The Chosen One

Michael Valpy’s Ignatieff profile in yesterday’s Globe is among the most thorough I’ve seen. I’ve always found it odd that so little is known about the purported white knight  of the Canadian political scene.

I was definitely a supporter of his during the 2006 leadership convention, however, I can’t shake this sense of unease at his rise to power this time around. Not that I necessarily disagree with the outcome, but I find it a bit discomfiting to know he was basically handed the Liberal leadership on a platter.

I can’t say it didn’t work out for the best though. Really, anybody looks better than Dion at this point.

This piece in the G&M pretty much sums up my feelings on the way things worked out:

But Mr. Rae didn’t have the benefit of a good fight. He didn’t concede with the knowledge that he had put every effort into winning. He didn’t walk away with a grudging sense of admiration for his opponent and his superior campaign. Events conspired against him…

…Grace, in that circumstance, suggests equanimity about the forces beyond our control. And that, in turn, deserves the highest admiration.

More on this after exam season…

Harper gets re-mixed

Oh the power of the Internet:

A tad harsh, but still funny.

From Harperdictatorship

Awaiting Jan. 26

GG Michaelle Jean agrees to prorogue parliament until Jan. 26, saving the Harper government… for now. The country (including numerous Liberal party members) breathes a sigh of relief. As anti-climatic as the decision was, I think it was the right one.

The coalition was just too deeply flawed. Starting at the top, Dion’s abysmal performance proved that he just isn’t leadership material. This leaves me wondering if the outcome would’ve been different had somebody more credible stepped up to take the leadership crown. It appears the Liberal Party has been felled not once but TWICE with Dion at the helm. Then there’s the question of Bloc and NDP cooperation. Cleraly, more than a few Liberal party members have been questioning the intelligence of this “deal with the devil.”

Why the Liberals have insisted on delaying their Leadership election until May is beyond me. JUST CHOOSE SOMEONE ALREADY. The party can only lose by leaving Dion as its leader.

Andrew Coyne makes an interesting assertion on his blog:

Let a candidate of stature enter the race on an anti-coalition platform, and he or she would instantly attract a wave of support. Until now, the Ignatieff and Rae machines would have precluded any serious challenge. But the party is in such turmoil after the events of recent days that the situation has suddenly become a lot more fluid.

But who? Martin Cauchon? As a federalist from Quebec, he’d help repair the damage to the party’s base in that province. But a Manley candidacy would be particularly compelling, in view of another factor: the sharp decline in Stephen Harper’s fortunes. Such is the damage he has sustained that the centre-right vote is now very much in play — provided the Liberals can arrest the lurch to the left implied by their participation in the coalition, and provided they can put forward a credible centre-right leader. The candidate that most readily fits that description: John Manley.

Coyne’s spot on here. Harper has done irreparable damage to his reputation in the last week. His lack of remorse for the situation is particularly jarring-I wonder if he’s actually learnt anything from this situation. There are a lot of centre-right votes to be won, if the Liberals can prove that they are a credible alternative to the Conservatives on economic policy. This fact is corroborated by the fact that the polls seem to show the majority of Canadians would’ve preferred keeping a Harper government. The best bet for the Liberal party is to pick a new leader and then just win the next election outright- without all this coalition silliness. This seems possible now that Harper has shown this glaring weakness.

The Conservatives have some interesting decisions to make now. Undoubtedly, they need to go back to the drawing board and put together some kind of economic stimulus plan- no matter what they think is actually necessary. Further, I think they need to seriously discuss replacing Stephen Harper. He made a fatal, unforgivable mistake, which almost cost his party the government. It’s unlikely, but this guy needs to go.

To the Bloc and the NDP- nice try, but no cigar.

Infighting begins- you can’t make this stuff up!

The Liberals’ chief whip is asking his MPs not to abandon the party as concerns grow about dissatisfaction over Stéphane Dion’s leadership.

CP reports threat of defection.

If he can’t even keep his own party in line, how can he possibly lead a coalition of three separate parties?

Clearly, the Liberal Party needs to replace this guy right now. This coalition is losing credibility and fast. We might have to wait to see Harper get his comeuppance.

WHY OH WHY is Canadian politics only interesting during exams?

This is our next prime minister?

Wow.

Just caught Dion’s announcement on the coalition. Anybody else think that was the worst, most anti-climatic public service video ever? I mean, I know the Liberal party is having some financing issues- but did they really have to use a web cam?

Do they really expect anybody to take that video seriously? Worst production values ever. He could’ve at least rehearsed the speech in advance.

If anyone forgot why he lost the last election….

Coalition for Canada…and Quebec

So, the CBC reports that a deal’s done:

A deal has been negotiated between NDP Leader Jack Layton and Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion that would see them form a coalition government for two and a half years, the CBC’s Keith Boag reported, citing sources.

The NDP would be invited into cabinet and get 25 per cent of seats, Boag said, adding that the party wouldn’t get the position of the finance chair or the deputy prime minister’s post.

Hmm… anybody else worried about giving TEN cabinet seats to a party that’s never had a hope in hell of holding even ONE? When did the NDP become a legitimate party in Canada? Even more disturbing is the Conservative’s secret recording (don’t they have better things to do? How about coming up with a budget that won’t lose a confidence vote?) of a private NDP meeting, where Jack Layton is caught saying:

Nothing could be better for our country than to have the 50 (BQ) members out of 75 who’ve been elected in Quebec actually helping to make Canada a better place. We just approach it on that basis and say, ‘We’re willing to make that happen. Here are the things we’re going to be investing in and transforming together.’

This statement is just laughable. Am I supposed to believe that, in the spirit of nation-building, the Bloc have decided to forget its “Quebec-first” mandate to “help make Canada a better place?” The last thing we need is for more power to go to this excuse of a national party.

Also, I’m also a bit confused at how the Liberals plan to keep this coalition together for two years. There are pretty significant ideological differences between the NDP and the Liberals, which could make this an incredibly fragile government. By making this deal, the Liberal’s pull themselves further and further into the very crowded left side of the political spectrum… at a time when Canadian’s seem to want to move a bit to the right. I argued after Dion lost on Oct. 14th that the party really needed to move to the right to capture back the fiscally conservative voters that have left en masse to the Tories. The left has some severe vote-splitting issues in Canada… and this could set them back even further.

As a Torontonian, I can’t help but feel a bit of vindictive glee at this Harper ousting. His policies have judiciously ignored the needs of both Ontario and cities. But, I have no idea if this new option is actually better. Which is the lesser of the two evils?

Backpeddling begins…

So the Tories have furiously begun to back-peddle away from their budget, nixing the controversial cut in public subsidies for political parties and ban on public servant strikes. They’ve also scheduled an early budget announcement in January in attempt to assuage this coup. Doesn’t appear to be enough though- the opposition smells blood and is going for the jugular. It’ll be interesting to see if Harper will be willing to make the ultimate 180 and introduce some sort of stimulus plan. It would amount to a huge loss of face and might not even deter the opposition’s non-confidence case.

Thankfully, the coalition leader will not be Dion (who probably regrets resigning at this point). Smart move, considering we just voted 6 weeks ago AGAINST HIM. So the question of the hour… who will it be? It certainly won’t be any of Ignatieff, Rae or LeBlanc- the liberals will wait until May to hold their leadership convention. It looks more and more likely like Goodale or McCallum will hold the coalition leader position if this thing comes together. I’d be more inclined to support McCallum, as he’s the current opposition finance critic- plus he has a solid economics/finance background from his days as an economist at RBC and an econ prof at McGill.

As exciting as this is for arm-chair amateur pundits such as myself, I can’t help but think this is horrible timing. Stability in a time of crisis is essential- and this type of turmoil detracts from every politician’s ability to actually do his job- i.e. run the country. In addition, if this coalition is successful, we’ll be essentially introducing a “lame-duck” interim Prime Minister to a newly minted President Obama. Not the best way to start an important relationship. But, I suppose the blame has to lie at the feet of Harper et al. for their hilariously bad miscalculation. This also makes the liberal leadership race all the more important… as it becomes the election for the next PM. There’s something so very undemocratic about that.

Prime Minister Dion?

(This comic is actually from Feb 2008. Funny how the tables have turned).

Oh, how interesting the last 48 hours have been. A few things I never thought I’d ever say in my life:

1. Canadian politics are kind of exciting.

2. Dion might become the next Prime Minister.

3. Jack Layton might have a place in cabinet.

Finally some excitement on the Canadian political scene. At exactly the wrong time! While the rest of the world tackles the economic crisis, our sage old elected representatives have decided to put partisan politics first. This just makes everyone look bad.

Harper’s budget was clearly asking for it. How did the conservatives manage NOT TO talk about an economic stimulus package? Boggles the mind. At the same time, it’s hard to see all this Liberal-NDP wrangling as anything but a pure power grab. I’m not sure what’s more scary- the prospect of  Dion/Layton government during the financial crisis or a crazy power-mad Stephen Harper. I suppose Harper should have to pay for his hubris, but aren’t there any other options?

On another note, despite the politically motivated nature of the cuts, I agree with Stephen Harper’s decision to get rid of the public voting subsidy. The last thing i want is my tax dollars supporting the Bloc Quebecois.

In Defense of the Deficit

In the last few weeks, the dreaded “d” word (deficit) has reared its ugly head in a variety of news stories. The Ontario economy, ravaged by its flagging manufacturing sector looks to be about $500M in the red. With the turmoil in the financial sector, the overall Canadian economy appears headed towards recession, which could also spell budget shortfalls for the federal government. The public perception on deficits is decidedly negative- most think they should be avoided at all costs (see this common opinion into today’s G&M). In the last election, this perception led all major parties to run on the promise of a balanced budget. Near the end of the campaign, Stephen Harper even commented outright that his party would not run a deficit. This kind of talk is dangerous.

Running a deficit in times of recession is not an unreasonable policy.  During a recession, both businesses and individuals make and spend less money, leading to shrinkage in the economy and smaller tax collections by the government. The ability to spend money is one of the few fiscal policy tools that a government has to fill the spending gap caused by the recession. Thus, in order to spur economic activity, we need our governments to spend money (on infrastructure, on health care, on education, etc)- not cut spending just to balance the books. Harper needs to rethink this ill-conceived campaign promise to balance the budget, which could worsen the state of our economy. If he insists on pandering to public opinion, he should look first at getting rid of his “targeted tax breaks” (read: bribes) before cutting spending- for more on this, see Jeffrey Simpson’s column. However, he should avoid raising taxes or interest rates to try to make up the short fall- both would further discourage investment in the economy.

(On another note, I’d argue that large government surpluses aren’t actually a good policy. Surpluses are usually the result of strategic “budget padding”- when the budget overemphasizes expenses and underestimates revenue sources. In this scenario the government should either lower taxes or spend the money on something useful.)

Bottom line: Deficits are not bad. In fact, in times of recession, they may be necessary.