policy and politics, and the moment they begin hearing positive messages about a candidate - through the media, from friends and neighbours, or simply via a televised debate - they in turn form positive images about that person.

If enough people develop and pass on those images, you have momentum.

Voters also like winners.

In U.S. presidential elections, the early Iowa and New Hampshire nomination contests are considered important because they give the victors a winning record from which to begin their long run for the White House.

The same is true in Canadian elections. Incumbent prime ministers have a huge psychological advantage over opponents who have never won a federal election before. Success breeds more success.

Of the 12 prime ministers elected into high office since the turn of the 20th century (not including Stephen Harper), all but three - Paul Martin, Joe Clark and R.B. Bennett - managed to win re-election.

Norman Hillmer, one of Canada's foremost political historians, also recites "Hillmer's law of Canadian politics: once you are in power for a year, you're in power for a long time. We have a very stable political culture (and) sitting leaders have a huge advantage."

When momentum shifts, as it sometimes does in campaigns, it's usually because a candidate has outperformed a common perception - or a media storyline - of low expectations.

"The media loves electoral surprises and covers successful insurgents as though they walk on water," writes Jay Cost.

John McCain's choice of Sarah Palin as his vice-presidential running mate surprised the country and gave the McCain campaign a large, if temporary, bounce in the polls.

Stephane Dion, whose entire political career has been defined by low expectations, almost certainly benefited from his surprisingly competent performance against Harper in the televised debates.

"Momentum has a lot to do with expectations," says Hillmer.

"The media set Harper up as a great strategist. He was `the man' and Dion was just this pathetic little figure. But Dion turned out to be a better campaigner than many expected. He grew stronger as the campaign progressed. He performed well the debates. It gave him, if not a momentum shift, at least the power to stop the bleeding."

Mills says the financial crisis now shaking the world also contributed to a momentum shift away from the Conservatives.

"Pocketbook issues and fears are momentum killers," says Mills. "Without this crisis, I think the results would be quite different.

"The lack of empathy of the prime minister towards people's fears has worked against him. And once voters lose confidence in somebody, it takes a long time to build that up again."

Politicians vs. our last healthy industry

aterry — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 10:54:00 GMT

By Mark Milke
Canwest News Service

Statistics Canada published data on Wednesday showing that the oil and gas industry spent $49.7 billion on capital expenditures in 2007. (Joshua Sawka/Canwest News Service)

In a serendipitous release Wednesday, Statistics Canada published data on how much the oil and gas sector industry spends on extraction, i.e., getting oil and gas out of the ground so we can power our automobiles and heat our homes and offices, among other uses.

The numbers are staggering. In 2007, the industry spent $49.7 billion on capital expenditures. On the operating side, Canada's energy industry cut cheques worth $37.6 billion.

Of particular note is the trend-line. Of almost $50 billion spent on capital investment last year, $32 billion was on conventional exploration; that's down 17 over per cent from the previous year. In contrast, oil and gas companies spent more than $18 billion on "non-conventional" extraction. That would be the oil sands and other difficult-to-reach reserves.

It's the same story on the operating side though less dramatic. Operating expenses were up 0.9 per cent for conventional projects (to $26.8 billion) but up six per cent for non-conventional extraction (to $10.9 billion).

Like most numbers, the statistics are hard to make sexy. But if someone can give them a come-hither look and parade them in front of our federal party leaders, they'd perform a valuable public service. Over the summer and now in the campaign, our political leaders attacked oil and gas companies as much as each other. They are apparently clueless about how valuable energy is to Canada, especially if we're about to enter a recession.

Regrettably, the assault comes from all sides. In the leaders' debates last week, NDP leader Jack Layton argued the energy sector didn't "deserve" the planned reduction in the corporate tax. One of Layton's candidates, the academic Michael Byers from the University of British Columbia, argued Alberta's oil sands should be shut down.

In a television interview in late September, the Green's Elizabeth May argued there was "too much focus on producing oil in one region." May claimed that hurt the rest of the country's economy and then recommended a moratorium on oil sands development. She said that action would "help bring our dollar back to more of its historic relationship with the U.S. dollar and that would help our manufacturing sector." Right.

Back in June, Liberal leader Stephane Dion told the Financial Post that his carbon tax plan would "be very good for Saskatchewan and Alberta" because the heavy tax loads on their energy producers will prompt them "to invest in Canada more." And this past Saturday, Bloc leader Gilles Duceppe, accused the Conservatives of being "sold" to the oil industry. Even Prime Minister Stephen Harper has piled on, with his plan to restrict bitumen exports to countries that live up to some as-yet undefined environmental standard.

This is bizarre. The energy sector is now a critical factor in not just Alberta's economy and to our provincial government revenues but also to British Columbia, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland. One day, energy, its high-paying jobs, and tax revenues might also be significant to Quebecers if natural gas reserves in the St. Lawrence basin, estimated at 24 to 30 million cubic feet, are ever developed.

Critics of the sector, but who love Ottawa largesse and equalization and transfer payments, should think hard about which federal and provincial social programs they would end. Without a booming energy industry, every government will see revenues drop.

But beyond the direct impact, consider some indirect effects. Some in Ontario's automotive sector, including their union leaders such as CAW economist Jim Stanford whom I debated last week, are critical of oil and gas companies and want "excess" profits reined in. They should be careful about what they wish for. If those in the auto belt think times are tough now, wait until the last buyers of their trucks stop showing up to showrooms across the West.

Canada's energy industry spent $87 billion last year on exploration and operations. That cash was spent on everything from Ontario's automobiles to Atlantic salmon to Quebec-furniture.

Given those realities, you'd think with stock indexes in a free fall, the world on the brink of a recession, with the manufacturing and the automobile sectors suffering, and with government tax revenues already set to take a hit from such events, our politicians might avoid trying to kick the slats out from underneath one of Canada's last healthy industries. But you would be wrong.

Mark Milke is the Director of Research for the Frontier Centre: www.fcpp.org.

Elections around the world

jgreen — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 18:43:00 GMT

By Jenny Green
Canwest News Service

Belarussian President Alexander Lukashenko holds his son Nikolay as he casts his ballot in Minsk September 28. (Vasily Fedosenko/Reuters)

The U.S. isn't the only country with an election happening at the same time as Canada's.

Important elections are also taking place - or have recently taken place - in several other countries around the world.

For voters in some of these countries, the issues facing them couldn't be more different, or more crucial.

Austria's Freedom Party leader Heinz Christian Strache reacts to early returns on voting day, September 28, on stage at the party headquarters in Vienna. (Dominic Ebenbichler/Reuters)

Austria: A return to the far-right

Only 18 months into a five-year term, internal strife caused Austria's coalition government to fall, forcing a September 28 snap election where the country's two far-right-wing parties won an unprecedented number of seats. In their worst showing since the Second World War, the Social Democrats and the People's Party lost 25 seats.

Those seats now belong to two parties: The Austrian Freedom Party (AFP) and the Alliance for the Future of Austria (AFA) .

The AFP is headed by Heinz-Christian Strache, who wants to end immigration, repatriate foreigners, ban Islamic dress and overturn Austrian law in order to display Nazi symbols, such as the swastika. The AFA was led by Jorg Haider, but Haider died in a car accident on Saturday, throwing the possibility of a coalition in doubt.

Opposition protesters hold a banner during a demonstration in Minsk after Belarus' parliamentary elections September 28. (Vasily Fedosenko/Reuters)

Belarus: Europe's last dictator

Soon after polls closed on September 28, voters took to the streets of the Belarusian capital, Minsk, protesting against electoral fraud and vote rigging.

Not one of the 70 opposition candidates got elected. All 110 seats went to supporters of a man dubbed "Europe's last dictator."

Alexander Lukashenko, a former collective farm manager, has ruled this former Soviet republic since 1994, censoring independent media, seizing control of banks and hiring secret police to keep an eye on his opposition.

Although the country's election commission pronounced the elections free and fair, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, which monitored the election, says it observed deliberate falsification of results.

New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark leaves 10 Downing Street after meeting with Britain's Prime Minister Gordon Brown in London on January 10. (Toby Melville/Reuters)

New Zealand: Gone to the dogs

New Zealand's prime minister is hoping to win a fourth consecutive term on November 8. Helen Clark and her Labour Party have been in power since 1999, but only in successive minority governments.

Her party is unlikely to win a majority this time.

Clark's leftist party has been plagued with political scandals, the economy is in a recession and the opposition is sneaking ahead in the polls. John Key's National Party advocates tax reductions, welfare cuts and free trade.

The official polls have Clark behind by only a few percentage points but according to an unofficial poll, she's going to the dogs. A New Zealand pet food company has made doggie chew toys to resemble the two opposing leaders' faces. A popular blog is tracking the results and so far, 60 per cent of dogs are giving Helen Clark the squeeze.

Rwanda's President Paul Kagame addresses the 63rd United Nations General Assembly at U.N. headquarters in New York on September 23, a week after his election. (Mike Segar/Reuters)

Rwanda: Governing unopposed

Paul Kagame was easily re-elected president on September 15 in Rwanda's second parliamentary election since the 1994 genocide. Voter turnout was 90 per cent and Kagame is respected worldwide for bringing security, reconciliation and economic growth to Rwanda.

But he was victorious because no opposition party challenged his Rwandan Patriotic Front. Members of every opposition party have been in exile since the end of the genocide and they call the elections a sham. Only one independent candidate entered the race and the two other parties to field candidates (the Social Democratic Party and the Liberal Party) back Kagame.

Rwanda is one of the few countries in the world with gender parity in parliament. Roughly half the seats are reserved for women; two seats are reserved for youth and one for a representative of the disabled.

AMembers of Ukraine's Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko's bloc swarm around parliament chairman Arseniy Yatsenyuk in Ukraine's house of parliament in Kiev October 10. Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko has called for an early December 7 election, a move that has been opposed by Tymoshenko's supporters. (Konstantin Chernichkin/Reuters)

Ukraine: Squabbling allies of the Orange Revolution

On Oct. 8, Ukrainian Prime Minister Viktor Yuschenko called a snap election for December 7. The election results could dictate whether this former Soviet republic aligns itself with the West or with Russia.

Yuschenko came to power during the 2004 Orange Revolution, after Ukrainians protested a rigged vote that declared pro-Moscow Viktor Yanukovych president. But Yuschenko and his Orange Revolution ally, Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, have been in a fierce power struggle for months. Tymoshenko, who now advocates closer ties with Russia, refused to back Yuschenko in his support for Georgia in its recent conflict with Russia. Yuschenko wants entry into NATO, and has been building closer ties with the U.S. and the European Union. He now blames Tymoshenko for the collapse of their fragile coalition.

Pundits say Yuschenko's party doesn't even have enough support to win a single seat. Viktor Yanukovych has more support than Yuschenko's and Tymoshenko's parties combined and if he rises to power, Ukraine may not gain entry into NATO.

This election comes at a time of growing inflation, a widening deficit and a currency falling in value.

A ZANU-PF supporter holds a poster of Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe during an election rally in the Harare township of Highfield on March 28. (Howard Burditt/Reuters)

Zimbabwe: Power-sharing stalemate

Zimbabwe has been without a government since March, when Morgan Tsvangirai and his Movement for Democratic Change won the first round of the presidential election, but fell short of a majority. Robert Mugabe, the incumbent, later won a June 27 presidential runoff unopposed after Tsvangirai withdrew, citing state-sponsored violent attacks against his supporters.

Following the elections, Mugabe (who has led Zimbabwe since independence from Britain in 1980) is under pressure to share power with his rival as his country is on the verge of economic ruin.

Power-sharing talks, mediated by ousted South African president Thabo Mbeki, began in July and a final deal was reached on September 11. But talks over the distribution of key ministries broke down and Mbeki has agreed to stay on to help break the stalemate.

Harper's minority: history's exception

aterry — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 16:03:00 GMT

Ashley Terry
Canwest News Service

According to Harper, the Liberals were stalling important legislation in the House of Commons and Senate. (Chris Wattie/Reuters)

In the weeks leading up to Stephen Harper’s trip to Rideau Hall on September 7, the Prime Minister made references to a “dysfunctional” Parliament and a committee system “in chaos.”

Liberal leader Stephane Dion had threatened several times to force an election, but backed off when faced with the prospect of a confidence vote. According to Harper, the Liberals were stalling important legislation in the House of Commons and Senate, and the Prime Minister had had enough.

But despite the apparent gridlock, Harper’s minority government was one of the most productive in Canadian history. It was surely the longest — no other Canadian minority government has rivalled Harper’s uninterrupted 2 ½-year tenure.

His government managed to cut taxes, introduce a new childcare policy, increase defence spending, recognize Quebec as a nation and resolve to keep Canadian troops in Afghanistan until 2011. The Conservatives passed the Accountability Act, made changes to the Election Act and approved a softwood lumber deal with the U.S.

In total, the government introduced 125 bills and passed 65, surviving 40 votes declared matters of confidence. It did all this despite being one of the smallest minorities the country has ever had.

History suggests that Conservative minorities have been significantly less productive than Liberal ones, making Harper’s government an exception. Just how well do past minority governments stack up against Harper’s record?

William Lyon Mackenzie King

In 1921, King’s Liberals were one seat short of a majority, and formed the first minority government in Canadian history, while relying on the support of the Progressives to stay alive. Floor crossings and by-elections meant that the government fluctuated between a majority and minority for its 3 ½ years in power.

The Liberals lost the 1925 election to Arthur Meighen’s Conservatives, but formed the government after attracting more support from the Progressive party.

During King’s minority rule, the Liberals passed new pension and labour legislation, introduced tariff reductions and reorganized the Canadian railroad system. But King also had the support of the Progressives, and his government was a majority about half the time.

John Diefenbaker

Diefenbaker’s Progressive Conservatives were unable to secure a majority in 1957, winning 113 seats to the Liberals’ 103. Diefenbaker’s minority stood for 294 days.

The party called another election in 1958 and dominated, winning 208 seats and easily clinching the majority they sought less than a year before.

Most of Diefenbaker’s significant accomplishments (such as the Bill of Rights and the Agricultural Rehabilitation and Development Act) came after the Progressive Conservatives had achieved a majority.

Lester B. Pearson

Pearson’s two Liberal minority governments from 1963-1968 can be considered among the most successful since Confederation with a list of reforms to their credit, including:

medicare
Canada Pension Plan
Canada Assistance Plan
student loans
increased transfers to provinces

Pearson’s government relied on close cooperation with Tommy Douglas’ newly-formed New Democratic Party, which held 17 seats after the election of 1963 and 21 seats after 1965.

Pierre Trudeau

Trudeau’s Liberals narrowly edged the Progressive Conservatives in 1972, but won a majority less than two years later. The Liberals relied heavily on their alliance with David Lewis’ NDP during their minority time, but the government was relatively productive, introducing 93 bills and passing 68 over two years. Among their accomplishments:

created Petro Canada
created the Foreign Investment Review Agency
passed election expenses act
increased pension spending

Joe Clark

Clark’s Progressive Conservative minority government was one of the shortest and least productive. The party was able to pass only seven of 38 bills introduced, and after nine months pushed unpopular fiscal policy and a proposed gas tax that forced an election.

Paul Martin

Martin’s Liberals managed to stay in office for 17 months — roughly the average duration of a minority government. They introduced 93 bills and passed 54, including a bill to legalize same-sex marriage and a 10-year, $41-billion health care deal with the provinces.

Martin’s time in office was relatively productive in the historical context. The minority Liberals passed 70 per cent of legislation, the same proportion as Jean Chretien’s majority government.

The road ahead

Current polls have Harper headed for another minority, where he will once again be forced to rely on the opposition to pass legislation.

Harper has argued that the current economic situation calls for a majority government that can act quickly and decisively.

“Don’t go out and vote just to have an opposition,” he said in early October, before referring to partisan fighting that stalled the American financial bailout. “We don't need a Parliament that acts and functions like the American Congress.”

Although minorities can be inefficient by nature, more negotiation means legislation is more likely to reflect a wider range of views, and increased communication can create a more transparent atmosphere.

But minorities also make it possible for parties to point the finger elsewhere when something goes wrong. And there is always instability stemming from the possibility that the opposition parties will unite to defeat the minority government.

Harper seems undaunted by the suggestion. “Whoever wins the election will have a mandate to govern," he said. "I think it will be incumbent upon the opposition parties - at least for a period of time - to respect that mandate. I think they would not do so at their peril.”

Where have you gone, FDR?

aterry — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 16:02:00 GMT

By Arthur Milnes
Canwest News Service

President Franklin D. Roosevelt prepares to begin his first fireside chat to the American people in this March 12, 1933. (Canwest News Service)

Our grandparents’ generation both survived the Great Depression and then fought a war.

In comparison, our own struggles today can be seen as minor. But for many, both in Canada and the United States, one hopes our elders will forgive our fears due to the market collapse of the last number of days.

Our pensions, RRSPs and so much more are under threat when the New York Stock Exchange drops more than $1 trillion in a day, and the S&P/TSX composite index plunges more than 800 points. The headlines are stark and the reports are only getting worse.

We are on the verge of crisis.

If our neighbours in Washington don’t soon put partisanship aside and work together, we could experience the sort of depression that hasn’t been visited upon North Americans since the Dirty Thirties our grandparents lived through.

But what is most clear right now, and especially considering both our nations are in the midst of national election campaigns, is neither Canadians or Americans today have amongst us what our grandparents had to guide them out of the darkness: a leader like Franklin Roosevelt.

"We are stricken by no plague of locusts," he said from the steps of the U.S. Capitol in his famous first Inaugural Address in March, 1933:

"Compared with the perils which our forefathers conquered because they believed and were not afraid, we have still much to be thankful for. Nature still offers her bounty and human efforts have multiplied it. Plenty is at our doorstep, but a generous use of it languishes in the very sight of the supply. Primarily this is because the rulers of the exchange of mankind's goods have failed, through their own stubbornness and their own incompetence, have admitted their failure, and abdicated. Practices of the unscrupulous money changers stand indicted in the court of public opinion, rejected by the hearts and minds of men."

Americans – and Canadians – gathered around their radios as the new president continued. Like him, they knew full well that the barons of Wall Street they had put their faith in had let them down.

"Faced by failure of credit they have proposed only the lending of more money," FDR continued.

"Stripped of the lure of profit by which to induce our people to follow their false leadership, they have resorted to exhortations, pleading tearfully for restored confidence. They know only the rules of a generation of self-seekers. They have no vision, and when there is no vision the people perish."

In John McCain and Sarah Palin, in Barack Obama and Joe Biden, it is hard to see a Roosevelt-like leader. To watch both McCain and Obama play politics in recent days with this crisis can only help one conclude how rudderless at the top our generation truly is.

"The money changers have fled from their high seats in the temple of our civilization," Roosevelt’s patrician voice announced that fateful day.

"We may now restore that temple to the ancient truths. The measure of the restoration lies in the extent to which we apply social values more noble than mere monetary profit.

Happiness lies not in the mere possession of money; it lies in the joy of achievement, in the thrill of creative effort.

The joy and moral stimulation of work no longer must be forgotten in the mad chase of evanescent profits. These dark days will be worth all they cost us if they teach us that our true destiny is not to be ministered unto but to minister to ourselves and to our fellow men."

And immediately, FDR started his New Deal and changed his country, and ours, for what we thought was forever. Government was indeed part of the solution, not the problem and so we, led by Roosevelt, moved forward together.

Our grandparents, tested by year after year of hard times, learned the hard way that business and the markets could never again be left to their own devices.

In Canada, for example, men and women who had experienced those years sat at both Progressive Conservative, CCF and Liberal cabinets in Ottawa and provincial capitals an, these memories fresh, and created medicare, pensions and regulated the "money changers" FDR had warned them about.

In our untested generation, as is painfully obvious in the past week, we moved the other way. Were Roosevelt in Washington today he‘d know what to do.

Just remember your grandparents. And hope McCain, Obama and Harper, Dion and all the rest recall them as well.

Arthur Milnes, a Fellow of the Queen’s University Centre for the Study of Democracy, is editor of the forthcoming In Roosevelt’s Bright Shadow, a collection of Presidential speeches in Canada marking the 70thanniversary of FDR’s visit to Queen’s University in 1938.

The leaders series

aterry — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 16:01:00 GMT

Canwest News Service

Liberal Leader Stephane Dion's advisers say they have witnessed "the making of a politician" during the campaign. (Shaun Best/Reuters)

Dion grew as politician as campaign unfolded

By Juliet O'Neill
Canwest News Service

TORONTO - Liberal Leader Stephane Dion's advisers say they have witnessed "the making of a politician" during the campaign for the Oct. 14 election.

Awkward and flat on the podium in the opening days, saddled with a Green Shift carbon tax plan that was a tough sell, a far more confident Dion has entered the last days of the campaign with a breeze, if not a wind, in his sails.

It took several weeks, but Dion gained his sea legs in time, his advisers hoped, for Canadians to have a second look at a man who learned on the stump how to show his conviction and to laugh at himself, especially his speaking style.

"Stephen Harper may speak better English than me," he began to tell each crowd for a guaranteed roar of approval, "but I speak the truth better than him in both official languages."

As the economy emerged as the dominant issue of the campaign, Dion less frequently used the phrase "Green Shift." Even so, he was able to incorporate his sweeping proposal to shift taxes from income onto pollution into the general debate about the economy and environment. Long before the campaign, the term "Green Shift" had been cursed by the Conservatives as "a tax on everything."

No one dared talk of a Liberal victory as the polls began to look up for Dion, but there was enough relief to reverse the assumption that the Liberals were facing the drubbing that former Liberal party president Stephen LeDrew said was not only in the works, but necessary to rebuild the party.

LeDrew's comment from the sidelines during the third week of the campaign was a public low point. Privately, a senior Liberal in Dion's entourage had already told his wife "it's all over."

After a disheartening first week on the campaign trail, the Liberals moved up by several days their plan to feature Dion with members of his "dream team" of prominent MPs, most of them former rivals for the party leadership in December 2006, and all of them better able to pump up a crowd and attract TV coverage than Dion.

The team included Michael Ignatieff, Bob Rae, Ken Dryden, Scott Brison, Dominic Leblanc and Martha Hall Findlay, most of whom have been conducting national or regional campaigns for the Liberals parallel to Dion.

A turning point for Dion was the end of the third week, when Prime Minister Stephen Harper accused him of "cheering" for a recession, when he was merely doing what any Liberal leader would do - claiming to be a better economic manager than the Conservatives as Canadians needed to brace for a spillover from economic turbulence south of the border.

Dion got angry. Fed up with what he called low blows and cheap shots from Harper, Dion fought back in off-the-cuff remarks at a farm in Belmont, Ont., and later again that evening at a rally.

His advisers said it was time to ditch the TelePrompTer for all but a couple of formal addresses for the rest of the campaign. It was the same advice an awkward Jean Chretien, who spoke garbled English, received in his early days as Liberal leader: Be yourself and let the chips fall where they may.

Edmonton is one of several cities where Layton is hoping to make gains for his party. (The Gazette)

Layton's goal of prime minister admirable, but elusive

By Mike De Souza
Canwest News Service

Ever since the last election, New Democratic Leader Jack Layton's goal was to convince Canadians he should be their next prime minister.

It has been the common theme throughout the 2008 campaign, repeated at virtually every stop on the leader's tour.

"Yes, I am Jack Layton and I'm running to be your prime minister," he told an enthusiastic crowd of about 200 supporters this week in Alberta. "I'm doing it for you and for everyday families here in Edmonton. Are you ready for a prime minister on your side?"

Edmonton is one of several cities where Layton is hoping to make gains for his party with a campaign that has focused on growth for the New Democrats at the expense of either the Conservatives or Liberals.

Fuelled by high approval ratings for his own leadership, Layton has attempted to drive home the message that he's the only one who can identify with the priorities of ordinary Canadians and deliver the goods by rolling back proposed corporate tax cuts and using the money for spending on items such as health care, child care and economic development.

"I think New Democrats would be very pleased with the way the campaign has unfolded and the enthusiasm that Jack has brought to the campaign," said Dick Proctor, Layton's former chief of staff who was an NDP MP. "I think the fact that this is his third campaign as leader is helping a lot. I think he sort of knows what he's up to, and it shows in the type of campaign that he's run."

As have the other party leaders, Layton has faced his share of bumps on the campaign trail with three candidates being forced to resign in British Columbia, one of the main battleground provinces of the election.

Video images that featured Vancouver candidate Dana Larsen appearing to consume drugs started the controversy. It eventually led to his resignation, along with fellow candidate Kirk Tousaw, because of ties to the B.C. marijuana party.

Within days, another candidate, Julian West, was forced to resign because of a stunt at an environmental conference in 1996 in which he dropped his pants in front of a group of teenage girls.

But in each case, observers say Layton dealt with the issues swiftly to avoid getting distracted from his message.

"I guess the key thing in retrospect is that it didn't stay as a lingering issue," said Patrick Smith, a political-science professor at Simon Fraser University.

"He quickly responded to it. Whether it was a wholesome response or not, we could argue, but the issue did go away. There's nobody talking about it."

Although some observers say Layton was overshadowed in the French-language debate, supporters say he rebounded with a strong performance in the English debate, hammering away at both the Conservatives for not having a platform and the Liberals for not stopping Prime Minister Stephen Harper's agenda.

"You supported Mr. Harper 43 times," Layton said, pointing his finger at Liberal Leader Stephane Dion during the debate. "His policies, your responsibility... If you can't do your job as leader of the Opposition, I don't know what you're doing running for prime minister."

Party officials enter the final days of the campaign sticking to their message that the New Democrats have a shot at forming the next government. Proctor, Layton's former adviser, acknowledged it's a shift in strategy for a party that was previously known as Parliament's conscience.

"For decades, the NDP has debated about whether we're running for government or running to be a strong third party or the principled party in the House of Commons, and I think (Layton) has decided since the last election that, `By golly, we're going to run for government and let the chips fall where they may,' " Proctor said.

"I think that was a bold decision, and probably, in the long term, the right decision."

Without money to mount an airborne campaign, May kept her name in the news by riding the rails from Vancouver to Halifax. (Natasha Fillion/The Gazette)

Winning seats: Elizabeth may, but she would if she changed tactics

By Richard Foot
Canwest News Service

The morning after the big smackdown - after a wave of public outrage forced Prime Minister Stephen Harper, NDP Leader Jack Layton and a group of TV executives to capitulate and allow Elizabeth May into the leaders' debates - May stood on a street corner in her home riding of Central Nova, greeted like a conquering hero.

Passersby patted her on the back, and drivers honked their horns or cheered from their windows.

Many had no intention of voting for the Green party, but like others across the country, all were offended that powerful forces had tried to exclude May from the debate, and their grassroots anger gave the Greens an early campaign boost like no other.

In a matter of days, this David-and-Goliath affair had transformed an upstart affiliation on the fringes of the election into a legitimate, mainstream party - a status it is unlikely to yield even if the party fails to win a seat on Tuesday.

"The fact that they got into the leaders' debates is a major stepping-stone for the Green party," says Nik Nanos, an Ottawa pollster and political watcher. "It allowed them to morph from a movement into a party. Elizabeth May changed the rules about who belongs in the debates. And she became a winner just by being there on the platform with the other leaders."

Without money to mount an airborne campaign, May kept her name in the news by riding the rails from Vancouver to Halifax, a "whistle-stop tour" notable for its novelty, that emphasized her down-to earth style and took her to small, railway towns never visited before by a campaigning federal leader.

The environmental activist and lawyer also proved her effectiveness as a communicator, explaining in simple terms the purpose of a Green tax shift - a feat that eluded Liberal Leader Stephane Dion.

"We tax the pollution, and we take the taxes off families," she said in announcing her plans for a national carbon tax.

There have been missteps along the way. May continues to be dogged by the controversy over a 2007 television statement in which she appeared to say that Canadians are "stupid."

Stephen Harper set out to run a cautious campaign with few policy surprises, and that is exactly what he has done. (Chris Wattie/Reuters)

Harper's cautious campaign runs headlong into economic turbulence

By Andrew Mayeda
Canwest News Service

VANCOUVER - Stephen Harper set out to run a cautious campaign with few policy surprises, and that is exactly what he has done - even in the face of a global financial crisis.

Heading into the campaign, the economy was emerging as the most important issue for Canadians, but few political observers expected it to crash through the windshield with such force.

Conservative strategists hoped to capitalize on Harper's strong leadership ratings to run a campaign in which the prime minister himself, rather than any bold policy ideas, took centre stage.

Political incumbents tend to fare poorly when the economy heads south, but the prospect of a slowdown actually favoured Harper, who consistently polled as the leader most trusted by Canadians to manage the economy.

On Sept. 7, when the Governor General granted the prime minister's request to dissolve Parliament, Harper laid out his pitch. The choice for Canadians, he argued, was between "certainty and risk," between the prudent approach of his party and the "risky experiments" of the Liberals and their Green Shift plan.

Harper continued to hammer away with this message in the opening week of the campaign, warning that the Liberals' proposed carbon tax would plunge the country into recession.

Meanwhile, the Conservatives rolled out a series of ads designed to cast the prime minister in a warmer light. Harper appeared in a sweater vest, chatting about the importance of family.

Despite a couple of gaffes by members of his party, Harper's strategy appeared to be working. A week into the campaign, several polls showed his party hovering around the 40 per cent threshold of support seen as necessary to form a majority government.

Then the Tories started to lose momentum, especially in Quebec. Outrage there was building to the government's plan, announced just before the election, to cut $45 million in arts and culture funding.

Harper did not help his cause in Quebec on Sept. 22, when he announced that under a Conservative government, teens as young as 14 could face life sentences for serious violent crimes. Quebec has tended to favour rehabilitation over tough sentences.

But the biggest turning point in the campaign could be the fallout from the U.S. mortgage crisis. As some of Wall Street's biggest financial institutions went under or had to be bailed out by the American government, regulators began to fear the entire financial system could collapse.

Congress eventually passed a $700-billion US bailout package, but stock markets worldwide have taken a massive hit. In the two weeks through Thursday, stocks on the Toronto Stock Exchange's main index lost well over a quarter of their value.

Amid the wreckage, Harper has struggled to find the right words to reassure jittery voters. On Monday, after unveiling a modest $8.7-billion platform, the prime minister urged the public not to panic, even suggesting the market woes were creating "great buying opportunities."

Canadian voters do not appear to be buying the Conservative message, however. Over the last week, the Tories have seen their lead over the Liberals narrow considerably.

Harper entered the campaign hoping to convince Canadians he could shepherd the country through a mild economic stormy. As it turns out, he must now weather a hurricane.

The Bloc Quebecois strategy from the outset was to run straight at Harper. (Mathieu Belanger/Reuters)

Bloc's 'block Tory majority' strategy had unexpected allies

Canwest News Service

MONTREAL - Gilles Duceppe said a lot of things this election campaign, but they all come down to the same thing: vote Bloc to stop Stephen Harper.

The Bloc Quebecois strategy from the outset was to run straight at Harper and the Conservatives in a wildly slashing attack while ignoring the rest of the field.

At the Bloc's largest rally last Sunday he was clocked invoking Harper's name 61 times in a half-hour speech without once mentioning Stephane Dion or Jack Layton, never mind Elizabeth May.

Even George W. Bush gets more mention in a typical Duceppe speech than his fellow opposition leaders.

He calls the prime minister a liar, a cheat, an arrogant and insensitive right-wing ideologue out to crush pretty well everything Quebec holds dear. Sticking firmly to the strategy, Duceppe said going into the campaign's final stretch what he said on Day 1.

"Stephen Harper is trying to get a majority to impose without limit his ideology inspired by George Bush. The battle of Quebec will be determinant because only the Bloc can block the road for the Conservatives."

Polls showing Bloc support steadily rising over the campaign suggest Duceppe's message has been getting across. If the trend holds, and there aren't legions of closet Tories lying to pollsters, the Bloc is on track to achieve its minimum goal of winning a majority of the province's 75 seats and possibly its ultimate goal of depriving Harper and the Conservatives of the additional Quebec seats they need to forge a majority.

In his fifth election as party leader, Duceppe has worked this campaign like the old pro he's become at age 61. He is the face of the Bloc and its voice; very few of his supporting cast of candidates has a profile outside their home riding. But he's also been lucky this campaign and has had a lot of help, some from unlikely sources.

No greater fortune came his way than the Conservative arts funding cut. It roused Quebec's artistic community to an anti-Harper crusade, led by some leading chansonniers in a province where having the singers onside counts for more than elsewhere in the country.

Duceppe was also able to capitalize on Conservative funding cuts to non-profit groups and regional development projects, which got local notables to side with him for photo-ops.

He lucked into help from Premier Jean Charest, who for reasons of his own took advantage of this campaign to distance himself from the Conservatives in anticipation of a provincial election campaign in which he must position himself as a staunch defender of Quebec interests against predatory federal power.

Given the outside help, not least having been granted a widely unloved Stephen Harper to kick around, a winning Bloc score on election night won't be so much a victory for Duceppe as a defeat for the prime minister.

Nor would it be much of a triumph for Quebec's sputtering sovereignty movement. In his set speeches, Duceppe pays lip service to sovereignty, but having invited anti-Harper federalists to vote Bloc as the optimal way to stop the Conservatives, he can't credibly claim a Bloc vote is an endorsement of separation, although he might well try.

If his appeal to federalists works, as it famously did with Margaret Atwood, who said she'd vote Bloc if she lived in Quebec, it would more likely suggest he's not taken very seriously as a sovereigntist any more.

Forum: The name game

jgreen — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 14:48:00 GMT

By Jenny Green
Canwest News Service

Prime Minister Stephen Harper and wife Laureen wave as they board the Conservative campaign plane - dubbed by journalists “the Sweater Vest-Jet” - in Ottawa September 7. (Chris Wattie/Reuters)

It could be argued that Canadians have had little to smile about during this election.

There has been anxious talk of a gloomy economy. Some party supporters have had their car brake lines cut. And all the polls say the chances of anyone's chosen party winning a majority are next to nil.

With days to go before Canadians choose the next government, it's time to bring some fun into Decision 2008.

How? By exercising your democratic right to poke fun at politicians.

You might have already read some of the buzzwords going around this campaign. Jack Layton has earned the nickname Taliban Jack. People who don't trust the Liberals call them the Fiberals. And there probably isn't a Canadian following the election who doesn't know that A.B.C. stands for something other than the first three letters of the alphabet.

Who comes up with these plays-on-words? Well, some of them come from journalists. It's a tradition for reporters covering elections to name the airplane they're travelling on, so, for example, Prime Minister Stephen Harper's plane has been christened The Sweater Vest-Jet.

Other monikers come from our clever readers in our comments section. We've read things like Always Bet Conservative, challenging Danny Williams' new A.B.C. acronym; and the Liberals' Green Shaft plan, a thumbs-down term for the Liberals' carbon tax plan.

There have got to be some more zingers out there. We want to see your nicknames and catch-phrases. Post them in the comments section at the bottom of the page.

They should poke fun of and perhaps also expose a little truth about your favourite – or most detested – politician or political issue.

And remember, this is all in fun. We're looking for creativity and humour, so it's not enough to just call the Prime Minister a windbag. Puns will make the cut but no profanity will be posted.

Here are some ideas to get you started:

Nickname for the political leaders or candidates
Funny names for the parties
A title you'd give to describe Election '08
A play-on-words to describe the current bickering over which party has the best solution to the economic situation
A catchy buzzword for the leaders' platforms
An epithet to describe the ad campaigns
Remember the puffin story? Why not give that a name?

Here are some examples, past and present, from both sides of the border:

• A.B.C: Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Danny Williams' official campaign to get people to vote "Anything But Conservative."

• B.M. the P.M.: Nickname for former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, first coined by morning DJs on Ottawa radio station "The Bear" in the late 1980s.

• Captain Canada: Name given to former Fisheries Minister Brian Tobin became almost a national hero for getting tough with Spain during the so-called turbot war.

• CCRAP: Unfortunate acronym for the Canadian Conservative Reform Alliance Party during the unite-the-right days. The name only stuck for a day before the party realized its mistake.

• Danny Boy: A demeaning nod to former Quebec premier Daniel Johnson Sr.'s Irish roots, who was often the butt of jokes.

• Dubya: One of many of U.S. President George W. Bush's nicknames, in reference to his Texas accent.

• FastCat Fiasco: AKA "Ferrygate," the B.C. Ferries scandal of the 1990s, where a fleet of high speed ferries ended up being hugely over-budget and slower than the ones they were built to replace.

• The Fiberals: First used to deride Dalton McGuinty's Ontario Liberal government which was perceived as breaking a number of election promises. Now also used to describe the Liberal Party of Canada due to of the sponsorship scandal.

• Le Frisé ("Curly"): One of many nicknames given to Quebec premier and former Quebec MP Jean Charest, in reference to his afro from the mid-1990s. He's also known as Patapouf (similar to "Bozo" the clown).

• Fuddle duddle: After Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau was accused of telling the opposition to "f- off" he told the press he had actually said "fuddle duddle," inspiring a whole generation of Canadians to use the expression in jest.

• Giveaway Jack: Name, first given by one of our online readers, to denote Jack Layton's excessive spending.

• Green Shaft: Name a Global News Online reader gave to the Liberals' carbon tax plan, officially known as the Green Shift.

• John McSame: Nickname for U.S. Republican hopeful John McCain, to indicate he's no different than George W. Bush, first heard in Democrat attack ads.

• King Ralph: Former Alberta Premier Ralph Klein earned this nickname because of his long stay in power and autocratic leadership style.

• The little guy from Shawinigan: Jean Chretien liked to refer to himself as a regular guy who came from the town of Shawinigan, Quebec.

• Mr. Dithers: Paul Martin became known by this unflattering name after his persona changed from tough and decisive finance minister to a prime minister who couldn't get anything accomplished.

• Professair: Name given by journalists to Stephane Dion's Election 2008 airplane, in homage to Dion's former life as a university professor.

• Rat Pack: Title given to a several young, up-and-coming Liberal opposition MPs who gave the Conservative government of the mid-1980s a run for its money. Includes Sheila Copps, Brian Tobin, John Nunziata and Don Boudria.

• Shawinigate: Name for a scandal where former Prime Minister Jean Chrétien was accused of conflict-of-interest in his hometown riding of Shawinigan, Quebec. The "gate" suffix" is commonly added to the end of words to denote a scandal, in reference to the famous Watergate scandal, for example, Bingogate, Lewinskygate, etc. Seen as a lazy wordsmith's trick.

• Sheila: Official Conservative Party nickname for the type of female voter the party is wooing this election, described as a suburban mother of two who drives a minivan.

• Super Mario: Mario Dumont, leader of Quebec's official opposition, was compared to a character in a popular videogame because he accomplished so much at such a young age (he was born in 1970.)

• The Sweater Vest-Jet: Stephen Harper's aircraft. A tribute to the Prime Minister's favourite piece of clothing during this campaign.

• Taliban Jack: An epithet given to Jack Layton by those who don't agree with his Afghanistan negotiation and exit-strategy policy.

• Ti-Pet: Lucky Pierre Elliott Trudeau's initials are P.E.T. Pet is the word used in Quebec for fart. Translation "Little Fart."

• Trudeaumania: Name to describe the almost fanatical adoration and fervor for Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau during the 1968 Liberal leadership race.

• Tunagate: Another "gate." Also plainly known as the tainted tuna scandal of 1985 in which large quantities of possibly tainted tuna were sold to the public. See "Shawinigate" for note on other "gates."

• Whistle-stop tour: Name for Green Party leader Elizabeth May's choice of transportation during this election campaign: the energy-efficient train.

• Zoey: Official Conservative Party strategy nickname given to a type of female voter the party isn't wasting its time campaigning to this election, described as a hip urban woman who eats organic vegetables.

Is that enough inspiration? Think you can do better? Scroll down to the comment box and start posting!

Spot Check: A regular look at the latest ads from the political parties

jgreen — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 10:48:00 GMT

Shannon Proudfoot
Canwest News Service

The latest Liberal ads, called “The Liberal Plan” show ordinary Canadians talking about the Liberal party, shifting the spotlight away from Stephane Dion. (Canwest News Service)

Liberals

The spot: "The Liberal Plan"

The plot: A low-key ad featuring a diverse group of "ordinary Canadians" praising the Liberals for balancing the books, bringing in universal health care and refusing to join the war in Iraq. Takes a brief jab at Stephen Harper by saying he'll force Canadians to "go it alone" in an uncertain economic climate.

The bottom line: "The Liberals know Canada's at its best when we work together instead of being told to fend for ourselves."

The message: "It makes the party, not the leader, the ballot issue," says Jonathan Rose, a political studies professor at Queen's University. "I found it interesting that it names the party `Canada's Liberals' and shows Stephane Dion literally fading into the party. Here is a case where the images speak volumes."

"It plays to the party's strengths, mainly the history that they have running the country," says Jeff Musson, a 35-year-old Windsor, Ont., voter and small business owner. "They use what seems to be ordinary Canadians (could be actors) as testimonial. Dion is not found in the ad other than a small picture at the very end (and) if you blink, you miss it."

The review: "This is a classic feel-good ad that combines a reassurance of the Liberal party with bland bromides," says Rose. "It evokes and reinforces the Liberals as the guardians of Canadian values."

"This is by far the best ad the Liberal party produced this election. Having testimonials and talking about the party's strong past make this ad very effective, in my mind," says Musson. "The Liberals should have used this marketing strategy at the beginning of the campaign instead of at the end. If they did, there may have been a significant difference in where the party stands in the polls today."

Today's buzz: Motherhood and the economy

jgreen — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 17:41:00 GMT

Kim Covert, Canwest News Service
Canwest News Service

Prime Minister Stephen Harper kicked off his federal election campaign on September 8 at the residence of the Wang family in Richmond, B.C. Harper may be returning to the persona of the homey family man he created at the beginning of the campaign. (Sam Leung/Canwest News Service)

The buzz: The economy has become a motherhood issue. In a TV interview and in speeches on Tuesday, Prime Minister Stephen Harper mentioned that his mom, who is at 24 Sussex Drive looking after the kids during the campaign, is a retired person and watching her portfolio hour by hour, as many Canadians are. He said he hears about the economy from her daily - "I get it every night."

On the campaign trail Wednesday, Harper was asked why he was suddenly talking about his mother's stock concerns.

"We're getting this criticism that somehow I don't understand the stock market, or I don't understand what people are feeling about the stock market. I use my mother as an obvious example because she's the person closest to me who's most worried about the stock market these days. And believe me, I get quicker updates from her on the stock market then I do from the Department of Finance."

The background: As the global financial crisis widens and worsens, Harper has come under increasing criticism for being out of touch with the concerns of ordinary Canadians who are watching the markets fall and seeing the value leak out of their retirement savings; or worry about how they'll hold on to their homes or feed their families if they lose their jobs. He has been lambasted by critics from all sides for not taking more obvious steps to deal with the problem.

The explanation: By invoking his retired mother, Harper could be attempting to revisit the persona created at the beginning of the campaign with his infamous sweater-vest ads, the homey family man with homey family concerns. His parents, he said, worked hard and saved in order to build better lives for their children, and that's what his government is trying to do. "The biggest thing I've learned from my parents is the most important thing about a crisis is first of all try to avoid it, (but also) have a plan way in advance."

Harper also said earlier in the day that the Conservatives are responding like ordinary Canadians who don't play "high-stakes games" in the stock market. "They don't rush out and pretend they win the lottery if the market goes up and they don't panic if the market goes down. We think more like ordinary people because we're in this for the long term."

Aloofness is Harper's worst enemy

aterry — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 10:35:00 GMT

By Barbara Yaffe
Canwest News Service

Polls now suggest a majority government is out of reach for Conservatives. (Chris Wattie/Reuters)

VANCOUVER - In the end, the decisive factor in next week's election will be Stephen Harper's trademark aloofness.

The Conservative leader's icy demeanour is dangerously dragging down his party's brand just days before the vote, the result of an excessively cerebral response to the global financial crisis.

Polls now suggest a majority government is out of reach for Conservatives.

According to the latest Harris/Decima poll, Conservatives have support of 31 per cent of decided voters - down from a high of 41 per cent one month ago.

The party's support is just ahead of Liberals, at 26 per cent, who have greater positive momentum behind them. Importantly, the Tuesday poll has Grits ahead of Conservatives in the seat-rich battlegrounds of Ontario and Quebec.

Harper's response to the economic challenge is key because his one-man-show style of leadership has resulted in him alone being the face of the party.

The PM made an aggressive bid Tuesday to reverse the downward trend in support, releasing his party's election platform - True North Strong and Free, Stephen Harper's Plan for Canada - and reassuring an elite crowd that his government has a firm hand on Canada's economic tiller.

"The worst thing a prime minister could do is respond in a way that shows panic, that you're unnerved or upset," he asserted to reporters after his speech. "That would be an extremely dangerous signal in terms of the markets."

At the same time, Harper acknowledged: "I'm not the most emotionally expressive guy."

Indeed he's not. His lack of empathy persisted through his luncheon address.

And the fact he delivered the speech to the Empire Club of Canada rather than, say, a group of seniors, did little to convince that Harper truly is feeling Canadians' pain.

He would have had to reach out and do some symbolic hand holding - express personal dismay over the fiscal mess, acknowledge what everyone knows - Canada is going to be steamrollered by a reduction in the purchase of our exports by an economically hobbled American market, talk about the worries of older workers contemplating early retirement before their stock portfolios got pummelled, lament that homes have been losing value across the country.

Instead, he stuck to a script aimed at convincing voters that his government anticipated the current problems back in August of 2007, and has taken measures to deal with them.

Harper again pointed out that economic facts in Canada differ from those in the U.S., which is in deficit and has experienced a sub-prime mortgage mess.

That Ottawa lowered taxes, tightened bank regulations, made mortgage conditions more onerous, planned for infrastructure spending and investments in research and development and technological innovation.

He argued the Conservative recipe of balanced budgets, low inflation, lower taxes and lower government spending would suffice to protect Canada. (In fact, Conservative spending has been broadly criticized for being too high.)

Intoned Harper: "It wasn't raining when Noah built his ark. When the rain came, Noah didn't panic and didn't need to switch boats."

He accused opposition leaders of panicking, offering plans that would put Canada in deficit and result in higher taxes.

But Liberal Leader Stephane Dion, whose party has been gaining in polls during the past week, has surprised many by showing an ability to put a fatherly arm around taxpayers.

Dion has referred to "the hard-earned savings of Canadians," spoken about mortgages and pensions. Dion said he'd even consider adjusting provisions that force seniors to convert their RRSPs to RRIFs at age 71.

In a news release Tuesday, the Dion asserted: "Government can be a partner with Canadians during times of turmoil."

Positively for Liberals, the economic turbulence has prompted the leader to quit speaking about his unpopular Green Shift.

Equally, NDP Leader Jack Layton has also talked at the 'micro' level, making reference to individual investors, working families, people facing job losses and retirees worried about pensions. He has focused his campaign on the kitchen table rather than the boardroom table.

Another signal Conservatives are trying to reverse polling trends: On Tuesday they cancelled plans to restrict which film and TV projects can receive tax credits. The move had upset the arts community.

Today's Buzz: Gambling at the polls

jgreen — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 17:36:00 GMT

Shannon Proudfoot
Canwest News Service

The Liberals say Prime Minister Stephen Harper's now infamous gambling ads are a direct rip-off of the failed attack ads used by Australia's John Howard in his unsuccessful re-election bid in November 2007. (Canwest News Service)

The Liberals accused Stephen Harper on Tuesday of taking another page from former Australian prime minister John Howard's playbook, citing similarities between a 2007 ad from Howard's camp and a Conservative attack ad released a few weeks ago.

The charge: Both are gambling-themed ads featuring a craps table and the opposing politician's face superimposed on red dice, with Australian Labor Party Leader Kevin Rudd starring in the 2007 ad and Liberal Leader Stephane Dion in the Canadian spot. Both ads warned voters not to gamble on election day by changing the governing party.

The Liberals earlier revealed that large portions of a speech Harper gave in the House of Commons in 2005 were lifted from a speech Howard delivered two days earlier in Australia.

Sounds familiar: The Conservatives released two other gambling-themed ads featuring Dion early in the campaign. Describing Dion as "not worth the risk" has been a common refrain for the party throughout the campaign.

In the U.S., Barack Obama's campaign created a gambling-themed ad complete with roulette table and casino music to attack John McCain's voting record on energy, middle-class tax cuts and children's health care.

The Liberals themselves aren't immune to accusations they've played the borrowing game - the NDP alleges they copied a stars-and-stripes logo the NDP created in 2004 to link Paul Martin with George W. Bush. This time around, the Liberals are using a similar logo to publicize a fictional Bush-Harper ticket and the Liberal attack website, BushHarper.ca.

Oops: In a statement, the Liberals said it wasn't surprising that Harper "would return to the well to drink from the campaign tactics of his right-wind idol," with a typo getting in the way of branding Howard as Harper's "right-wing" idol.

Tough act to follow: John Howard lost his own seat in the 2007 election and his party was defeated by Rudd's party, after 11 years in power.

Sourcing of election material closely scrutinized during the campaign

jgreen — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 09:46:00 GMT

By Shannon Proudfoot
Canwest News Service

This man won't actually benefit from the Liberal party health-care plan advertised here, because he probably is German. (Liberal Party of Canada)

As the Liberals hammer away at comparisons between Conservative Leader Stephen Harper and President George W. Bush, there's something distinctly American about the ads themselves.

The Liberal party's TV spots all feature the same male narrator who pronounces words like "economy" and "opportunity" more like a Michigan resident than a Canadian.

"It absolutely did sound oddly American," said Julia Lenardon, a voice and speech teacher at the National Theatre School, after reviewing the Liberal party's ads. "You could maybe call it a Midwest sound, a sort of American flat `a'."

The Liberals won't divulge the identity of the voice-over actor, but spokesman George Young said the party's advertising agency hired the voice-over artist - and "nationality was not a factor."

Another Liberal spokesman said "it's just a coincidence" if the voice sounds American.

It's hard to tell whether the actor is American by birth or imitating a typical American announcer's delivery, Lenardon says.

Most Canadians pronounce the vowel sound in the word "jobs" like the satisfied "Ahh!" of sinking into a warm bath, she says. But when she introduces her acting students in Montreal to the shorter and flatter American accent like the one in the Liberal ads, they immediately identify it with their southern neighbours, she says.

"Often the reaction is, 'Oh wow, that's so American!"'

From cribbed comments to visual gaffes featuring unfortunate stock photography choices, parties are running into scrutiny this campaign over where they source their materials.

The Conservatives have been dogged by revelations that Stephen Harper gave a House of Commons speech on the Iraq war in 2003 that borrowed heavily from an address by the Australian prime minister two days earlier.

The Liberals changed an ad released last week after it emerged that the older couple pictured in it are lifelong New Democrats whose on-camera smooch made its way into a stock footage archive.

The Liberal platform book contains a full-page picture of an older man in a hospital bed being cared for by two smiling doctors under the banner "A fairer Canada." It's unlikely any of the people in the photo will benefit from Canadian health care, however, as the image is a German stock photo.

Gordon McMillan, president of Ottawa ad agency McMillan, says the extreme time constraints of a political campaign are the reason parties and their ad agencies don't simply shoot their own stock images and avoid such pitfalls altogether. Some campaigns, like the NDP's, have avoided the problem by using iconic, generic images and quick turnaround Flash animation in their ads, he says.

But responding to events as the campaign unfolds requires easily accessible raw materials. "Using stock photography becomes about the only option," he said, adding that image catalogues don't provide any information about where the subjects live - or who they vote for.

As for voice-over actors, McMillan says he's surprised a Canadian political party wouldn't issue clear instructions to its ad agency to find talent that reflects its voter base.

"We work with American and Canadian firms and we actually have the opposite (problem), where we have to watch when we're sourcing Canadian talent so they don't say 'aboot,"' he said, echoing the popular consensus on how Canadians say `about.' "Really, I think for a Canadian political ad campaign, it would be absolutely critical that you would brief any firms you're working with to produce these ads to say, 'It has to be Canadian talent, and it has to be talent that votes for our party."'

FAST FACTS:

Source material-related gaffes have dogged all the parties in this campaign:

The NDP issued a mock 29th birthday greeting in honour of Stephane Dion's aging Boeing 737 early in the campaign, but the attached picture of a plane marooned on blocks and surrounded by scaffolding was actually an older 727 model.
The NDP accused the Liberals of copying a stars-and-stripes logo they created in 2004 to connect Liberal Leader Paul Martin with George W. Bush's missile defence scheme. The new Liberal version, on the other hand, is a send-up of a Bush-Harper ticket.
A Conservative attack ad aimed at the Liberals' child-care plan featured an attractive couple and their baby on a beach, but the couple actually lives in California and supports the Democrats.
The Tories were asked to remove news clips sourced from various Canadian broadcasters and posted to an anti-Dion attack site because they violated licensing policies.

Promise Tracker: A list of spending promises made by the parties during the 2008 federal election

jgreen — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 18:52:00 GMT

Canwest News Service

Promises, promises…

The party leaders are making several campaign promises every day during this election.

Having trouble keeping track of who said what?

Global News' feature, Promise Tracker, does the work for you.

Promise Tracker is a complete listing of every campaign promise made by all five parties.

The list is updated daily.

Conservatives

This week:

$20 million over four years: to induce Canadian doctors and nurses to return home to practice.
$200 million over four years: for auto sector.
$200 million over four years: for aerospace sector.
$345 million over four years: the cost to eliminate tariffs on importing machinery for the manufacturing sector.
$100 million annually: changes to the Universal Child Care Benefit.

Week four:

$300 million over four years: for regional economic development.
$60 million annually: bonuses to apprentices who finish their training.
$60 million over three years: job retraining for older workers.
$150 million annually: children's arts tax credit.
$150 million over four years: Changes to education savings programs to allow lower income families to participate.

Week three:

$24 million one-time funding: to expand cruise ship tourism along the St. Lawrence River.
$5 million annually: more consumer inspectors for gas pumps and heating meters.
$113 million over five years: to enforce environmental laws.
$10 million annually beginning next spring: increase the funding to the Youth Gang Prevention Fund.

Week two:

$200 million annually: the cost to fund a tax credit for first-time homebuyers.
$147 million annually: the cost to allow the self-employed into the EI benefits program so they can claim maternity and paternity benefits.
$80 million annually: the cost to assist families with disabled relatives.
$25 million over five years: the cost to increase funding to TV5, a Quebec-based international french language television network.

Week one:

$420 million annually: the cost to fund tax relief for seniors.
$600 million annually: the cost to cut the excise tax on diesel and aviation fuel to two cents a litre from four.
$50 million annually: the cost to restore the veterans' allowance for veterans from Commonwealth countries or Second World War allies who have live in Canada at least 10 years.
$220 million over four years: the cost to reduce the tax burden on small business.

Liberals

Week three:

$6 million annually: restore funding to the National Optics Institute, based in Quebec.
$75 million over four years: to help fund security measures for religious and cultural groups.
$620 million over four years: social housing
$500 million over four years: increase foreign aid.
$60 million over four years: for veterans suffering from post traumatic stress disorder.
$2.1 billion over four years: to implement the Kelowna Accord agreement with Aboriginal Peoples

Week two:

$350 over four years: funding for arts and culture.
$80 million over four years: safer communities.
$45 million over four years: for a gun violence and gang prevention fund.
$70 billion over 10 years: the cost of infrastructure and transit programs.
$ 482 million annually: the cost for a Guaranteed Family Supplement (part of the Green Shift)
$1.25 billion annually: the cost to create 165,000 child-care spaces.
$1.2 billion of new money over four years: cost for reform of post secondary education including changes to student loans and other student aid, and money for research and development.
$420 million: the cost to increase the number of doctors and nurses by spending more on training new professionals and assisting foreign trained health professionals earn Canadian credentials.
$900 million over four years: the cost for a program to help people pay for medications for catastrophic illnesses.
$250 million over four years: the cost of new money to combat the pine beetle infestation in British Columbia.
$250 million over four years: the cost for a green fisheries and transportation fund and to retire some fishing licences.
$70 million over four years: the cost to retire some fishing licences.
$100 million over four years: investment in small craft harbours.
$1.2 billion over four years: package for agriculture and farmers.

Week one:

$6 million annually: the cost to reinstate the court challenges program, essentially cancelled in September 2006.
$2.878 billion: the cost to create a universal child tax benefit worth $350 per child per year in addition to existing benefits for children; would take four years to implement.
$50 million over four years: the cost to increase the number of food inspectors, conduct a food safety review and hold a public inquiry on the August tainted meat recall.
$575 million over four years: the cost for programs to help consumers retrofit their homes and make low-income housing more environmentally friendly.
$800 million over four years: the cost to improve the immigration system, language training and job mentoring for new immigrants.

New Democratic Party

This week:

$4.4 billion annually by 2012: new child benefit which is open to children until age 18.
$120 million beginning next year: child nutrition program.
$1 billion annually : support for First Nations.
$100 million annually: Arctic sovereignty and infrastructure.

Week three:

$1 billion in the first year, 2011: money to offset the cost of prescription drugs.
$125 million annually: arts and culture funding.$4.4 billion annually by 2012: new child benefit which is open to children until age 18.
$120 million beginning next year: child nutrition program.
$1 billion annually : support for First Nations.
$100 million annually: Arctic sovereignty and infrastructure.

Week two:

$175 million annually: for crime prevention.
$2.5 billion over four years: the cost of a home care plan for seniors.
$1.45 billion annually: the cost to fund 150,000 child-care spaces.
$100 million annually: to expand the training and apprentice tax credit.
$120 million annually: the cost to fund women's organizations.
$200 million annually: the cost to hire more family doctors and nurses.

Week one:

$8.2 billion over four years: the cost to create green collar jobs, invest in low emission vehicles, a made-in-Canada procurement policy, create a jobs commissioner to investigate shutdowns, and create 40,000 jobs in the automotive sector.
$1 billion annually: the cost of an investment in public transportation. This includes $400 million per year in gas tax money.
$2.89 billion over four years: the cost of an energy efficiency retrofit program for residential and commercial buildings.

Green Party

Week two:

$19.1 billion next year: the overall cost to implement the full platform.
$6.2 billion next year: the cost to buy carbon credits to meet Canada's Kyoto Accord commitments.
$5.2 billion next year: the cost of carbon tax rebates for taxpayers.
$16.2 billion next year: the cost of a carbon tax holiday for business.
$5 billion next year: the cost for income splitting for all adults.

Week one:

$ 8.6 billion over three years: to help relieve student debt and increase funding to the provinces for post-secondary education.

Today's buzz: It's the economy, Stephen

jgreen — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 18:08:00 GMT

Kim Covert
Canwest News Service

Prime Minister Stephen Harper, seen here with his wife Laureen in Ottawa October 6, may be doing anxious voters a disservice by not releasing his party's platform. (Chris Wattie/Reuters)

The buzz:

On a day when at one point the TSX fell more than 1,200 points during trading (it closed down 573 points), and in the fallout of a Scotia Capital report that said Canada is heading into a recession, Prime Minister Stephen Harper acknowledged the global economic turmoil Monday. "Look, we're not an island," he said, adding government officials are meeting with their G7 counterparts to see if a "co-ordinated" response is in order.

But then he added that Canada's fundamentals are sound.

"We cannot pretend and we're not pretending that we will escape effects of world developments, but what we can do is make sure that we're doing the proper things in Canada to make sure our banking system is stable - we'd done that, we're doing that - to make sure our finances are in good position and that we can invest in things that can cause long run job creation."

The background:

The way political branding works, each of the major parties is seen to have mastery in one area: for the Liberals it's national unity; for the NDP it's labour. And the Conservatives are seen as the best stewards of the economy. Two weeks ago, Ipsos Reid CEO Darrell Bricker, responding to a poll that saw the Conservative star rising as the U.S. economy tanked, said the Conservatives are "given a pass" when it comes to the economy, especially if there's no recent evidence of bad budgeting.

But more recent polls have shown support for the Conservatives falling as the economic turmoil spreads. So why wouldn't the party be ahead when it appears that its perceived strengths will be the ones needed to see Canada through the crisis?

The explanation:

It could be that Harper's relaxed attitude on the economy is working against him. In the last week of the campaign, he has yet to present his party's platform. His "don't worry" stance may no longer be soothing to Canadians who are becoming increasingly worried about their investments, their savings, their mortgages.

Liberal Leader Stephane Dion appears to have been speaking for the rest of the country when he said Monday, "For the last weeks we told him that he needs to wake up and to say to Canadians that indeed, we have tough times and indeed the government will help you."

While he may believe that the economy's fundamentals are strong, Harper doesn't seem to be winning any brownie points by saying so.

Leaders wanted

jgreen — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 12:07:00 GMT

By Gord Henderson
Windsor Star

Canada's major political party leaders get set for their pre-debate photo-op in Ottawa on October 2. Gord Henderson wonders why none of them has the leadership to inspire Canadians. (Blair Gable/Reuters)

WINDSOR - How did a nation of 33 million souls, a nation with a seemingly inexhaustible supply of smartass comedians, soaring rock stars and combative hockey players, turn into a wasteland when it comes to political talent?

About an hour into this week's English-language "leadership" debate, an hour I can never get back, my mind wandered and I started thinking about poor Joe Clark.

Remember Joe? Remember the bayonet-embracing, arithmetic-challenged klutz from High River who was PM for approximately five minutes and spent most of his political career being either knifed in the back by party plotters or kicked in the groin by Canadians who didn't think he had the right stuff?

Well it turns out it's all about timing, because the Joe Clark who once provided chinless fodder for cartoonists would have made chowder out of the cold fish who offered themselves up to Canadians this week. He would have eaten these small fry alive, which speaks volumes about the draining of Canada's political talent pool.

Where is Pierre Trudeau when we really need him? How could a country that produced orators and visionaries of the calibre of Trudeau and John Diefenbaker be reduced to choosing between the frozen android, Stephen Harper, and the uninspiring also-rans who would take his place?

The one glimmer of hope Thursday night came from Elizabeth May, the spunky Green party leader who proved to Canadians that they were dead right in demanding she be included in the debate.

May, a U.S.-born environmental lawyer, showed she belonged (which isn't saying much) and oozed confidence as she repeatedly rattled Harper's chain.

The highlight of the evening was Harper grinning awkwardly and saying nothing, like the kid caught with his mitt in the cookie jar, while a finger-wagging May gave him a piece of her mind. At 54, she's only five years older than Harper, but the moment reeked of mom and her bratty son. I half expected May to toss this bad boy over her knee and administer a damn good spanking.

Patron saint of lost causes

May's problem, and the problem for Canadian voters, is that she leads a children's crusade of no-name candidates, some barely out of high school and still battling zits, and will be lucky to win her own election fight, let alone lead a Green contingent into Parliament. I hope she has St. Jude, patron saint of lost causes, working the phones.

What are the alternatives? I know it's unfair but NDP Leader Jack Layton makes me think of a Fuller Brush salesman. Not that I have anything against salesmen. But he should lose the moustache and that smug, bantam rooster arrogance. If you were stuck on a desert island with Layton and had to listen to him pontificate day after day, you might consider ending it all with a broken clam shell.

Liberal Leader Stephane Dion is brilliant, courageous and a man of integrity. So what's not to like? Sadly, the guy couldn't sell himself to save his soul. He's your classic geek, the pointy-headed academic who rules the lecture hall, and it remains a mystery how Liberal delegates concluded he might have the royal jelly.

Bloc Leader Gilles Duceppe, the former union organizer who has spent 18 years working to break up Canada and is now in line to collect cash for life from Canadian taxpayers, appeared bored to tears. And why not? His high-stakes show was the French-language debate the previous night. Thursday was a yawn-inducing afterthought.

And then there's Harper. I'm still having trouble, two-and-a-half years on, getting my head around the idea he's our prime minister. Stiff, distant, with the iciest blue eyes I've ever seen, he projects all the warmth of a backroom right-wing policy wonk, which is what he was before entering the political arena. He seemed even more withdrawn Thursday, like a tired boxer leaning on the ropes, ducking and dodging, confident he's ahead on points and unwilling to chance a knockout.

We are bereft of real leadership as a nation. We're not hearing the visionary, nation-building ideas every country needs to inspire its citizens. We're headed, at a cost of $300 million, back to the status quo, an unstable minority government.

Meanwhile, the folks next door, after enduring eight years of knuckle-headed leadership, appear set to elect Barack Obama, an orator for the ages who gushes charisma, as their next president. The contrast will be painful.

Little wonder Harper wanted this election out of the way.

'A powerful group': How parties are courting the female factor

jgreen — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 12:42:00 GMT

By Shannon Proudfoot
Canwest News Service

Liberal leader Stephane Dion speaks to the media, surrounded by female party members attending the Liberal Celebration of Women in Politics rally in Toronto on September 28. The Liberal party has the highest percentage of women candidates running in this election. (Mark Blinch/Reuters)

Women - the target of campaign tactics from warm-and-fuzzy commercials aired on female-centric specialty channels to family focused promises - are centre stage in the election arena.

"They want our votes. Being 52 per cent of the population, we can be a very powerful group," says Jennifer Sweeney, president of the Canadian Women Voters Congress, which encourages women to participate in the political process. "However, I think people assume that women will vote for the same things, that we're all somewhat alike."

Women have more diversified voting habits than men and more of them gravitate to parties that focus on social and environmental issues, says Darrell Bricker, CEO of Ipsos Reid Public Affairs. Ipsos polls show women are more likely to support the Liberals, NDP and Greens than men, and for the NDP and Greens, that support is highest among female voters aged 18 to 34.

The Liberals have traditionally received "a real bonus out of the women's vote," Bricker says, but that advantage is slipping.

The biggest reason is lack of confidence in the leadership of the party, believes Kathy Brock, a political studies professor at Queen's University in Kingston, Ont. An environmental "tug of war" among the left-of-centre parties is also causing the Liberals to lose female support to the NDP and Green party, she adds.

"The Liberals are a little later off the mark," she says, adding that the party is now airing ads with female voice-overs talking about what Stephen Harper's economic policies mean for them. "I think perhaps they took it for granted at first, but now they realize they really have to shore up the vote there."

For the Conservatives, female voters are a traditional weak spot they're trying to turn into a new source of support, she says.

According to analysis by PunditsGuide.ca, women are the minority in just 42 of 308 federal ridings.

"The Conservatives know they've got to pull some of that vote if they're going to come ahead in some of the ridings where they're close," Brock says.

Conservatives direct their message to "Sheila"

According to a Conservative source, the party is "narrowcasting" its advertising message on specialty networks and TV shows that are popular among women, such as YTV and the Food Network, and in movie theatres before family friendly films. They have identified voting groups by nickname and decided they are not going after "Zoey," a hip urban woman who eats organic vegetables, but instead are targeting "Sheila," a suburban mother of two who drives a mini-van.

"The lowest hanging fruits would be moms with two children," the Conservative says. "With each child you have, the more likely you are to vote Conservative."

Ads featuring a sweater-vested Stephen Harper are an effort to soften up his image with female voters, the party source says, and an ad entitled "$1,200" that claims the Liberals will revoke the Universal Child Care Benefit is also specifically aimed at that demographic.

The Harper "makeover" ads are a "brilliant" way to connect with female voters, says Nadine Changfoot, a professor of politics at Trent University in Peterborough, Ont.

She showed the spot in which Harper discusses his relationship with his son to her class, and one of her students immediately concluded he must be in favour of childcare since he's a devoted father, she says.

Campaign proposals aren't crafted according to the whims of focus groups or other opinion research, says former Liberal party strategist John Duffy, but voter feedback tells parties which pre-drafted policies to pull off the shelf and go with.

"When it works, it moves large amounts of votes," he says. "If you can bring together a policy, a leader and a concern that's out there in the public, lightning can strike."

But in focusing on certain voting segments, it's a mistake to assume an entire gender can be wooed by the same message or campaign promises, Sweeney says.

People never talk about "men's issues" as a niche interest in the same way they speak of women's issues, she says, and there's a mistaken perception that women don't care about topics such as the economy, budgets or crime.

Other issues such as education and childcare are treated as female-specific when they should be of importance to all voters who want strong communities, she adds.

"I don't have children but I care about the children in my neighbourhood and I want them to grow up happy and healthy," says Sweeney. "But I don't think that makes me any different from my husband."

More women than ever running in election

Women are also participating as candidates in record numbers in this campaign. In all, there are 446 women running in this election, compared to 379 in 2006 and 377 in 2004.

According to PunditsGuide.ca, the Liberals have 113 female candidates comprising 37 per cent of their national slate, while the NDP has 105 women representing 34 per cent of its candidates. With 89 female candidates, the Green party has 29 per cent, while the Conservatives are fielding 63 women candidates or 21 per cent of their total. Twenty-one of the Bloc's 75 Quebec candidates are women, amounting to 28 per cent of the total.

But Canada currently ranks 51st internationally in terms of elected female representatives, below countries like Burundi and United Arab Emirates, says Francoise Gagnon, executive director of Equal Voice, which promotes the election of women.

"If we'd gone to the Olympics and we'd placed 51st, every columnist in this country would be writing, 'What's wrong with our sports funding? Why aren't we promoting athletes?"' she says. "Well, we're 51st internationally in terms of female representation. It's not because we don't have qualified, educated, articulate women in this country. Why aren't we addressing the barriers?"

With files from Andrew Mayeda

FAST FACTS:

Trent University politics professor Nadine Changfoot gives her take on each party's ideal female voter:

Conservatives

Age: 40s, 50s

Income: Makes ends meet plus some (above average)

Location: Lives in urban, suburban area

Education: College or university

Family: Married with children; children are in college or university. Has senior parent(s).

Hot button issue: Family and economic stability

Liberals

Age: 30s and up

Income: Makes ends meet plus some (above average)

Location: Lives in urban, suburban area

Education: College or university

Family: Married with or without children; children are in college or university

Hot button issue: Change from Conservative party

NDP

Age: 20s and up

Income: Working hard to make ends meet

Family: Married with or without children

Hot button issue: Family and personal needs aren't being met the way they'd like (i.e. no doctor, jobs that pay the bills, child care); believes in publicly funded child care, job creation programs, health care.

Green party

Age: 20s-30s, younger generation

Income: Working hard to make ends meet

Family: Single or married; no children (yet)

Hot button issue: Environment; need for change from political establishment

Harper fends off leaders' barbs with diplomacy in English debate

jgreen — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 18:34:00 GMT

By Barbara Yaffe
Canwest News Service

Prime Minister Stephen Harper fielded off attacks from every opposition leader during the English-language debate on October 2. (Tom Hanson/Reuters)

The imperative Thursday night was for Stephane Dion to make a strong, positive impression in order to rescue a faltering Liberal campaign.

The Liberal leader went a fair distance in doing that, speaking passable English and landing several punches on Stephen Harper.

He forcefully called the Conservative leader "an imprudent man," inspired by the philosophy of George W. Bush, a laissez-faire leader who doesn't understand the important role government can play.

Dion's clear advantage was that expectations of him going into the English-language debate were so low.

As of Thursday, daily polling by Nanos Research had Liberals at 26-per-cent support, well behind Conservatives with 37 per cent. New Democrats were at 19 per cent, Greens at eight per cent.

The English debate was important for Harper because his recent call for tougher justice for young offenders and planned cuts to arts funding has stalled the party's Quebec support, which will force Conservatives to look for more Ontario votes in order to achieve a majority government.

The dynamic that had dominated the French-language debate the evening before was at play once again Thursday, with four party leaders all ganging up on Harper.

Harper cool, calm and collected

And again, the Conservative leader reacted to the onslaught of criticism with diplomacy and calm. His aim was clearly to sound reasonable and prime ministerial, which he did with the exception of one exchange in which Harper was challenged on whether he'd have sent troops to Iraq had he been prime minister in 2003.

"That's not my position," he mumbled, despite the fact that he is on record back then speaking strongly in favour of Canada's participation in Bush's coalition of the willing.

Green Leader Elizabeth May repeatedly tore strips off Harper, lambasting his policy interpretations and occasionally wagging a finger at him. She spoke over him as he delivered his responses, correcting statements that she viewed as misleading.

Dion, who had been praised by poll respondents for his Wednesday French-language debate performance, had a tougher job in English. And stakes were higher because so many more ridings are involved in English Canada.

The Liberal leader put serious effort into defending his party's Green Shift, which has been such a tough sell.

When Harper asserted the Liberal policy would feature tax increases twice the size of any cuts, Dion reacted disdainfully: "Mr. Harper, it's a lie. It's not true at all . . . Don't believe this man. We don't need this kind of leader any more."

Dion also needed to look good enough to marginalize Jack Layton, whose New Democrats are making an aggressive bid to replace the Liberals as official opposition in the Commons.

Firing volleys at both Harper and Layton, the Liberal leader said: "We have the I-don't-care approach and the far-too-socialist approach."

He added that the Liberals' centrist approach "has always been good for Canada and is the one we need to follow now."

Layton waged a passsionate fight

Layton was certainly not marginalized. The NDP leader was feisty and effective, attacking both Harper and Dion on everything from protection for public health care to cuts to arts funding to the Afghanistan mission.

Layton passionately raised the plight of aboriginal people in Canada, citing communities where children sleep in shifts for lack of beds and adequate housing.

Some of the most vigorous exchanges focused on the Harper government's handling of the economy.

Over and over, Harper insisted his government had put in place measures to stimulate key sectors of the economy and that Canada was not in as bad fiscal shape as the U.S.

Scolded Layton: "The economy is not fine . . . either you don't care or you're incompetent."

Harper said he personally had been "between jobs, and I understand (economic insecurity). I believe all you guys are sincere in what you're saying but the policies you're advocating would mean ramping up spending and going into deficit."

Layton prodded Harper to tell the audience what his election platform is, and noted that Conservatives are alone in not having released a platform. "Where's your platform?" he asked Harper, "Under your sweater?"

It was a good line, but chances are, the lines were better in the Biden-Palin debate.

SPOT CHECK: A regular look at the latest election campaign ads

jgreen — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 18:14:00 GMT

Canwest News Service

Green Party leader Elizabeth May speaks about the economy in one of her "moving train" election ads. (Green Party of Canada/You Tube)

Green party

The spot: "Elizabeth May on the Economy"

The plot: The Greens released their first-ever TV ads as a set of five, all with the same low-budget look of a single camera filming leader Elizabeth May speaking on topics ranging from democracy to nature while the Canadian landscape whizzes past her train window. The economy ad focuses on the close ties between the Canadian and U.S. economies and the need to shore up employment at home with local food and energy production.

The bottom line: "Let's invest in Canada to have Canadian workers making goods and services for Canadians. It makes us stronger."

The message: "It is trying to expand the knowledge of (the party) by saying it's not just environment, although they would say it's connected to everything," says Nelson Wiseman, a political scientist at the University of Toronto.

The review: "I thought the production values could have been better. There were a lot of dark, shady spots where you didn't see her face, so that wasn't well done. (The message) doesn't differentiate them. People identify the Green party not so much with what she was talking about and, if it does win anybody over, it won't be Conservatives, or very few. It will win over Liberal or NDP voters, people who aren't that attached."

Today's buzz: 'I'm running for prime minister,' declares Layton

aterry — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 16:57:00 GMT

Larissa Liepins
Canwest News Service

NDP leader Jack Layton said Friday that voters are tired of being told they have only two choices at the ballot box: Liberal and Conservative. (The Gazette)

The buzz:

Call it ambitious - if not presumptuous - but Jack Layton aimed higher on Friday than we're used to seeing from the leader of a national party that's never even formed the official Opposition.

The NDP leader said voters are tired of being told they have only two choices at the ballot box: Liberal and Conservative.

"What I hoped became clear from the (televised leaders') debate is that I'm running for prime minister, and there's two others that are presenting themselves, one of whom who supported the other for the last year," Layton said at a campaign stop in Montreal.

The background:

"Ever since the NDP was created, there has been debate within that party about whether to aspire to power, or whether it is primarily a vehicle for protest and opposition," says Akaash Maharaj, a University of Toronto academic and former national policy chair of the Liberal Party of Canada.

"And indeed, one of the greatest criticisms its critics and other parties have levelled against it has always been that a vote for the NDP is a wasted vote because, no matter what the virtues or vices of the policies they embrace, they will never be in a position to implement them, not least because they don't aspire to form government."

The explanation:

"(Layton) does recognize that, though there is no possibility of his becoming prime minister after this election, there is a modest, though real possibility, that he could become leader of the Opposition," Maharaj said.

"But if he aspires to take that position, Canadians recognize that leaders of the Opposition, if they are to be effective, must be prime ministers-in-waiting. So by striking that posture, he makes it more likely that he might be considered a viable option for Canadians who wish to see a change in government."

For a struggling Dion, good debate may be not good enough

aterry — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 23:31:00 GMT

By Don Martin
Canwest News Service

Liberal Party Leader Stephane Dion, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper. (Blair Gable/Reuters)

OTTAWA - On a night when Liberal leader Stephane Dion had to defend his grand green scheme, define his leadership potential and deliver the message in the most coherent English of his political career in order to survive, he got it done. Almost.

The question as this debate limped along without serious sparks or substance: Was his target audience watching?

That clicking you could hear half an hour into Thursday's debate - the sleepier of the two - was the sound of remotes turning to the U.S. vice-presidential debate blanketing the American networks.

But for Dion, the stakes were unnaturally high as a Liberal party that's been around since Confederation was at risk of losing its status as one of the top two national parties from a stubbornly resilient New Democrat Party while his leadership ratings continue to tank.

Dion oozed sincerity and exceeded low advance expectations by communicating reasonably well as he strove to reverse the damage of an 18-month Conservative campaign to discredit his character as pale, passive and priority-challenged.

Following up a performance that seemed to impress Quebecers in the French debates, despite his bizarre move during the first debate to introduce a 30-day economic consultation project if elected prime minister, Dion delivered blanket feel-your-pain responses to every question.

Unfortunately he can't be declared a standout winner because Prime Minister Stephen Harper was far more engaged than the previous debate and deflected the group attacks with relative ease.

Harper had obviously spotted danger in a recovering Dion and went for the jugular within seconds of the debate's opening, no longer the restrained above-the-fray French debate participant mocked in some pundit reviews Thursday as a Valium-drugged.

He denounced Dion as an election rival "panicked" by his trembling poll numbers into a knee-jerk economic policy.

The New Democrats, whose leader Jack Layton was deemed by polled viewers as a French debate loser, had to shine in his bid for Official Opposition leader.

But he failed to recognize that Dion is his most dangerous electoral competition, wasting most of his breath attacking the prime minister and leaving the Liberal leader to sound a more rational and reasonable option for those advocating government intervention in the economy.

Green leader Elizabeth May, bless her, showed flashes of debating brilliance even on issues outside her environmental specialization.

She moved hard against Harper from the get-go by demanding the prime minister produce a platform which, come to think of it, is rather late in coming, and accusing him of being an environmental "fraud" for the second night in a row.

But the more she talked, the less she seemed anything more than a protest ballot or a place to park a vote for a public disgusted by all of the above.

Oh, right. I almost forgot. Bloc Quebecois leader Gilles Duceppe was there as a protocol obligation. Enough said.

It was a far snoozier exchange than the French version and the more you listened to the four-leader opposition pile-on, the more favourably isolated Harper became as the only party leader in favour of tax decreases and opposed to a massive government intervention to prop up the manufacturing sector.

Of course, the search for a win-lose-or-draw ranking assumes that these debates matter and votes sway dramatically in the aftermath, a doubtful theory given an electoral history of these chat room winners becoming ballot-box losers.

But with Conservative strategists confiding the government majority that was at their fingertips two weeks ago is now a brass ring lunge out of their grasp, every bit helps. The recent lost love for Harper in Quebec has hit the campaign with a harsh dose of reduced expectations, even though the ultimate result of another Conservative government is not in much doubt.

It will now take a continuing collapse of Liberal support in Ontario and B.C. for Harper to make up the alleged lost gains in Quebec.

Perhaps Dion's performance has stemmed some of the bleeding. But out in the real world where the debates were simply a regular program pre-empting irritant, even supposedly safe candidates report frosty doorsteps and the party's organization on the ground seems shallow and in such disarray that insiders are worried they'll have trouble identifying and getting out their vote.

Liberal party volunteers in the regions where electoral recovery is possible desperately needed a morale boost from the English debate last night.

Dion's pivotal performance won't have them cowering with embarrassment at having a disaster of a leader, but it fell short of captivating enough for the battered Liberal brand to stage a miracle comeback.

Spot check: A regular look at the latest ads from the parties

aterry — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 18:53:00 GMT

By Shannon Proudfoot
Canwest News Service

"The ad is effectively trying to tie Harper to Bush and Howard," says Jeff Musson, a 35-year-old Windsor, Ont., voter. (Jim Young/Reuters)

Liberals

The Spot: "Harper, Howard, Bush and Iraq"

The plot: Reminds Canadians "how proud you felt when Canada's Liberals told Bush, `No way' on Iraq," alongside an image of the House of Commons giving a standing ovation to Jean Chretien.

Says Stephen Harper - "ashamed of his country" - was opposed to that decision and "stole" comments from "Bush's strongest pro-war ally," Australian Prime Minister John Howard, in order to say so.

The bottom line: "Harper parroted his words and would have followed him to Iraq. That's the real Harper. Do you really want more of this?"

The message: "The message they're trying to send with this ad is very similar to the message Paul Martin tried to send in 2004 and again in 2006. You knew it was coming, you were just wondering when," says Darrell Bricker, CEO of Ipsos Reid Public Affairs.

"The message is, if this guy gets a majority government - if you give Stephen Harper a majority government - this is probably what he would have done with it. This is the anti-majority message."

"The ad is effectively trying to tie Harper to Bush and Howard," says Jeff Musson, a 35-year-old Windsor, Ont., voter and small business owner of Dynamite Network Solutions, an IT company.

"The Liberals are trying to tie the judgment of Harper supporting the Iraq war to his judgment as PM. "

The review:

"The reason it's effective is because there still is this nagging doubt about whether or not Stephen Harper has a hidden agenda, and this gives it content," says Bricker.

"It reminds people with words Stephen Harper used himself of what his intentions might be if another issue like this comes up."

"Bush is unpopular and Howard lost his election over Iraq, and the Liberals are trying to tie that unpopular war to Harper. They can't do it for the Afghan war, because Paul Martin sent us into that war," says Musson.

"(The ad is) effective, but shows the Liberals are desperate at knocking down Harper's favourable rating."

No clear winner in French-language debate

jgreen — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 23:23:00 GMT

By Don Martin
Canwest News Service

The leaders of Canada's major political parties pose before the French leaders' debate in Ottawa, October 1, where no one leader landed a knockout punch. (Chris Wattie/Reuters)

For a few minutes, it was the most awkward fan club in Canadian political history.

The five French language debate participants Wednesday were forced to gush about the leader to their left in a tense roundtable as they squared off in the battle for Quebec.

It was a rare moment of levity as they struggled to articulate something positive while wrapping their reluctant compliments around their own record of achievement.

But debates are not about mutual admiration. They are about stealing support at the expense of the other guy (or gal) by any possible means.

That set up two parallel showdowns. The fight to carry the province boiled down to Prime Minister Stephen Harper versus Bloc Quebecois Leader Gilles Duceppe. There is really no realistic third option to claim a majority of the 75 seats.

The other three leaders were finger-wrestling for the leftovers, concentrated on the island of Montreal.

The narrow target audience always complicates picking the clear winner in a French-language leaders debate. An anglophone columnist with Alberta roots trying to decipher the impact of leaders fighting for the hearts of Quebec francophones with sovereigntist leanings is, at best, instinctive.

So at the risk of playing it too safe, let me fearlessly declare there was no runaway winner or obvious loser.

The roundtable format worked well and there was enough adult supervision from the moderator to prevent the unprecedented handful of participants from drowning each other out.

With so many Quebec voters in political limbo, dangling enough swayable seats to crown a powerful king as majority prime minister or keep Parliament squabbling as a minority government, Harper's performance was arguably the most important of his political career.

Harper kept his cool

It was a calm and surprisingly laid back delivery, and at times he seemed bemused by the group gang-up that was trying to goad him into losing his temper. To his credit, he kept his cool and did nothing to alarm the electorate over a hidden agenda or dangerous economic or environmental policy.

Going in, his challenge was to calm the hue and cry over arts funding cuts and explain why adult sentences for 14-year-old kids are justifiable justice, both particularly tough sells in Quebec. While he didn't inflame the debate, neither did he extinguish it.

But in a grander sense, Harper had to convince the sovereigntist fence-sitters that a powerful government mandate will better represent their unique interests than a Bloc party that has lost its raison d'etre under a leader clearly in pre-retirement mode.

To that end, and assuming these debates actually change voter behaviour, he may have fallen short in swaying the block of Bloc seats he'll need to land a majority in Quebec seats.

That's because that old master of these debates, the Bloc's Gilles Duceppe, adequately defended his party's right to exist in a federal state long after his party was supposed to fold its tent and retreat to a semi-sovereigntist state.

It's arguably the first French debate in Canadian history where the once-invincible Liberals were marginalized to the Quebec sidelines, the goal of Leader Stephane Dion having been reduced to a scramble for survival in his party's trembling 11-seat Montreal island.

In that context and as a rehearsal for his critical performance tonight, Dion was underwhelming at times, a faded force of personality dwarfed by the testy exchanges surrounding him.

If he's smart he'll stop waiting to be recognized with his hand in the air tonight and dive into the debate. His segment on the environment, where he should've shone as the only leader campaigning on a carbon tax, was strangely weak, although he redeemed himself somewhat with an forceful assault on Harper's partisan behaviour and a more spirited finale on the Afghanistan question.

It was also the first time when the New Democrats had a single seat to protect in Quebec and perhaps a couple to gain. Leader Jack Layton delivered a solid attack on the Harper record, advancing an agenda that will put him in ideal position to challenge the Liberals for more seats in Montreal area if that party is reduced to a smouldering car wreck on election day.

And, of course, Green Leader Elizabeth May delivered the most fearless and feisty display of debate aggression, betraying no nervousness or hesitation in challenging the dark suits with a particularly strong slam on the Conservative's environmental record.

John Turner: the pilot who weathered the storm

aterry — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 11:22:00 GMT

By Thomas S. Axworthy

Left to right- Brian Mulroney, John Turner and Ed Broadbent. (Wayne Cuddington/The Citizen)

As our national party leaders participate in televised debates this week, it is a good time to recall perhaps the greatest election debate in our history, the televised showdowns between Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and Liberal leader John Turner 20 years ago this month.

It was the famous 1988 Free Trade Election and until the leaders, including Ed Broadbent of the NDP, stood before the cameras that fall, Canada’s Progressive Conservatives were in the midst of a relatively easy election victory.

But as Turner showed that year, debates can matter. Though Mulroney went on to win and the Free Trade Agreement was to become a reality, the PC victory that year was anything but easy -- because of Turner.

Turner reached the summit of Canadian politics by becoming Prime Minister, though only briefly, four years before the debates of 1988. He had had a golden career, rarely making a mistake, before his resignation in 1975. But his return to active politics in 1984 was rocky.

“A week is a long time in politics”, said Prime Minister Harold Wilson of Great Britain, and Turner had been away for nearly eight years. In the 1984 television debate, Mulroney clearly bested him and a proud man leading a proud party was reduced to 40 seats, only 10 ahead of the NDP.

As the 1988 election approached, the media conceded victory to Mulroney and said the real question was whether Ed Broadbent’s NDP would replace Turner’s Liberals as the Official Opposition. We are seeing some of the same reporting and commentary today.

One man, though, made a difference, 20 years ago this fall. Turner turned the situation around with the old-fashioned idea that election campaigns are about issues and platforms, not personalities and polls.

He had read every paragraph of the 1,407-page Free Trade Agreement that Mulroney’s government had signed with the United States. Defeating that agreement, he said, was “the cause of my life”.

Waving the agreement before crowds in community halls, school gymnasiums, and church basements, Turner ignited Canadians. In the French and English television debates on October 24 and 25, 1988, he marginalized Broadbent and confronted Mulroney.

The last 15 minutes of the English language debate was the best performance of Turner’s career. Those 15 minutes saved the Liberal Party.

Turner did not win the 1988 election. His debate performance, however, briefly moved the Liberals into the lead. “I have never been more serious in my life,” he told Mulroney, his eyes steely blue once again, as million of Canadians watched.

This, in turn, galvanized the Conservatives and the business community who spent millions of dollars in advertising to “bomb the bridge” of Turner’s credibility. The Conservatives won a majority, and the Free Trade Agreement became law.

But Turner doubled the number of Liberal seats and it was clear that if the Conservatives stumbled, it would be the Liberals who profited.

Speculation about the NDP replacing the Liberal Party ceased. When Turner retired in 1990, the Liberals were poised to dominate the decade.

Turner’s character is defined even more by his defeats than by his successes. He never gave up. In 1988, he soldiered on, nearly alone, a bad back aching. He never lost faith in the kind of Canada that had given him such an opportunity to shine.

We will never know if he would have made a great Prime Minister; we do know that he was a great Liberal leader who remained true to the verities of one era, while trying to adapt to the demands of another. For the Liberal Party, he was the pilot who weathered the storm.

Thomas S. Axworthy is Chair of the Centre for the Study of Democracy (CSD) at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario. He’s been a long-time Liberal and was speechwriter and policy adviser to Pierre Trudeau. The CSD is hosting a Tribute Conference and re-enactment of the Great Debate of 1988 at Queen’s University on Oct. 24 – the 20th anniversary of the first Mulroney-Turner debate in the 1988 election campaign. See www.Queensu.ca/csd for further details.

Suddenly, French debate pivotal for Harper

aterry — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 10:47:00 GMT

By Don Martin
Canwest News Service

The French-language leaders' debate Wednesday night has taken on epic importance for Stephen Harper's ambition to land a "strong mandate". (Tom Hanson/Reuters)

OTTAWA -He's still a pariah, but the man's got a hard-to-ignore record as a prophet.

Former prime minister Brian Mulroney called the Conservative election bus in the middle of the 2006 campaign to guarantee a nine-seat gain in the party's Quebec dead zone. We laughed at such poll-defying optimism.

Two weeks later, they won 10 seats.

Now ostracized by Prime Minister Stephen Harper's government until an inquiry over his business links to former arms dealer Karlheinz Schreiber wraps up, Mulroney is still spinning his blue-chip Rolodex to take the province's political pulse. A week or so ago, he started telling friends the Conservatives would claim at least 20 more seats in Quebec.

There you have it: with an easy six-pack of seat pickups from the rest of Canada, the Stephen Harper majority was in the bag.

But in the last few days, a big `whoa-there' was slapped on Mulroney's bold prediction and loyalists have moved to downplay talk of the Conservatives being Quebec-handed the keys to the parliamentary kingdom.

Forget the big gains, they confide, there may even be current seats at risk. Yikes.

That's why the French-language leaders' debate Wednesday night has taken on epic importance for Harper's ambition to land a "strong mandate" to enact a youth-crime agenda, perhaps cut some more arts funding and generally rule Canada as he sees fit.

The Conservatives' promise to impose adult sentences on 14 year olds and their pledge to shave $45 million from arts fundingare the sort of twin initiatives that would elect 50 Conservative MPs from Alberta, if only the province wasn't limited to 28 ridings.

But in the twin solitude of Quebec where the results are still in flux, it's turned into the double-whammy of electoral setbacks.

Quebec singer Michel Rivard's hilarious art-censorship satire, available for viewing on YouTube, has done more to reverse Harper's momentum than all the French attack ads by the Bloc Quebecois and Liberals combined. And Harper's thus-far refusal to appear for the requisite humbling on the Tout le monde en parle Sunday television phenomenon is viewed in Quebec with furrowed brows and wrinkled noses.

The good news for Conservatives is that they have two weeks and two debates to reverse their sudden sagging in Quebec.

The bad news is that Harper is not entering the debate in peak form, despite the restful pace Tuesday when his campaign was limited to the painfully contrived photo-op of the prime minister walking his daughter to school and saying goodbye with a nice shoulder pat (is a fatherly hug really too much to ask?).

That pesky plagiarism charge is the sort of saved-up dirt the Liberal war room had been promising to throw for weeks. A lazy speech writer on the Canadian Alliance payroll in 2003 grafted great gobs of then-Australian prime minister John Howard's clarion cry supporting the Iraqi invasion into a Harper speech, delivered two days later in the House of Commons.

The lifted lines were angrily dismissed as "old news" and "gotcha politics" by the Conservatives, which is bit rich, given how eager they've been to drag out decades-old quips and quotes, the better to choke rivals on their own stale-dated words.

When veteran political operative and Globe and Mail writer Owen Lippert volunteered to be the sword-falling speech writer later in the day, he shielded Harper from a lot of sticky Liberal mud.

But the substance of the address may resonate louder in Quebec than the fact the lines were lifted. The last thing Conservatives wanted is anyone's memory jogged about Harper's aye-aye-sir support for joining the United States in the mother of all futile wars in Iraq.

If there's a good news glimmer for Harper in both debates, it's that he successfully argued that more time had to be spent on the economic crisis.

Good for him, bad for the Liberals whose leader, Stephane Dion, is weakest in discussing financial matters.

Still, given the choice of watching Wednesday night's showdown with anybody on the planet, I'd pick a living room watching Brian Mulroney's reaction to the debate.

There's nobody better than a former Conservative prime minister from Quebec to decipher if a current Conservative prime minister from Alberta has talked himself into a majority - or big trouble.

Today's buzz: 'Plagiarism'

aterry — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 18:13:00 GMT

Meagan Fitzpatrick
Canwest News Service

A liberal advertisement shows a split screen of Howard's speech and Harper's speech two days later.

The buzz:

Prime Minister Stephen Harper was accused Tuesday of plagiarizing much of a speech, he delivered in 2003 as opposition leader, from then-Australian prime minister John Howard. In their speeches, delivered two days apart, both men urged their respective countries to join the U.S.-led war in Iraq.

The background:

As the federal leaders scaled down their campaign activities Tuesday to prepare for televised debates Wednesday and Thursday, Liberal foreign affairs critic Bob Rae was holding a news conference in Toronto, at which he showed side-by-side video clips of Harper and Howard using identical language during their speeches. The Liberals also produced transcripts of the speeches, which showed Harper's was virtually word for word and in the same order as much of Howard's address.

Harper vs. Howard:

"In the final analysis, disarming Iraq is necessary for the long-term security of the world, to the collective interests of our historic allies and therefore, manifestly, it is in the national interest of this country," said Harper.

"In the final analysis, the absolute conviction of the government is that disarming Iraq is necessary for the long-term security of the world and is therefore manifestly in the national interest of Australia," said Howard.

The reaction:

Initially the Tories dismissed and played down the allegations, but a few hours later the party issued a news release with a staffer named Owen Lippert accepting responsibility for "copying" parts of Howard's speech and announcing his resignation from the Tory campaign. Lippert said he was tasked with writing the speech for Harper and he was "overzealous" in lifting parts of Howard's speech. Harper, nor anyone in his office, knew what he had done, said Lippert's statement.

The explanation:

Lippert said he was "pressed for time."

Election marketing taking a few strange turns

jgreen — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 16:26:00 GMT

By Misty Harris
Canwest News Service

A Las Vegas tourism website is launching a new campaign on October 1 featuring bumper stickers that say: `Vegas: Because you need to be drunk to make it through this election.' Businesses on both sides of the border are using the elections as marketing tools. (Handout/CNS-BRAND-POLITICS)

Public urination, burgers and booze are among the unlikely elements in new marketing efforts that piggyback on election fever on both sides of the border.

MTV Canada launched a bizarre series of TV spots last week that show people peeing on things, with the tagline: "There are other ways to mark your territory. On Oct. 14, vote."

Starting Wednesday, tourism website Vegas.com will debut Crapshoot 08, an online initiative offering trip discounts, faux U.S. campaign videos and bumper stickers featuring the slogan: "Vegas: Because you need to be drunk to make it through this election."

And, in British Columbia, restaurant Burger Heaven is asking patrons to vote with their stomachs in a "bun-official" burger poll that includes such fare as an Elizabeth May Green party burger - which, as you might expect, comes with plenty of greens and extra mayo.

"It's been very good for business," says Chris Geib, manager of the New Westminster eatery. "Our regular clientele comes in regardless, but we do have new customers that come in after they've heard spots on the radio, on TV or in newsprint."

As of Monday, the Jack Layton burger - featuring "lean to the left beef" and "sharp Jack cheese" - led the pack at 206 votes, followed by patties named after Stephen Harper (133), May (41), Stephane Dion (30) and Gilles Duceppe (6). America leads the way in wacky election advertising

Vegas.com is among the more creative companies of the bunch, with promotional materials that compare election-time "half truths and naked lies" to the fact Sin City is "good with naked," along with the observation that "in Las Vegas, our `polls' tend to have half-dressed women hanging from them." Visitors to the site are asked to enter the name of their preferred presidential candidate.

"Now Canadians get a chance to vote in the American election," quips Vegas.com spokesman Bryan Allison.

Other initiatives include a Burger King campaign that turns its "Have it your way" slogan into an election mantra (haveityourway08.com), a national "cookie poll" by members of the Retail Bakers Association of America, and a U.S. taco joint that charts the similarities between candidate preference and a person's favourite Mexican food (tastebudpolitics.com).

Shorter election campaign means less creative advertising

Although quirky Canadian efforts are harder to come by, an expert on political communication and advertising says that doesn't mean we're any less patriotic.

"The much shorter duration and unpredictable timing of (Canadian) elections, coupled with the much less glamorous status of our politicians as celebrities, makes them comparatively less attractive - and available - as symbols for advertisers," says Shane Gunster, an assistant professor at Simon Fraser University.

"I (also) think it has much more to do with the extraordinary promotional resources that are poured into American campaigns and the desire of some advertisers to literally freeload off the media spectacle that U.S. elections have, in part, become."

Lucas Marco, a political science student at the University of Victoria, wouldn't have it any other way.

"As Canadians, maybe we don't get as involved but when we do, are we in fact getting more done and debating what's actually relevant? I actually believe this," says Marco.

"I'd rather watch CBC's At Issue Panel once a week than listen to the constant barrage of (U.S.) pundits and so-called political experts, as well as Burger King ads, on a nightly basis."

Green success comes in many shades

jgreen — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 15:04:00 GMT

By Richard Foot
Canwest News Service

Green Party leader Elizabeth May addresses supporters during a campaign rally outside a train station in Vancouver, British Columbia. Her participation in the upcoming leaders' debate could be a make-or-break opportunity for the Green Party. (Andy Clark/Reuters)

For Elizabeth May, Oct. 2 is a day filled with prophecy and meaning.

On the very night the leader of the Green party takes her place before the TV cameras for the national leaders' debate, hundreds of people in her home province of Nova Scotia will be attending a gala ball to celebrate the 250th birthday of parliamentary democracy in Canada.

On Oct. 2, 1758, the country's first elected legislative assembly met in Halifax, and for May it is a delicious coincidence that exactly 250 years later, another grassroots democratic impulse swept aside official efforts to exclude her from the debate, and propelled her onto a stage along with the prime minister and other political heavyweights.

Thursday's debate (the French-language debate is the night before) is a make-or-break opportunity for May and the Greens - the biggest political arena in the party's history, and their best chance to convince Canadians to elect Green MPs to the House of Commons.

She promises a performance like no other.

"I'm not going to have a lot of debate `prep' and I'm not going to be stagy and artificial like the other candidates," she said in an interview this week. "Previous debates have been disappointing for many of us because the leaders looked groomed and packaged and rehearsed, with formulaic answers. It all looks so phoney. I promise to be very real, and different."

For three weeks, May has led a rather charmed campaign, garnering more ink, attention and air time than expected for a fifth-place party on the fringes of the political system.

The TV-debate "uprising" made her the media darling of the campaign's first week. Her novel, whistle-stop rail journey has attracted small but respectable crowds at train stations across Canada, and May has continually found ways to keep her name in the headlines, even suggesting that the Greens would enter formal coalitions with other parties in the House of Commons.

But the debate will be her first chance to go head to head with the major party leaders, and to prove herself a serious player.

"There's the risk of high expectations, and she may fall flat," particularly if May is forced to shout and scream to be heard on an already crowded stage, says Jim Bickerton, a professor of political science at St. Francis Xavier University in Antigonish, N.S., part of the riding where May is seeking her own seat.

"But she's unusually good in unscripted environments," he says, "and debates can be the downfall of politicians who are groomed to stay on script. May is good at thinking on her feet. People may like that."

Even if May shines in the debate, the odds of seeing Green candidates elected to Parliament this fall remain slim.

The Greens won only 4.5 per cent of the vote in the 2006 election. This year climate change and the party's key policy - a suite of carbon taxes - has not lit the electorate on fire.

And the party's only incumbent candidate, discredited MP Blair Wilson, who was expelled from the Liberal caucus because of spending irregularities during the last election, is not expected to retain his B.C. seat.

In Central Nova - a sprawling rural constituency that includes dozens of small communities between the Atlantic coast and the Northumberland Strait, May faces the daunting task of trying to unseat Defence Minister Peter MacKay, who has held the riding since 1997.

MacKay is vulnerable. The local economy is shaky. The provincial wing of the NDP has been steadily gaining ground in the area and now holds two of the riding's three provincial seats. In the last federal election, a young, charismatic NDP candidate named Alexis MacDonald came within about 3,000 votes of upsetting MacKay.

"Peter MacKay can be beaten," says MacDonald, who isn't running this year. "People should never assume a seat belongs to one party or one individual. People have made that mistake before and been proven wrong."

But MacDonald also says May is wrong to assume she can duplicate or improve on what the NDP achieved last year in Central Nova - even after May convinced Liberal Leader Stephane Dion not to run a candidate there this year.

For one thing, the NDP remains well organized and its candidate has been knocking on doors for more than a year. MacKay, aware of the threats he faces, has also campaigned almost exclusively on his home turf this fall instead of travelling the country to support other Conservatives, as he did in 2006.

Steve Goodwin, a reporter for the Pictou Advocate, a local newspaper, says for May to win she must convince the 10,000 people who voted Liberal last time to park their votes with her, plus bleed votes from the Conservatives, and then "leapfrog past the NDP . . . I think that's a long shot," he says.

So why didn't May choose an easier riding with a lower-profile opponent? Bickerton says May doesn't expect to win, and by losing against MacKay, no one can accuse her of failure.

He suspects the overall Green strategy is not to win seats this year anyway, but to win votes, and the important federal subsidy of nearly $2 per vote that comes after every election.

"The Greens don't have to elect any MPs on election night," says Bickerton. "But a million votes (up from the 660,000 won in 2006) would bring $2 million into their war chest. That's a lot of money for the Green party. With 10 per cent support and a million votes, they could feel quite good about the election, and they could use that money to build for next time."

May dismisses such speculation. Publicly, she is setting her sights much higher, saying anything less than a victory in Central Nova and a total of 12 Green MPs - enough for official party status in the Commons - would disappoint her.

"I can win in Central Nova," she says. "I can't wait to get back there. Once the debates are over I'm not budging from the riding for the rest of the campaign.

"It's going to be fun on election night. I promise you a great party."

Grudge matches and bellwethers in the 2008 election

jgreen — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 14:33:00 GMT

By David Akin
Canwest News Service

Conservative MP Rahim Jaffer and his volunteers wave at passing cars in the riding of Edmonton-Strathcona. His riding is one of many where some of the more exciting battles of this election will be fought. (Jimmy Jeong/Edmonton Journal)

OTTAWA - As he campaigns in ridings around the country, Prime Minister Stephen Harper has never mentioned local opposition candidates by name - except once.

At a stop in Oakville, Ont., Harper had some special words for the local Liberal candidate.

"I should have told the media that when I called this general election, I did it to give Garth Turner that byelection he promised," Harper said to the cheers of his supporters.

Turner had been elected in 2006 as a Conservative but ended up annoying his caucus so much that it threw him out. After sitting for a spell as an independent, Turner joined the Liberals and now seeks re-election under that banner. As a Liberal, Turner has been a relentless critic of Harper and the Conservatives, mostly through daily posts on his popular blog but also in the House of Commons and in town hall meetings in his riding and around the country. As a result, Conservatives find him as annoying as they ever did.

So, in the riding of Halton at least, the race is one of the country's best grudge matches, pitting Turner against all Conservative comers.

But there are plenty of fights like that in this 40th general election.

And for those who are tiring of the same old speeches from the party leaders, Canwest News Service spotlights 20 races where the local flavour gives politics some extra spice. These races feature grudge matches, high profile candidates, or could be trendsetters on election night.

The Grudge Matches

Halton, Ont.: Garth Turner has been a thorn in the Tory side since he was tossed from their caucus. Local Tories were annoyed that head office appointed a candidate - Lisa Raitt - to face off against Turner. But Conservatives will cheer loud and long if they can oust Turner on Oct. 14.

Whitby-Oshawa, Ont.: Finance Minister Jim Flaherty should win here, but his Liberal opponent is Brent Fullard, a key organizer of investors who were furious over Flaherty's decision to tax income trusts. Fullard is carrying the grudge of all Canadians who felt burned by the Tory flip-flop on income trusts.

Avalon, N.L.: Politics here could hardly be more personal. Conservative incumbent Fabian Manning was, at the time of his election in 2006, famous for being one of the few island politicians to stand up to Premier Danny Williams and live to tell the tale. Manning, who was part of Williams's caucus in the provincial legislature refused to toe the party line once and earned Williams's wrath. Now Williams, of course, is heading up the Anybody But Conservative campaign in that province and Manning, the only Conservative incumbent in that province, is in Williams's crosshairs.

Edmonton-Strathcona, Alta.: Conservative MP Rahim Jaffer had a tough fight in 2006 to beat NDP candidate Linda Duncan. Duncan is back for round 2 in a riding where the NDP holds the provincial seat. Everything else in Alberta will be Tory blue but the Jaffer-Duncan re-match merits close watching.

Churchill, Man.: Liberal Tina Keeper won this in 2006 partly because the NDP vote was split between NDP candidate Nikki Ashton and Bev Desjarlais, the incumbent MP who had been kicked out of the NDP caucus and was running as an independent. Ashton's back for a rematch with Keeper and there's no independent on the left.

West Nova, N.S.: Liberal Robert Thibault beat Tory Greg Kerr by a little more than 500 votes in 2006. Then, this summer, Thibault added insult to injury suggesting Kerr was too old to run against him again. Kerr and the Tory war room hope to make Thibault eat his words.

The Trend Setters

Richmond, B.C.: The Tories are gunning for Liberal MP Raymond Chan. This is one of three ridings the Liberals won in 2006 that the Tories think they can steal. They also hope for Vancouver Quadra and West Vancouver-Sunshine Coast-Sea-to-Sky. If Chan falls, Liberal incumbent Don Bell could also be threatened in North Vancouver.

Nunavut, Nunavut: For the first time, voters in Nunavut get to choose from an all-Inuit slate. Liberal Nancy Karetek-Lindell is retiring and though the Conservatives haven't won anything in the north since Erik Nielsen held the Yukon back in the 1980s, they think their candidate Leona Aglukkaq, a former health minister in the territorial government, might be their breakthrough. Harper has already campaigned in Iqaluit with Alukkaq.

Ottawa West-Nepean, Ont.: This riding and the Ontario riding of Peterborough are bellwethers in that they always seem to elect MPs on the government side of the House. In 2006, voters in Ottawa-West Nepean picked John Baird, who became environment minister. The Liberals are running David Pratt, a former defence minister, against Baird. Pratt was ousted in 2004 next door in Nepean-Carleton by Pierre Poilievre. Keep an eye, as well, on Ottawa-South, the riding held by David McGuinty, the brother of the Ontario premier. He should win, but some Conservatives think he is vulnerable.

Oshawa, Ont.: The country's autoworkers are angry and here, in the riding that is home to General Motors and Canada's largest auto assembly plant, union leader Mike Shields is running for the NDP, challenging Conservative incumbent Colin Carrie. In the last year, more than 70,000 manufacturing jobs have been lost in Canada, many in the auto sector that powers Ontario's economy. In this riding and in others in southwestern Ontario like Essex, Chatham-Kent-Essex, Elgin-Middlesex-London, and Sarnia-Lambton, laid-off workers could take their anger out on Conservative incumbents.

Parkdale-High Park, Ont.: This downtown Toronto riding could be a symbol of the Liberal-NDP battle. NDP MP Peggy Nash stole it from a Liberal incumbent in 2006. Now the Liberals want it back and failed leadership candidate and convention kingmaker Gerard Kennedy is the candidate. Nash is putting up a tough defence, though, making this race too close to call.

Trois-Rivieres, Que.: If Parkdale-High Park highlights the NDP-Liberal battle, Trois-Rivieres is a good proxy for the Conservative-Bloc Quebecois contest. BQ incumbent Paule Brunelle faces Conservative Claude Duran, who has a high-profile locally. If the Tories can win steal the Trois-Rivieres of the world, the BQ MPs in ridings like Chicoutimi-Le Fjord, Richmond-Arthabaska, Drummond, and elsewhere ought to be worried.

Outremont, Que.: Can Thomas Mulcair hold the NDP foothold in Quebec? Mulcair won what had been viewed as Liberal stronghold in Montreal in a byelection. General elections, though, are a different kettle of fish. Mulcair benefited from the collapse of the separatist vote here and there is no sign that BQ support has revived. A Liberal defeat here will deeply hurt the Quebec wing of the party.

The Star Turns

Central Nova, N.S.: Defence Minister Peter MacKay is the favourite but his challenger is Green Leader Elizabeth May. The Liberals agreed not to run a candidate here to give May her best shot. May either wins the upset of the evening on Oct. 14 or becomes 0-for-2 when her name is on the ballot.

Papineau, Que.: Justin Trudeau fought for and won the right to carry the Liberal banner in a riding that is by no means a safe seat. The oldest son of the former prime minister hopes his heritage helps him beat Bloc Quebecois MP Vivien Barbot. Barbot knocked off then-foreign affairs minister Pierre Pettigrew for this Montreal seat in 2006.

Surrey North, B.C.: The ghost of Chuck Cadman haunted the last Parliament with Liberal accusations that the Tories offered him a bribe to run for them. Cadman's widow Dona is now running for the Conservatives here. It's a wide-open race with the retirement of NDP MP Penny Priddy. The Tories hope Cadman gets elected, although Liberals accuse the Tories of muzzling the candidate. Cadman says she has no interest in talking to the national media.

Wascana, Sask.: Former finance minister Ralph Goodale holds down the only Liberal riding between Winnipeg and Vancouver's eastern suburbs. The Conservatives would dearly like to make it Tory Blue right across the Prairies but Goodale is no pushover. Meanwhile, the NDP are gunning for some Conservative-held ridings including Palliser, Regina-Qu-Appelle, and Saskatoon-Rosetown-Biggar

Desnethe-Missinippi-Churchill River, Sask.: Winning this riding might give Stephane Dion a few headaches down the road. His candidate is David Orchard, who once tried to beat Peter MacKay to lead the Progressive Conservatives. The most northern of Saskatchewan's ridings is now held by Conservative Rob Clarke who won a squeaker in a byelection. The Liberals won it in the 2006 general election by a hair over the Tories. And in 2004, the Tories won by a nose. Expect another nail-biter.

Vaudreuil-Soulanges, Que.: Michael Fortier quit the Senate to carry the Tory banner in this west end Montreal riding against BQ incumbent Melli Faille. This is widely seen as the best chance the Conservatives have in Montreal.

Westmount-Ville Marie, Que.: The NDP are running a popular radio show host - Anne Lagace Dawson - against Liberal Marc Garneau, the former astronaut. It's a riding that should be about as safe as it gets for Liberals in Quebec, but the NDP think Jack Layton is connecting with Quebecers.

Tories ahead in tepid pool of election ads

aterry — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 17:50:00 GMT

By Shannon Proudfoot
Canwest News Service

U.S. Free trade 1988 Liberal Ad-" erasing" the Canada- U.S. border. (Rod MacIvor/The Citizen)

No one has landed a knockout punch in the advertising or online arenas at this mid-point of the election campaign, experts say, but some serious contenders have emerged.

Thanks to major pre-election strategizing, deep pockets, and a charm offensive clad in a blue sweater vest, the Conservatives are looking like the party to beat in the traditional advertising ring, says Lindsay Meredith, a professor of marketing strategy at Simon Fraser University.

"Harper and the boys clearly had this ambush planned, and they were ready to hit the ground," he says.

The Liberals have been "wandering in the wasteland" and have to step it up very soon if they want to make an impression on voters, he says, but the sharpest advertising barbs from all the parties will come in the campaign's final rounds.

The Conservatives released a flurry of ads at the beginning of the race, but there has been little new advertising from the party in the last week.

The Liberals, on the other hand, got off to a slow start but have since released half a dozen spots, while the NDP released just one English-language ad in the first two weeks of the campaign but has now turned up the heat.

The fireside spots the Conservatives started airing before the campaign launched have been effective at warming up Harper's "Tin Man" image, and at appealing to middle-class families and female voters, Meredith says.

The attack ads lobbed at Stephane Dion are too vague to have much impact, he adds, but he believes all the parties have learned from gaffes in the past and reined in their negative messages.

"You're not getting any more stupid ads making fun of Chretien's speech impediment or facial paralysis," he says, referring to an infamous 1993 Conservative ad. "That's how you shoot your own foot off."

Political ads that fundamentally change the race in any lasting way are rare, says Darrell Bricker, CEO of Ipsos Reid Public Affairs.

In 20-odd years as a pollster, he remembers only two - the 1993 ad that caused a backlash for the Tories, and a 1988 free-trade ad from the Liberals that showed a hand erasing the Canadian border - that really galvanized Canadian voters.

"Very little of the advertising has had any big, momentous impact," he says.

In the online arena, clever Facebook trinkets and a media-sharing site dubbed the Orange Room have made the NDP the clear winner, says Tamara Small, a professor of political science at Mount Allison University in New Brunswick, who studies the online presence of Canadian parties.

"There's no comparison to any of the things going on with the other Canadian sites," she says of the Orange Room, which awards points to members for uploading pictures or videos of campaign events. "It's one of the most innovative uses of technology I've ever seen."

Perhaps the most interesting element of the online campaign has been the Internet's role as the closet from which candidates' skeletons are spilling, she says.

Furious statements pour out of the parties' war rooms on a daily basis, denouncing opposition candidates whose past deeds or opinions have been dragged out of an online cache.

Small points out these indiscretions are usually years old.

"There is a sense that candidates with blogs or candidates with Facebook sites or YouTube videos are being watched by the Internet," she says.

But while the parties jostle to sell themselves and discredit their opponents through the final two weeks of the race, Meredith senses voters simply aren't hungry for another helping of politics - no matter how it's packaged.

"I think there's a certain amount of fatigue in Canadian politics," adds Bricker.

"We've been though three elections in four years, first of all, and secondly, it's not like we have our own Barack Obama who's inspiring all sorts of people to get involved in politics. This is a fairly workaday type of election campaign. There isn't a lot of inspiration anywhere."

Spot Check: A regular look at the latest campaign ads

aterry — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 16:22:00 GMT

By Shannon Proudfoot
Canwest News Service

Screen grab of the NDP spot "strong on health care". (Canwest News Service)

NDP

The Spot: "Strong on Health Care"

The plot: Using the same graphic style and drum soundtrack as the other NDP ads, this one accuses Prime Minister Stephen Harper of leaving millions of Canadians without a family doctor or access to medication and early detection. NDP Leader Jack Layton appears at the end, touting his party's health care plans.

The bottom line: "If that's Harper's idea of strong leadership, we need a new kind of strong."

The message:

"It's not about the Conservatives. It's not about the NDP. It's about Stephen versus Jack," says Gordon McMillan, president of Ottawa-based marketing agency McMillan.

"It spends most of its energy blasting Harper based on the dubious statement that Harper 'says it's OK that nearly five million Canadians don't have a family doctor.'"

"Health care is a topic that ranks near the top in voters' minds, including my own. It's good that the NDP points out weaknesses in health care under the Conservatives," says Jeff Musson, a 35-year-old Windsor, Ont., voter and small business owner of Dynamite Network Solutions, an IT company.

The review:

"The militaristic drum track makes you pay attention and realize this is serious stuff," says McMillan.

"By using still cut-outs of Harper and live footage of Layton, there's a sense that Harper is two-dimensional, while Jack is, quite literally, the life of the New Democratic Party."

"What this ad fails to do is tell exactly what the NDP plan is related to health care. We need specifics," says Musson.

"They just say that they have a plan to hire more doctors and nurses; a plan for essential medications. This is not good enough, in most people's minds. They want to hear what the NDP will do to fix the problem."

"Claims are made in the ad without any substantiation," says Jonathan Rose, a professor of political studies at Queen's University in Kingston, Ont.

"In a 30-second spot, there is not enough time to discuss the plan to train new doctors and nurses. Claims without evidence have less weight than those that do."

Spot Check: A regular look at the latest ads from the parties

aterry — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 16:11:00 GMT

By Shannon Proudfoot
Canwest News Service

Liberal ads juxtapose Stephen Harper's recent assertions about a strong Canadian economy against headlines about job losses and a claim that Harper is cutting economic growth. (Canwest News Service)

Liberals

The Spot: "Harpernomics and you"

The plot: Juxtaposes Stephen Harper's recent assertions about a strong Canadian economy against headlines about job losses and a claim that Harper is cutting economic growth while "families struggle to get by."

The bottom line: "Do you really want more of this?"

The message: "This ad continues the shift by the Liberals away from promoting their agenda to attack advertising," says Gordon McMillan, president of Ottawa-based marketing agency McMillan.

"The Tory strategy has put Harper front and centre in the campaign; now the Liberals are trying to turn that against them by suggesting Harper is out of touch on the economy."

"The new Liberal ad tries to undermine Harper's strengths by painting a bleak economic picture and blaming it on the Conservatives," says Jason Shields, 38, a voter and IT consultant in Vancouver.

The review: "This notion of 'Harpernomics' does allow the Liberals to run an underlying theme through some more ads and this could stick," says McMillan. "I think it will start to sow seeds of doubt, but with the Liberals down in the polls, it will take much more than this to swing voters towards the Liberals."

"The ad may backfire because Conservative support only seems to grow as confidence in the economy falls," says Shields.

"Also, the Liberal message of a weak economy is at odds with their own campaign platform which assumes a growing economy, so something just doesn't add up."

Spendthrift Liberals get free kick at 'sorry' Conservatives

aterry — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 10:26:00 GMT

By Don Martin
Canwest News Service

Hon. Gerry Ritz, Canada's Minister of Agriculture, looks at his apology as he walks toward media members gathered in front of the Confederation Building on Wednesday. (Mike Carroccetto/The Ottawa Citizen)

OTTAWA - It was Prime Minister Stephen Harper's clearest and cleanest shot yet at discrediting his main opponent, but his party's "sorry" campaign threw him off script. Again.

On the day when the Liberals practically begged Harper to attack them for putting on the ritz in a wild spending spree platform topped by a massive $70-billion price tag boost on Thursday, a different Ritz stole Harper's thunder and pushed the gaffe-plagued Conservatives back on the defensive.

Okay, bad pun, but of course we're talking about Gerry Ritz, the mild-mannered agriculture minister with a warped sense of humour who forgot conference calls can be taped and sick jokes preserved until leaked for maximum political damage.

To describe a lethal listeriosis outbreak at a Maple Leaf meat processing plant as a "death by a thousand cuts - cold cuts" is the sound of Ritz talking himself out of the next cabinet lineup.

He's a decent guy and isn't afraid of a little dirt under his fingernails - which is a good thing for an agriculture minister, not a bad thing like the "dirt under their fingernails that transmit diseases" which fellow Saskatchewan MP Tom Lukiwski linked to "homosexual faggots" in a video.

Sorry, I digress. With so many Tory foot-in-mouth outbreaks, it's hard to keep track, but the mini-epidemic of misspeaks certainly explains Harper's sock-stuffing gag on his party.

Unfortunately for Harper, his agriculture minister's twisted comment dominated the campaign coverage on the same day as Liberals went completely over the top with a $70 billion pledge for road, water treatment and environmental initiatives.

Instead of an easy whack at Liberal spending, the Liberals got a free kick at the Conservatives.

Just imagine how Harper, who had described the $9 billion worth of promises before the 10-year infrastructure announcement as "mind-boggling," would've reacted to Liberal leader Stephane Dion's grandest giveaway of the campaign. Think of a grapefruit exploding.

But the race is still young and there are still three weeks' worth of partisan openings for derision and ridicule. Besides, the mood is souring against vote-buying tactics in trying times.

When Harper grandly announced a priority to prohibit bubble gum-flavoured cigarillos this week, I howled at the thought of that as any sort of justification for a $300-million election to seek a fresh mandate. As one of my anonymous election operatives wrote from her vantage point in Vancouver: "Cigarillo packaging restrictions? I shaved my legs for this?"

But it might've been a better fit with the times than any billion-dollar handout. The queasy stock market roller-coaster and institutional failures on Wall Street are transforming the mood of this electorate in a big way that can only be bad news for those who promise new taxes and big spending.

Voters no longer want a government to brighten their lives with new cradle-to-grave government program protection. They'll settle for a solid seatbelt that'll hold their lifestyles at status quo if that economic light at the end of the tunnel is actually an oncoming train.

So while Harper moves on multiple fronts with modest, affordable pockets of cash to help women entrepreneurs, first-time homebuyers and truck drivers, Dion seems out of sync by promising the classic grab-bag of Liberal handouts for daycare, immigration, tuition, health care and big city relief. The only targeted group with cause to complain so far would be the pine beetle, the victim of their $250-million extermination pledge.

To be fair, the Liberals are almost finished their rollout. They have some modest agriculture, justice and cultural program announcements coming out in the next few days. And they vow to wrap it all up with a full accounting inside a balanced budget when the full platform is released next week.

But the trick now becomes selling their Green Shift environmental policy as an economic blueprint, shifting attention away from it being an onerous tax on employers to selling it a relief package for consumers and homeowners battening down the hatches against an American financial storm surge.

The Liberals, being the only party which can be taken seriously as a government-in-waiting, should promise restraint, not ritz, as we enter unnervingly difficult times.

Pollster cautions NDP surge in Quebec could soon deflate

aterry — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 11:50:00 GMT

By Andy Riga
Canwest News Service

NDp Quebec lietenant and Outremont incumbent Thomas Mulcair says the party's target is six to 12 of Quebec's 75 ridings. (Chris Wattie/Reuters)

MONTREAL -Once dismissed as a non-entity in Quebec, the New Democrats have their best chance yet to break through in the province in the Oct. 14 federal election.

But though polls indicate left-wing Quebecers are flirting with the New Democrats, current support may evaporate come voting day or it may not be enough to win seats, experts say.

The party's target is six to 12 of Quebec's 75 ridings, said Outremont incumbent Thomas Mulcair, the NDP's Quebec lieutenant.

"We're looking at growing a lot in Quebec," said Mulcair, who pointed to developments in the Jeanne-Le Ber riding as evidence the Bloc Quebecois is "very nervous" about the NDP.

In that Montreal riding, the Bloc this week has put up posters urging voters to back the Bloc because a vote for the NDP will split the left-wing vote and help the Conservatives win a majority.

"It's a good day for you in politics when your adversary puts up a sign that talks about you," Mulcair said.

The NDP is counting on well-known candidates, including CBC broadcaster Anne Lagace Dowson in Westmount-Ville Marie, environmentalist Daniel Breton in Jeanne-Le Ber, and Francoise Boivin, a former Liberal MP now running for the New Democrats in Gatineau, Mulcair said.

The party is also hoping to come up the middle in several other ridings, including some on the South Shore, the Eastern Townships and the Gatineau area, where the vote will be split among three or four parties.

But the NDP, whose Quebec support in summer polls soared to 16 per cent, is now below 10 per cent, according to a survey to be published Thursday by Leger Marketing.

In the 2006 election, the NDP got 7.5 per cent of the vote in Quebec.

"It's true that they're stronger than last time, but it will be very difficult for the NDP to win seats here," pollster Jean-Marc Leger said. "It's always the same problem with the NDP: the closer you get to the vote, the more their support drops." he said.

The NDP may do well in two or three Montreal-area ridings, including Westmount-Ville Marie and Outremont, he said. But it "will be a great victory" if the party holds on to Outremont, a riding it won in a byelection.

Their only hope is in the fact that "the vote is totally divided" in many ridings, Leger added.

Leger said many Quebecers are undecided, waiting for the debates before choosing a party. And some NDP support in Quebec may slip away if Prime Minister Stephen Harper's Conservatives seem close to forming a majority, with anglophones heading back to the Liberals, francophones to the Bloc, he said.

The NDP has never won a seat in Quebec in a federal general election.

Debate decision puts Green party on a roll

jgreen — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 12:33:00 GMT

By Barbara Yaffe
Canwest News Service

Calgary West Green Party candidate Randy Weeks rides his recumbent bike, which he is using to deliver signs and literature on the first day of the federal election. (Ted Rhodes/Calgary Herald)

VANCOUVER - Could this election mark a breakthrough for Canada's 25-year-old Green party?

While other partisan forces are campaigning to become the government, or augment their opposition clout in the Commons, the Greens are keen to elect their first-ever MP somewhere - anywhere - in Canada.

Party support has soared in the past week, in part due to the recent high profile fuss over leader Elizabeth May's inclusion in televised debates scheduled for Oct. 1 and 2. After opposing her participation, Stephen Harper and Jack Layton capitulated but the donnybrook resulted in a huge amount of media play for the Greens.

Ironically, if the Greens do well in the Oct. 14 vote, that could greatly assist the Conservatives by splintering the vote on the left.

In the 2006 election, the Greens were not major players, receiving just 4.5-per-cent support. Their strongest showing, perhaps surprisingly, was in Alberta, with 6.5 per cent.

Nunavut, with 5.9-per-cent support, was second. B.C. was third with 5.3 per cent.

The party got its first MP only weeks ago when discredited former B.C. Liberal Blair Wilson opted to become Green.

But it's widely believed his chances of recapturing the traditionally Conservative riding of West Vancouver-Sunshine Coast are modest.

The Greens' best opportunity should be in Central Nova, a rural Nova Scotia riding the party leader chose for herself last year.

The choice has dismayed political observers because few believe May can unseat Peter MacKay, a prominent cabinet minister whose political family has claimed the area for decades.

Other ridings the Greens are targeting include North Vancouver and Saanich-Gulf Islands in B.C., and Guelph and Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound in Ontario.

Their fundamental problem of course is that their support is sparsely distributed across the country.

Newcomer parties, such as Reform and the Bloc Quebecois, have tended to do well in Canada in recent decades. But that's because they played to regional grievances.

Greens do not naturally have a concentrated mass of backers in any part of Canada.

They call themselves a party of the future, catering neither to left nor right but rather to those who "believe in sound fiscal management, and strengthening our economy while ensuring that it is sustainable."

In the current campaign, they've had the good fortune to find themselves in a starring role due to the leaders' debate fracas.

An Angus Reid poll taken as that controversy was playing out put the Greens ahead of the Bloc Quebecois, with 10 per cent support nationally compared to the Quebec party's nine per cent.

In B.C., Green support was 26 per cent, slightly ahead of New Democrats, who elected 11 B.C. MPs in the last election, and well ahead of Liberals, who elected seven.

According to the poll, another region where Greens appear strong is the Prairies where they toted up 14 per cent support. In Ontario, they're at 12 per cent - a whisker behind the NDP.

Greens have an advantage in this election because voters are consistently identifying the environment as one of their top three issues.

Another advantage is that they have a leader Canadians are relating well to - a personable, warm, outgoing, plain-talking woman from Cape Breton.

Elizabeth May's approval rating last week, at 25 per cent, beat out that of Liberal Leader Stephane Dion.

The Greens hope May's folksy and endearing manner will make a strong impression during the leaders' debates. She's everything Harper isn't - approachable, informal, motherly - and could deal the formal-sounding, occasionally stiff PM a serious wound on the human side.

The party argue on its website that it's the only party to put principle above power. "We agree with Canadians who say it's time for parties in Parliament to stop bickering and get on with the job of combating climate change ... "

Vancouver Quadra candidate Dan Grice says he's personally convinced that May's participation in the debates will mark a real turning point for his party: "We fully expect (her participation) to resonate deeply with Canadian voters, resulting in several Green MPs being elected next month."

Alberta not feeling the love in federal election

jgreen — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 12:00:00 GMT

By Don Martin
Canwest News Service

NDP leader Jack Layton is greeted onstage by Calgary-Centre-North candidate John Chan on day one of the federal election campaign. Layton is the only party leader to visit Alberta so far. (Ted Rhodes/Calgary Herald)

OTTAWA - It's the province this election forgot, suitable only for framing in campaign material as a scene where plumes of greenhouse gases belch into the deep blue Prairie sky from oilsands plants.

Alberta, and to a lesser extent Saskatchewan, is getting even more than the usual alienation treatment so far in this campaign - ignored by leaders while some of its 28 deemed-elected Conservative MPs fan across the country to help land seats where the result is in doubt.

How ironic. The souring economy tops the polls as the ballot-box question, yet the province keeping Confederation out of recession is almost exclusively portrayed in opposition-party advertising as an environmental evildoer in need of carbon taxation or hard-capping.

At best, Alberta is expected to serve as a refuelling stop for leaders' campaign jets, with a token event on the ground.

At worst it'll be a flyover as leaders search for seats anywhere else but in a one-party state that can be safely and strategically ignored.

The statistics are just too daunting to argue that anything but a Conservative sweep would qualify as a major upset.

After all, 25 Conservative candidates in Alberta finished with more than 50 per cent of the vote in 2006, including one claiming more than 80 per cent of all votes cast.

As my friend Alice Funke at punditsguide.ca found during her number-crunching, the only party that can see the faintest glimmer in the deep blue Tory tidal wave is the Green Party, which claimed three seats in Alberta among its top 10 national showings in the 2006 election.

Very few Conservatives, or candidates from any other party, for that matter, blew even half of their spending limit fighting the last election, and their ho-hum sleepwalk to the ballot box will undoubtedly repeat on October 14.

But, here's a rhetorical question: Does that mean Albertans, or voters in the now-booming province of Saskatchewan, home to Ralph Goodale as the last surviving Liberal, shouldn't have a role in setting the agenda?

The perennial quibble over allowing greater entrepreneurial health care would be an interesting discussion, particularly if Prime Minister Stephen Harper is heading for a majority government. As someone who believes in respecting constitutional boundaries, Harper knows health care is a provincial jurisdiction that could or should mean surrendering the Canada Health Act to legislature control.

The unfairness of western representation in the Senate, where smaller New Brunswick and Nova Scotia hold four more Senate seats than six-seater Alberta or B.C., is screaming for equalization, yet gets the silent treatment on the hustings.

And while it may be hard to feel empathy for a booming energy province when the auto sector is heading south, Alberta's economic slowdown should concern the country. A friend of mine recently went house shopping in the Calgary buyer's market, and submitted offers 25 per cent below the asking price, knowing someone will be desperate enough to accept his stink bid.

Add it up, and Alberta clearly rates something more than the 35,000-foot attention treatment from party leaders.

True, there are tentative plans for Liberal leader Stephane Dion, who might run the risk of becoming a rotten-tomato target for his Green Shift carbon tax, to appear at a Calgary rally focused on investor angst at the Conservative flip-flop on taxing income trusts.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper, who confined his Calgary time to Christmas and the night before the election in 2006, is expected to pit stop briefly in his riding before returning there for the election eve Thanksgiving weekend.

And NDP Leader Jack Layton has already come and gone, using the oilsands as policy backdrop with altitude as he swooped his campaign jet low over the tarsands to give reporters a closer look at the smokestacks he wants capped.

Even if it makes strategic sense for the leaders to spend more time in Guelph than Alberta, one should at least expect Conservative candidates to go through the motions of running for the job.

Yet, as my Calgary Herald colleagues learned last week, more than half the Calgary MP incumbents were knocking on doors in Ontario instead of in their ridings. MP Jason Kenney didn't open his election office until the first week of the battle was over, and says he'll only return to campaign on weekends. I guess that's what happens when the election ends with the selection or confirmation of Conservative candidates.

After all, only in Alberta does love always mean saying you're Tory.

Today's buzz: 'Herbert Hoover in a blue sweater'

jgreen — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 17:34:00 GMT

Shannon Proudfoot
Canwest News Service

The meaning of Bob Rae's comments about Stephen Harper may be lost on younger voters. (Chris Young/National Post)

At a Halifax rally on Tuesday, Liberal MP Bob Rae referred to Stephen Harper as "Herbert Hoover in a blue sweater," adding, "I think we can do better than that."

Why that's an insult: Within months of Hoover assuming the U.S. presidency in 1929, the stock market crashed and sparked the Great Depression. He was defeated in the 1932 election and became the scapegoat of that period of American history.

"What he was saying was that Herbert Hoover was kind of the master of disaster," says Gil Troy, a history professor at McGill University in Montreal. "He was the face of the great failure of the Republican party to keep the great prosperity of the 1920s, and was blamed as the individual who failed to lead America effectively during the Great Depression."

On a personal level, Hoover was known as a "dour, uncharismatic engineer who once had a kind of boy-wonder reputation," Troy says.

The recent context: Amid disastrous news from the U.S. stock market on Monday, Harper - who wears a blue sweater-vest in a series of Tory ads - maintained the Canadian economy is on solid footing.

The problem: No one under a certain age is likely to understand Rae's would-be zinger, Troy says.

"In the 1940s, if a Canadian politician were saying that, we'd all give a knowing laugh," he says. "But I can't imagine even many of my students who study history would really get the Herbert Hoover reference."

The jab is "not something I'd want to be called," Troy says, but it's an ineffective comment that may ultimately say more about Rae than anyone else.

"I think what Bob Rae did with that comment is show that he's a well-read man, he knows his history, but he might not quite know where the voters are at."

'Boring' Canada getting little election coverage in foreign media

jgreen — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 13:47:00 GMT

By Archie McLean
Canwest News Service

Prime Minister Stephen Harper delivers a speech to the Halifax Chamber of Commerce during the first week of the campaign. (Chris Wattie/Reuters)

EDMONTON - Sometimes, outsiders offer a fresh and insightful take on a country's domestic affairs.

One of the most influential books on American politics - the aptly named Democracy in America - was written more than 150 years ago by a young Frenchman, Alexis de Tocqueville.

More recently, Britain's venerable Economist magazine helped cement Paul Martin's reputation for indecision when it hung him with the "Mr. Dithers" moniker.

So, what is the rest of the world saying about our federal election so far?

The short answer is: not much. The BBC has only one short article on its website. The Washington Post has run only short briefs and the Times of London has nothing on its website. Israel's Haaretz newspaper wrote a piece about Canadian Jewish groups asking Prime Minister Stephen Harper not to hold the vote on the first day of the Sukkot festival.

Much of the news coverage in the foreign press has come through Associated Press and Reuters wire copy. At least one British columnist has noticed the tepid international coverage.

"The lack of interest abroad in Canada's national politics is striking - probably partly a perennial stereotype of Canada as peaceful (read: boring) country, partly because the last eight years have required a heightened focus on the big bag of crazy that the institutional politics of Canada's southern neighbour has
become," writes Heather McRobie in Britain's leftish newspaper, the Guardian.

McRobie goes on to scold Harper and his government's record.

"For a prime minister with a powerless minority government, he's managed to do an almost impressive amount of damage since coming to power two years ago, damage that - particularly on environmental issues - has an impact far beyond Canada."

She advocates abandoning any notions that Canada is an international "good guy."

The Wall Street Journal's famously conservative editorial page has a different take.

"One candidate believes in low taxes, gun rights and a strong national defence. The other has a dog named Kyoto and promises to levy a new carbon tax on industry. Any guess who is favored to win the Canadian federal election set for October 14?"

The American online magazine Slate published an article by former Stephane Dion speech writer, Christopher Flavelle, with the headline 'What's the matter with Canada?: How the world's nicest country turned mean.'

The Economist quotes Machiavelli and predicts another Conservative minority government.

The dearth of good foreign reporting in Canada is partly the result of shrinking news budgets. Last year, the Washington Post closed its Canadian bureau, a belt-tightening measure that followed similar moves by the Los Angeles Times, Chicago Tribune and Wall Street Journal.

Still, the New York Times has run several articles about the election, most recently under the headline 'Online, a Puffin Stars in a Political Attack in Canada.

The article begins: "American election campaigns have a reputation for dirty tactics and negative campaigning. But in the current Canadian federal election, which began just over a week ago, one party started its campaign by immediately dropping dirt of a virtual variety."

The Times does point out the bright side to the brevity of our campaigns.

"Canadians voters weary of attack ads do have one advantage over their American counterparts: the Canadian election campaign lasts only 38 days."

What the world is saying:

"`A Prince never lacks legitimate reasons to break his promise.' Stephen Harper, Canada's Conservative prime minister, is poised to test this bit of Machiavellian political theory. Having championed legislation last year to fix election dates at four-year intervals, thus curtailing the ability of future governments to call a vote when victory seemed most assured, Mr. Harper is now about to ignore his own law and announce a general election within days. With no overarching issue preoccupying voters still awakening from their summer slumber and with four byelections set for September, which a general election would pre-empt, Mr. Harper presumably has strong reasons for wanting to face the electorate a year before the set date of October 19th 2009. But what are they?"
- The Economist magazine, Sept. 4, 2008

"If you care about the American election because you're scared of Sarah Palin's skepticism toward global warming, you should worry about Harper's unwillingness to continue his predecessor's work against climate change. If you hated George Bush because of his government's corrosion of civil liberties at home and abroad, the fact that Harper has been a thorough Bush apologist is a worrying indicator of how a full-fledged Conservative government
would encroach on the rights of Canadians."
- Heather McRobie in The Guardian, Sept. 10, 2008

". . . Beneath the calm exterior, Canada's political system is in turmoil. Since 2004, a succession of unstable minority governments has led to a constant campaign frenzy, brutalizing Canada's once-broad political consensus and producing a series of policies at odds with the country's socially liberal, fiscally
conservative identity. Canada is quietly becoming a political basket case, and this latest election may make things even worse."
- Christopher Flavelle in Slate magazine, Sept. 12, 2008

"Mr. Harper has restored the country's international prestige by demonstrating political courage on Afghanistan. The Liberals had sent Canadian troops there in 2001 but began agitating for withdrawal when things got difficult. Mr. Harper has refused to cut and run, and he has chastised those NATO partners in Europe who have shrunk from the fight. He has also boosted defence spending so Canadian troops are properly armed."
- Wall Street Journal editorial, Sept. 13, 2008

"The notaleader.ca website had a few other odd features. Among them was a homepage illustration depicting Mr. Ignatieff holding a machine gun, and a fictional dog blog ostensibly written by Mr. Dion's family pet, Kyoto. (The dog is so named because Mr. Dion, as environment minister in a previous government, was involved in the talks that led to the international climate change protocol of the same name.)"
- Ian Austen in the New York Times, Sept. 14, 2008

Global News – Decision 2008 – Analysis

Squandered loonies

By Gordon HendersonThe Windsor Star

Dion scarier than Harper, Canadians decide

By Mike BlanchfieldCanwest News Service

Arts cuts, lack of action on economy derailed Tory majority hopes

By David AkinCanwest News Service

Canadians not ready to give the NDP power in Ottawa

By Mike De SouzaCanwest News Service

Tories win a majority of sorts

By Don Martin Canwest News Service

Canadians have seen and heard their share of gaffes

Ashley TerryCanwest News Service

The apathetic voter is Harper's best friend right now

By Don Martin Canwest News Service

Economy ignited mean-spirited campaign

By Norma Greenaway Canwest News Service

Lacklustre campaign leads to questions over voter turnout

By Meagan Fitzpatrick Canwest News Service

The culture card: How the arts could cost the Conservatives

By Janice Tibbetts Canwest News Service

Harper's post-Thanksgiving election looking like a turkey for Tories

Don MartinCanwest News Service

Harper should have let botched interview speak for itself

By Barbara Yaffe Canwest News Service

Today's buzz: 'This man has no class'

By Shannon ProudfootCanwest News Service

Elections are emotional things, but voters love a winner

By Richard Foot Canwest News Service

Politicians vs. our last healthy industry

By Mark Milke Canwest News Service

Elections around the world

By Jenny GreenCanwest News Service

Austria: A return to the far-right

Belarus: Europe's last dictator

New Zealand: Gone to the dogs

Rwanda: Governing unopposed

Ukraine: Squabbling allies of the Orange Revolution

Zimbabwe: Power-sharing stalemate

Harper's minority: history's exception

Ashley TerryCanwest News Service

William Lyon Mackenzie King

John Diefenbaker

Lester B. Pearson

Pierre Trudeau

Joe Clark

Paul Martin

The road ahead

Where have you gone, FDR?

By Arthur MilnesCanwest News Service

The leaders series

Canwest News Service

Dion grew as politician as campaign unfolded

By Juliet O'Neill Canwest News Service

Layton's goal of prime minister admirable, but elusive

By Mike De Souza Canwest News Service

Winning seats: Elizabeth may, but she would if she changed tactics

By Richard FootCanwest News Service

Harper's cautious campaign runs headlong into economic turbulence

By Andrew Mayeda Canwest News Service

Bloc's 'block Tory majority' strategy had unexpected allies

Canwest News Service

Forum: The name game

By Jenny Green Canwest News Service

Spot Check: A regular look at the latest ads from the political parties

Shannon ProudfootCanwest News Service

Today's buzz: Motherhood and the economy

Kim Covert, Canwest News ServiceCanwest News Service

Aloofness is Harper's worst enemy

By Barbara Yaffe Canwest News Service

Today's Buzz: Gambling at the polls

Shannon Proudfoot Canwest News Service

Sourcing of election material closely scrutinized during the campaign

By Shannon Proudfoot Canwest News Service

Promise Tracker: A list of spending promises made by the parties during the 2008 federal election

Canwest News Service

Conservatives

Liberals

New Democratic Party

Green Party

By Gordon Henderson
The Windsor Star

By Mike Blanchfield
Canwest News Service

By David Akin
Canwest News Service

By Mike De Souza
Canwest News Service

By Don Martin
Canwest News Service

Ashley Terry
Canwest News Service

By Don Martin
Canwest News Service

By Norma Greenaway
Canwest News Service

By Meagan Fitzpatrick
Canwest News Service

By Janice Tibbetts
Canwest News Service

Don Martin
Canwest News Service

By Barbara Yaffe
Canwest News Service

By Shannon Proudfoot
Canwest News Service

By Richard Foot
Canwest News Service

By Mark Milke
Canwest News Service

By Jenny Green
Canwest News Service

Ashley Terry
Canwest News Service

By Arthur Milnes
Canwest News Service

By Juliet O'Neill
Canwest News Service

By Mike De Souza
Canwest News Service

By Richard Foot
Canwest News Service

By Andrew Mayeda
Canwest News Service

By Jenny Green
Canwest News Service

Shannon Proudfoot
Canwest News Service

Kim Covert, Canwest News Service
Canwest News Service

By Barbara Yaffe
Canwest News Service

Shannon Proudfoot
Canwest News Service

By Shannon Proudfoot
Canwest News Service

Kim Covert
Canwest News Service

By Gord Henderson
Windsor Star

By Shannon Proudfoot
Canwest News Service

By Barbara Yaffe
Canwest News Service

Larissa Liepins
Canwest News Service

By Don Martin
Canwest News Service

By Shannon Proudfoot
Canwest News Service

By Don Martin
Canwest News Service

By Don Martin
Canwest News Service

Meagan Fitzpatrick
Canwest News Service

By Misty Harris
Canwest News Service

By Richard Foot
Canwest News Service

By David Akin
Canwest News Service

By Shannon Proudfoot
Canwest News Service

By Shannon Proudfoot
Canwest News Service

By Shannon Proudfoot
Canwest News Service

By Don Martin
Canwest News Service

By Andy Riga
Canwest News Service

By Barbara Yaffe
Canwest News Service

By Don Martin
Canwest News Service

Shannon Proudfoot
Canwest News Service

By Archie McLean
Canwest News Service