Bhutto's 19 year old son named leader of PPP

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7164968.stm

While he may he horrendously unqualified for the job of leader of the largest political party of a nuclear armed nation wracked by terrorism, civil strife, and corruption, he should at least stand as an inspiration for all people my age who have political dreams. Maybe I'll even make a run for leadership myself next contest, I can see my campaign buttons now...

Bob Rae campaign kick-off: Pictures

Myself and my girlfriend in front of the office
Rocking some buttons and a t-shirt
Bob himself gave a good speech
Lots of signs
Bob makes the rounds

It's obviously that Bob has a great team around him, and should cruise to victory in Toronto Centre, either in a by-election or a federal election, and I look forward to volunteering as much as I can for him and his campaign.

McGuinty and O'Brien

http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/city/story.html?id=696d9a36-0f50-4f68-8e88-b6bfc035f0eb

As I'm heading back up to Ottawa today from Mississauga, I thought it would be appropriate to make an Ottawa-centric post.

While I do believe that the provincial government would work well with any municipal government, particularly with the importance that the provincial government has placed on helping Ontario's cities, I can't but think that McGuinty would prefer either for O'Brien to step down, or suffer further political embarrassment, as O'Brien has had some notable policy clashes.

Of course, given my previous thoughts on the rumour mill output of Jim Watson running for mayor, McGuinty's comments, while diplomatic, can be interpreted as firing a warning shot across O'Brien's bow that he could be in for some serious competition if he decides to wait it out.

Conservative inaction damaging progress of Mississauga, and the abandonment of fiscal conservatism

http://www.mississauga.com/article/9419

As I've written many times, Hazel McCallion should be the role model for fiscal responsibility, and her moderate and pragmatic values should serve as inspiration for all those who call themselves fiscal conservatives, as well as municipal governments.

While this incident further shows Conservative hostility towards Ontario's cities, the more interesting matter Hazel's bashing of the Conservatives should serve as a sign that the Conservatives have in fact abandoned fiscal conservatism. Given the huge deficits and gross spending by the Bush administration, and economist baffling decisions such as taxing income trusts and the GST cuts, it can be very fairly postulated that "economic conservatism" as generally understood, is no longer an actual set of policy prescriptions, but is merely a piece of rhetoric.

Replacing "fiscal conservatism" is two contrasting policies. While the Conservatives and Republicans cry they are fiscal conservatives, what they really are is "fiscal populists". The Bush administration, with its costly Iraq war spending, and military Keynesism, has been described by commentators as "Big Government conservatism", a combination of socially conservative domestic policies, expensive foreign policy, pork barrel spending, and corporate subsidies. In Canada, the Conservatives have seemingly showed disdain for basic rules of economics, and the advice of economists, in favour of implementing flimsy policies more concerned with bumping up Conservative support 1-2 points than with moving Canada's economy forward and helping individual Canadians achieve financial security.

Back to Mississauga, good to see the "small man of Confederation" has delivered the goods while Lawrence Cannon dithers.

Larry O'Brien wants to stay

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2007/12/11/ot-obrien-stays-071211.html

While it is perhaps somewhat cosmically funny that these allegations of bribery to get Kilrea to drop out at the same time both the NDP and Paul Martin apologized to David Oliver, I do wonder how dedicated O'Brien really is to staying on.

This is a situation which could rapidly worsen, even having federal implications for the Conservatives, as the Liberals are alleging that John Baird, (who is currently off sinking the Bali conference: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20071212.wbaliyork1212/BNStory/International/home)
may have been involved. Obviously O'Brien has to say he will stay on at this point, lest he appear weak and scared, but I would not be surprised at all if he were to step down if this affair becomes worse, particularly given O'Brien's relative unpopularity.

Simply on a rumour mill note, I have heard from various places around Ottawa that Jim Watson, the former mayor of Ottawa, current MPP for Ottawa West-Nepean, and Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, may have more than a fleeting interest in having his old job back. Watson's name is sometimes thrown around with those of Smitherman, Bryant, Duncan, and Bentley as potential leadership candidates, but given O'Brien's tailspin, I wouldn't be surprised if Watson threw his hat into the mayoral ring.

Climate Change Contrasts

Moving forward, playing a leadership role:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7130106.stm

Moving backwards, reducing Canada's influence on a pressing global issue:
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/071207/world/bali_climate_conference_16
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/071207/science/science_bali_climate_conference_cda_1

For all the Conservatives sound and fury about "Canada's Back", and the important they placed in the throne speech on improving Canada's role in the world, once again the Conservatives are showing that "Canada's Backwards", by not only dismissing, but openly being spiteful of global frameworks and agreements, and rapidly moving Canada from a global leader to a global loser.

That even China is making more relative progress, and shows more enthusiasm for an effective climate change agreement, while the Conservatives seem more than willing to wrong-foot the world community by deliberately setting the process up for failure shows that the Conservatives recklessness is destroying Canadian leadership in the world.

Meeting Ian Brodie

As an end of the term gift to the class, my Public Affairs teacher managed to get Ian Brodie, the Chief of Staff to the Prime Minister to come in and give a little talk. From the perspective of someone who entertains thoughts of going into a political career, having the God of Hacks come in was particularly interesting.

The first half of his talk was basically non-partisan, as Brodie discussed mainly the challenges any new government faces, particularly one of a party which has not seen government in over a decade. He focused mainly on Canada-US relations as a main priority for the government coming into power, and how that relationship affects almost every other policy area for the government. Brodie was openly critical of what he saw as lackluster performance of the Bush Administration, being particularly harsh on The Department of Homeland Security, criticizing the higher levels of that department for incompetence. I asked him if the Democratic takeover of Congress had changed the working relationship between the PMO and the White House, and Brodie said that it had actually been a good thing, as the Democrats grilled many Homeland Security higher-up's who Brodie had trouble with. Also, he mentioned, The Prime Minister has 2 personal washrooms too, apparently, one of which has a full shower.

It was when questions came from the class that Brodie started to get partisan. He lauded the child care benefit as if it came down from heaven, and dropped hints that the defense of this program will be a big part of Conservative strategy in the next election, and that the Conservatives will want to establish Dion before he gets a chance to establish himself, so we can expect a full wave of negative attack ads right from the word go.

Another standard Conservative line was that Conservative supporters are "hard working, honest, busy Canadians" and letting his mask slip for a moment by dismissing Liberal supporters as mostly "singles, young people with no particular responsibilities" as well as openly admitting the Conservatives were writing off urban centres and ethnic communities. Being from Mississauga, I found this part particularly relevant, and I can only imagine what shade of red Hazel McCallion would have turned if she had heard Brodie, with a literal wave of the hand, dismiss the complaints of urban mayors about infrastructure concerns. I was somewhat taken back at his remark about "young people with no particular responsibilities" considering he was talking to a group of very political active and aware students, perhaps he was thinking that most of the youth wouldn't vote Conservative anyway, so no point in acknowledging them.

Also of note is that Brodie's young child was used as the poster child on all the child-care related Conservative literature.

Quebec completely rejects Harper's abandonment of climate change file

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/071128/national/kyoto_quebec

All 3 parties voted in favour of the motion, showing that even amongst the Conservative-friendly ADQ, the realization of Harper's outright hostility to showing real Canadian leadership on climate climate has hit. It is refreshing to see Quebec playing a leadership role on this file, and I hope the Ontario Liberals follow suit.

Layton's NDP joins Conservative fear mongering

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20071128.wveil28/BNStory/National/home

Jack Layton, whose record as NDP leader is largely one of doing the Conservatives work for them, and selling out progressive Canadian values whenever he thinks he has a chance to damage the Liberals, for the benefit of the Conservatives, continues his track record by jumping on the Harper bandwagon on the face veil issue.

Chalk this one up either to Layton's desire to kowtow to Quebec and further minimal gains made there, or simply to take a policy opposed to the Liberals, but the NDP has unabashedly jumped on this bandwagon since the start. While I have never considered myself an NDP supporter, I think it is unfortunate that the NDP under Layton has largely moved away from representing the interests of the working class, back when it was the party of Tommy Douglas, and is now a party of divisive identity politics and jumping on whatever left-wing cause is fashionable, as it is now the party of Jack Layton's ego.

The Liberals admittedly failed to take a strong stand on this issue the last time, this time the Liberals must take a clear stand in defense of the Canadian traditions of rights and multiculturalism, to show Canadians they are the true voice of progressive Canadians.

Khan humour

I just felt this needed a post

Canada alone at Commonwealth

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2007/11/23/commonwealth-climate.html

Canada, who has a legacy of acting as a progressive vanguard within the Commonwealth, such as the leadership role it played on the Apartheid issue, has become, under the Conservatives, a road block to progress on a global issue. With the defeat on John Howard, Harper becomes the only leader to stand on the side of denial and dismissiveness of the climate change issue, and his lack of leadership is risking Canada's position as a positive influence on global affairs within international bodies, as also demonstrated by dismissal of the UN vote on the death penalty. This lack of leadership can be contrasted to Dion's decisive action at the UN Conference on Climate Change in 2005, where he got 191 nations to agree on a climate change agenda. The Conservatives cry "Canada's Back" when discussing foreign policy, but the governments actions have only shown "Canada's backwards".

Bonnie Crombie is feeling pretty good right now

Not exactly a great run of luck for Liberal-turned-Conservative floor crossers in Mississauga, is it?

First Tim Peterson gets smashed by Sousa, and now Wajid Khan (who I just mentioned in a blog post the other day, even) is stepping aside from the Conservatives after being charged with violating the Elections Canada Act. While the accusations do date from when he ran as a Liberal, the obvious focus now must be on the contrast between Khan and Bonnie Crombie, the Liberal candidate for the next election. (Which could be as soon as Feburary, if rumours are true) A local entrepreneur and community leader/activist, I fully expect Bonnie to be able to win Mississauga-Streetsville against whoever the Conservative candidate is, Khan or no Khan.

Mark Warner and Bob Rae's fundraiser

I've written about the disconnect and outright hostility of the Conservatives to Canada's urban areas, and so this is not that surprising to me.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20071123.wwarner23/BNStory/National/home?cid=al_gam_mostview

While Warner states his attending of a Rae event should not be seen as an endorsement, a man of Mr. Warner's intelligence of course realizes that it will be broadly seen as one. Warner, while he was a candidate, ran a localized campaign, on issues of relevant to the people of Toronto Centre. However, issues like poverty, equality, and opportunity don't mesh well with the current Harper Conservative platform and strategy, which is more focused on throwing potentially billions of dollars down the drain in an unneeded drug war, abandoning Canadians on death row, and borderline unconstitutional crime bills. That Warner's "endorsement" comes on the heels of the defection of the Progressive Canadians comes as no surprise, and should be a sign to dissafected Red Tories that they do, again, have a political home from which to work towards a moderate agenda.

After all that talk on Red Tories being said, I urge Liberals in Desnethe-Missinippi-Churchill River to vote against David Orchard.

Liberals and Conservatives on getting things done for Mississauga citizens

The Liberals: http://www.mississauga.com/article/8758

Mississauga South Liberal Paul Szabo has been named the hardest-working MP in Ottawa for the second consecutive year.

Pat Martin can childishly name-call and disrupt the Parliamentary process all he wants, but Paul Szabo, my member back home, is very effective for the people of Mississauga South.

The Conservatives: http://www.mississauga.com/article/8760

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty said the 86-year-old mayor of Mississauga should shut up and stop whining about her city's infrastructure problems and get to work fixing them.

It is fairly rich for the former Minister of Downloading and Locking up the Homeless, whose most high profile actions as Finance Minister federally have been a broken promise on income trusts, and a GST cut the vast majority of economists have been critical of, to speak so ill of the Mayor whose city has become associated with successful urban growth, balanced budgets, and lack of debt. While a general urban bashing makes sense from a Conservative stand point (they won't win any seats in the major urban core areas, and bashing big cities and big city values plays well in rural areas and among SoCons, the Conservatives bedrock supporters) the sheer hostility towards much of the suburban areas, and Mississauga in particularly I can't understand.

If the Conservatives wish to win a majority, Mississauga is an area in which they will need to make gains. On the Mississauga South Federal Conservative webpage, one of the lines they have states "Who will represent Mississauga South in a Conservative majority government?" The line is more than just filler, it has real substance. Mississauga South is among the top targets for the Conservatives, missing it by less than 5% in the last election, and if any real Conservative beachhead will be established in the GTA, it will be on the banks of the Credit River.

It isn't as if Mississauga is downtown Toronto, beyond the South, the Conservatives even have an incumbent in the city in Mississauga-Streetsville (albeit via a floor crossing), and have a realistic shot at Mississauga-Erindale, meaning that in the best of times, they could control half the city riding's, meaning Mississauga is not exactly an electoral wasteland.

The only possible explanation I can think of for the cold shoulder the Conservatives are showing towards Missers is they have figured that general urban bashing will secure more rural seats than developing actual urban policies would gain urban seats. Mississauga voters need to realize that Conservatives ultimately do not care of them, which is a real reflection that the Conservatives are willing to ignore and trash a city that ultimately represents so much of what is right with Canada; economically successful because of moderate and balanced approaches, wonderfully multicultural, and based around a successful federation.

Pat Martin's histrionics

Pat Martin has a bit of a history of pulling vulgar stunts like these:

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/071120/national/mulroney_schreiber_circus


The non-partisan committee advisers employed by the House of Commons had informed Szabo that the motions dealing with the Mulroney-Schreiber affair were not within the written mandate of the ethics committee.

So far following the advice of non-partisan employers, Pat Martin calls the Member for Mississauga-South a "son of a bitch" and a "disgrace". Martin, who has long been one of my least favourite MP's because of his seemingly pathological and often aimless hatred of the Liberals, shows again why the NDP is ultimately a protest party. Had the situations been reversed, and Szabo used unparliamentary language to disrupt important committee meetings, much more focus would be on Szabo. Actions like these show the NDP is more focused on creating shows like these than the business of Parliament.

I also want to include this bit of smack down my hometown member put on the NDP finance critic:

Paul Szabo, a Liberal MP for Mississauga South disputed Wasylycia-Leis's credibility on May 10, 2007 in the House of Commons. Wasylycia-Leis charged that the Liberals were unduly influenced by the Canadian Association of Income Trust Investors (CAITI) who, she asserted, had donated $282,000 since 1993 to the Liberals and $53,700 to Liberal leadership contenders in 2006. Szabo pointed out that the CAITI did not exist until January 2007, after the Liberal Leadership Convention and continued "The member has immunity in the House. She can say whatever she wants, whether truthful or not, but she cannot say those things, I believe, outside the House. Will she go outside the House and say the same things to the media and expose herself to the consequences of misleading of the House of Commons?"
During the same Parliamentary session Szabo read the following email into the record written by CAITI to Wasylycia-Leis: "You need to publish a[n] immediate retraction of your false statements and assertions made in today's House of Commons today about our association funding the Liberal Party. CAITI did not come into existence until January 11, 2007. Please provide evidence to support you[r] statement that we have funded the Liberal Party to the tune of some $280,000. We have provided no funding to any political party directly or indirectly' Never have, Never will. Please advise immediately. In the absence of an immediate response, CAITI will pursue legal recourse." To date, Wasylycia-Leis has refrained from repeating her remarks outside the House of Commons where her Parliamentary immunity does not apply.

Progressive Canadian Party all but merges with the Liberals

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20071117.tories17/BNStory/National/home

Well, this is interesting. As the article points out, the Progressive Canadians are hardly an electoral force, but this move, with the Liberals and Conservatives in a tie poll-wise, is a propaganda coup. Given the emergence of the Mulroney-Schreiber scandal, it is interesting to draw the differences in the legacies of the Progressive Conservative Party that have been inherited by the Liberals and Conservatives. The Liberals inherited the traditional Red Tory emphasis on national unity, social cohesion and progress, while the Conservatives have inherited the Mulroney sleaze. I wouldn't be surprised to see Parsons and Love be candidates in the next election.

Some choice quotes:

“As a political party you are always trying to find your differentiators [with other parties] and I found that when Stéphane Dion became the leader of the Liberal Party that that differentiator was harder and harder to locate.”

"He had a lot of the same visions for the country that we had. And, of course, the Liberal Party has sort of moved into that Progressive Conservative space anyway.”

Senator Marie Poulin, the president of the federal Liberal Party, said the Liberals take the new arrivals as evidence of their leader's broad appeal to Canadians of many political backgrounds.

Events of the last week

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20071115/mulroney_thibault_071115/20071115?hub=QPeriod

The Mulroney vs. Thibault saga continues, with each side upping rhetoric as the war is now more of one than just words. While this development is certainly worth following and watching, the Liberals must be careful to keep the issue about Brian Mulroney and Karlheinz Schreiber, and not let this aspect become more dominant, as it is significantly less spin-worthy.

http://www.thestar.com/News/article/276677

Dan McTeague's comments that "The hunter is now the hunted" is interesting. Given that the Conservatives at this point are going to be trying to avoid an election, but are still going to be pushing ahead with a policy agenda to try and re-gain momentum, this could be an opportunity for the Liberals to flex some muscle without triggering an election. The Liberals should say about any proposed legislation that it won't pass without changes x,y,z, but if those changes are made, the Liberals would support it. This would allow them to use the "making minority parliament work" rhetoric, and actually mean it, and if the Conservatives reject any changes, the Liberals can counter that the Conservatives are being obstructionist and more concerned with triggering an election that Canadians don't want than governing the country.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2007/11/15/ot-budget-071115.html

And yet another standoff in Ottawa as Larry O' Brien and his Harris and John Tory-esque rhetoric about preventing service cuts with "efficiencies" and not raising taxes versus the city manager Kent Kirkpatrick's predictions that holding the zero line on taxes would result in service cuts. O'Brien proposal of a two-per-cent infrastructure tax levy is interesting to compare to the steps taken by Hazel in Mississauga.

More Hurricane Hazel

http://www.thestar.com/News/article/275278

Support for Hazel, in the GTA, and in the urban centres of the province continues to grow, as her campaign against the most anti-urban government in modern days.

This week, it was federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty who ran into the municipal rock of ages. "I tell you I'm taking on Mr. Flaherty," the mayor said. And, as a result, he and his government might well be picking up bits of wreckage for the foreseeable future.

McCallion slapped a 5-per-cent infrastructure levy in place – no muss, no fuss, no months of squeamish agonizing – to vacuum up some of Ottawa's GST cut and take care of what the feds won't do.

And, step aside, boys, from now on she'll lead a national campaign entitled Cities Now!, to demand Ottawa use its huge surplus to help urban centres tackle their many and mounting problems.

"I'm not fighting for Mississauga," she declared. "I'm fighting for the municipalities of Canada."

Others might be content to wait for bridges to fall down. Not Her Worship.
Suddenly, the easy outs of Ottawa have been closed off. No one can accuse Hazel of being some union lackey. No one can accuse her of running a fat and wasteful shop.

Unlike your more effete urban pols, McCallion's got a style and face and sensibility at home in every Tim Hortons and curling rink, legion hall and mall in the country.
She had street cred before the term was invented. If she says so, it must be true. And if she's angry, something must be wrong. And if you're in her crosshairs, well, might want to get your affairs in order.

"I am in a fighting mood," Greater Toronto's best-loved octogenarian announced

Come election time, the Conservatives will find that Misser Liberals will be in a fighting mood, not content to let federal mismanagement destroy Canada's greatest urban success story. The recent provincial election showed that Mississauga, once a safe Conservative area, is becoming Liberal country. Wajid Khan, at a rally the other day, talked about how proud he was to be a Conservative, and how the GTA needed more Conservative representatives. As long as the Conservatives take an openly hostile. approach towards Ontario's cities, and the GTA in particular, Khan should be spending more time discussing with his riding why he felt the need to join an anti-urban party, and less time grandstanding.

11/11

On this Remembrance Day, it is important to remember both the sacrifices given, and the gains made by Canadians in battle across time. From the formation of our national identity at Vimy Ridge, to making the world a safer place in the era of peacekeeping, today Canada salutes and remembers our brave soldiers.

Hurricane Hazel vs. Jim Flaherty

http://www.thestar.com/News/GTA/article/274687
http://www.thestar.com/Article/274686


"We are doing the right thing. We shouldn't have to, but we have no choice," McCallion said after the 9-2 vote.

This is about par for the course for Hazel. Mississauga and McCallion herself have long prided themselves on prudent fiscal management, and remaining debt free. While the blame for rising infrastructure costs can be spread around to many sources, from the Peel Regional government and the unfair burden it places on Mississauga, to the Mississauga government of the past which has displayed pro-growth policies at the sake of infrastructure development in the past, in the here and now, Hazel criticisms of the federal government should definitely be noted.

"The federal and provincial government better not come here and tell me we are not managed efficiently. They wouldn't dare tell us that. I tell you, we could teach them a lot of things as to how better they should be managed," she said.

"They're doing everything to put money in people's pockets to win the next election, using the taxpayers' money to win a majority," McCallion said. "I take real exception to that, I tell you. We are fighting. I'm in a fighting mood. ... We are going to get a real campaign going across this country."

When asked if she'll have problems selling the idea, McCallion said: "The citizens of Mississauga are disappointed that the federal government has disowned the cities of Canada, absolutely. It's a complete neglect of the cities of this great country."

She said Finance Minister Jim Flaherty's mini-budget, which ignored urban needs in favour of cuts in the GST and income tax, left Mississauga with no choice but to impose a levy that could be collected annually for the next 20 years.

"It's a sham," McCallion said, slamming the tax cuts as a cynical attempt to gain re-election.
"Is the federal government going to wait for more bridges to fall down?" she said, citing the results of neglect in the recent collapses of bridges in Quebec and Minnesota.

And then David Miller's comments:
"I don't think they can dismiss each city systematically," Miller said. "Mississauga has benefited from extraordinary growth, and even they are facing challenges that are unaffordable in their city without massive property tax hikes.
"So Minister Flaherty may try to marginalize Hazel McCallion. Good luck."

Hazel, who is extraordinarily popular in Mississauga, is arguably the most credible political figure in the country when it comes to urban areas. Jim Flaherty, hailing from the opposite end of the GTA, ignores her at his peril. Given that Mississauga is an area the Conservatives hope to make real gains in, (Khan doesn't count) particularly Mississauga South, which is bound to be a top Conservative target in the next election, as it was the seat they came the closest to winning in the GTA proper, Hazel's criticisms will certainly put a dent in any plans to paint Misser blue.

Enersource plot twist

http://www.mississauga.com/article/8301

Interesting developments, particularly for me in the South as Carmen Corbasson of Ward 1 is my councillor.

Few details are available at the moment but one of the three resigning councillors, Ward 7's Nando Iannicca, mentioned the development at today’s council meeting and asked that the item be added to the agenda for discussion.Iannicca, Ward 1 Councillor Carmen Corbasson and Ward 10 Councillor Sue McFadden have resigned from the Enersource board, which has been embroiled in a dispute with the City following council’s decision to slash the salaries of board members.Board members refused to accept the pay cut last April and council responded with an ultimatum to take the cut or be fired.

Corbasson's name is sometimes tossed around as a possible future mayor once Hazel leaves office (and knowing Hazel's resolve, I would place money on the reins of the city being literally taken from her cold, dead hands) so I wonder if the kerfluffle around Enersource could affect a potential run.

The Phony War, and the "Icebreaker"

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20071104/tories_elxn_071104/20071104?hub=QPeriod

I agree with the idea that currently Parliament is in a bit of a phony war, or a cold war, with all sides building up arms and ammunition, but with no immediate flash point on the horizon, and I also think that this gives us a glimpse of the style of campaign the Conservatives will run.

''Liberals sit on their butt,'' said the official, referring to the Liberal MPs who abstained in confidence votes on the throne speech and the recent mini-budget.
''We have been running TV ads letting people know that Liberals and NDP say one thing and do another.''
Conservative attack ads, portraying Liberal Leader Stephane Dion as being indecisive and keen to restore the recently announced cut to the GST, debuted this weekend.
A Conservative spokesman in Ottawa refused to say whether ads are being prepared to attack NDP Leader Jack Layton.
In an indication the Conservative campaign will be as centrally managed as the last election, candidates will be able to call upon the war room for even the most minute of details, such as drafting a local press release.

Attacks on Dion's leadership are too be expected, although one would think they might have learned from John Tory that a campaign based around a loose idea and hammered home with endless attack ads have a high risk of backfiring. As well, given the beheading of the two Conservative candidates in Ontario, as well as the Bill Casey situation, the Conservative campaign being micromanaged and centrally controlled by the Harperites is not a surprise.

What is interesting is the references to Jack Layton and the NDP. The great secret of the NDP is that they would prefer a Conservative victory, even a majority, as it would allow the NDP to attack the Liberal opposition as opposed to the Conservatives, as seen in the last election. While the NDP is obviously not a Marxist party, they do seem to put much faith in the idea of a "vanguard/icebreaker of revolution" which would be a Conservative majority, which NDP partisans hope would make the Liberals look weak, and allow the NDP to replace them as the main opposition to the Conservatives. This can be seen by the NDP's branding of themselves as the "Effective Opposition" and adapting the exact same "leadership" rhetoric as the Conservatives.

Likewise, the Conservatives would greatly prefer a strong NDP, as it does them much good, both for splitting the vote, distracting the Liberals from focusing on the Conservatives, and allow the Conservatives to compare themselves with the NDP, in an effort to win over centrist voters. The Liberals in the next election must realize that Layton and the NDP care much more about Layton and the NDP than actually protecting and promoting progressive values (as seen by the NDP adapting Conservative rhetoric, and the poor relations between the NDP and the Green Party, which was also shown in the Ontario provincial election) so the Liberals have a great opportunity to show themselves as the true voice of the progressive centre, and directly confront the Conservatives without getting distracted by the barbs coming from the left.

The Misser cabinet

First off, I'm happy that the new cabinet will have two Missers (a phrase I am now declaring coined, if no one else has) at the table, with Mississauga-Erindale MPP Harinder Takhar keeping his spot as minister of small business and entrepreneurship, and Peter Fonseca over in Mississauga-East getting a promotion to Tourism. While Harinder keeping his portfolio (small business being in Mississauga does make a lot of sense) is not a great surprise, and Fonseca getting into cabinet is as I predicted in a blog post last week (I figured either Fonseca or Sousa would get in, so my "Portuguese guy from Mississauga theory was correct) but I was slightly surprised at the portfolio. Tourism is generally given to someone from a well, "touristy" place, and while Mississauga is a great place to live, I wouldn't exactly call it a tourist destination.

Perhaps the Liberal government has a grand scheme to make the GTA West a hot spot of tourism. While Fonseca's riding does cover the "downtown" of Mississauga, and as such would probably be the focal point of any tourist development, for us down in the South, developing the lakefront would be a good tourist draw. and is something Sousa stressed during his campaign, to work towards turning Lakeview into "the Beaches of the West". Between Fonseca in Tourism, and Harinder in small business, Mississauga can probably expect some nice little investments over the next 4 years to help keep moving forward.

What, me worry?

http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/271064

Hopefully, things like this can show that Dion's leadership of the party is in command, particularly given that the GTA is the powerbase for Rae, Ignatieff, and Kennedy. The annual meeting is a good step forward to ensure a connection between the Leadership and the grassroots, and combined with the upcoming LPC-O AGM, should be a good step forward in ensuring party unity and renewal.

Sorbara leaving cabinet

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20071026/sorbara_leaving_cabinet_071026/20071026?hub=QPeriod

Wow. This comes as a pretty big surprise. Sorbara, who is a close ally of McGuinty, and basically saved his ass after the 99' election, seemed pretty secure in his spot as Finance Minister, particularly after running the very successful re-election campaign. Sorbara said he "wants to spend time with his family", which could either be very true, or be a euphemism. While it is still too early to tell what Sorbara's resignation could mean from a policy perspective, to me, it raises two key points:

1. With McGuinty's closest cabinet ally quiting, is that a sign the next leadership race might be starting sooner than we think? I don't think Sorbara has an interest in being party leader/Premier, so I don't think he himself would make a run, but his departure could be a sign that the "old guard" of the party wants to make a peaceful exit before the gritty stuff happens. I do think that McGuinty, whose personal popularity is below that of the party and the Liberal brand, will probably want to pull a Bill Davis, and step down as leader whenever the polls are showing he is really popular, but I don't see that happening for at least a couple of years. As Sorbara was the 2nd in command, and such a close ally of McGuinty, it is hard to imagine anyone could muscle him out but McGuinty, and no reason why McGuinty would want to remove him is apparent.

2. The new cabinet will be wide open. Ian Urquhart wrote (http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/269115) about how Smithermann would be the key character in any cabinent shuffle, and that if Smithermann wanted to stay at Health, the cabinet would retain much of its current make-up, but if he wanted to move to another portfolio (the article discusses Environment) in preparation for a run for either party leadership, or for Mayor of Toronto, that would be a sign the cabinet would be more wide open. With Sorbara gone however, even if Smithermann does want to stay at Health, I think we can expect more of a major shuffle. The media buzz has focused on some of the more high-profile rookies, including Margarett Best in Scarborough-Guildwood, Sophia Aggelonitis in Hamilton Mountain, and my man Charles Sousa in Mississauga-South. I think Sophia is a good bet, being both a woman, and a Liberal in Hamilton, which is an NDP area, and Charles has a good shot too, since he won a traditionally PC seat that was supposed to be close so overwhelmingly, combined with media speculation about Harinder Takhar losing his portfolio, and the need to have a cabinet minister from Mississauga. I think that it is a safe bet that irregardless of what happens to Takhar, a Portuguese guy from Mississauga will be in cabinet, meaning either Charles in the South to both consolidate the gains made in a traditionally PC seat, and reward him for his victory, or Peter Fonseca, who has seniority over Sousa and has built himself a very nice power base and a safe seat in Mississauga East-Cooksville.

Outside Mississauga, look for former federal cabinet minister Aileen Carroll, who picked up Barrie, (the seat she used to represent federally) from the PC's, to be a fairly safe bet to get into cabinet. Kevin Flynn in Oakville has a shot, as does Deb Matthews, particularly as with the defeat of Caroline Di Cocco, the Liberals have a female, South-Western gap to fill. I also think that Kathleen Wynne, fresh of the victory over John Tory, might be a dark horse to get a promotion to finance minister. And be sure to watch the big names that have leadership whispers around them; Jim Watson, George Smithermann, Michael Bryant, and Dwight Duncan.

Dion stands up for Canadian identity, and a democratic Quebec

I blogged about the PQ's thinly veiled "identity" bill (http://theliberalbag.blogspot.com/2007/10/pq-and-separatist-movement-has-not.html) previously, and now, thankfully and rightfully, Dion and the federal Liberals have entered the debate, to defend the values of the Quiet Revolution and a united, multi-ethnic, democratic Quebec.

"Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion called it a sovereigntist plot to broaden the French-English split and increase the PQ's popularity. He urged Marois to withdraw the bill.
"Thankfully we have a Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms which prevents certain politicians from going off the rails like she has," Dion said."

When people ask, "What do Liberals stand for?" this is a good example to point them towards: Defending democratic rights, making a united Canada work within the framework of the Charter, defending the rights of individual citizens under the law, and committed to the ideals of a just society and multiculturalism.

And what of the Conservatives, who claim to be "putting Canada on the right track?"

Labour Minister Jean-Pierre Blackburn turned aside questions on the issue.

"That's their debate," Blackburn said, referring to provincial politicians.

Prime Minister Stephan Harper's office declined to comment.

Shameful. Apparently the Conservative vision for Canada is one of government apathy towards the rights of citizens. Although given the slashing of the Court Challenges Program, the stacking of the independent and trusted judiciary with socially regressive party hacks, and the desire to wantonly abandon all federal government power for the sake of vote buying, it is too be expected. Actions, statements, and views like these are another warning of what Canadians can expect from a Conservative majority.

Conservatives "false" plan for a war on drugs

http://www.macleans.ca/canada/features/article.jsp?content=20071019_144237_6108

The Conservatives have been ramping up the rhetoric recently on drugs in Canada, discussing the need to get "tough" on the issue, and that, in the words of Tony Clement, "The party's over". While the Conservatives had attempt to frame the issue as one of "safer communities and families", an examination of the actual issues and policy shows that the Conservative plan is focused on things they want to do very badly: ignore urban voters and issues (because urban voters won't vote Conservative anyway) kowtow to social conservatives in the party, attempt to win over suburban voters (who generally haven't, but might start voting Conservative) and blatantly copy Republican Party style rhetoric that is short on results but long on soundbites about "toughness" and "leadership".

Perhaps the prime example is the issue of safe injection sites. Despite clear results of the benefits of supervised injection programs, Conservatives want to ignore "inconvenient truths" about harm reduction because it is harder to sell to the base, and, because it requires seeing issues like drug use and abuse in more than nuanced terms, is difficult for Conservatives to remove the black and white tinted glasses.

Former mayor of Vancouver mayor Philip Owen, who invested in, and saw results from, Vancouver's drug safe-injection site, has called the plan "uninformed". Considering Harper is an economist, one would have assumed he would understand issues like supply and demand, but the Conservatives seem to be taking a page out the NDP playbook by ignoring basic rules of economics. By locking up drug dealers, both minor and major, yes, supply can be affected. But demand will still exist, and given the lack of emphasis on harm reduction in the Conservative plan, all that can result is a destructive cycle that will lead to ever more amounts of tax dollars being thrown away, less safe communities, and the high paradox of US-style drug policies, more criminals convicted, but a more broken system. A heavy-handed, paternalistic, freedom endangering drug policy can do no good for anyone. Drug polices must take into consideration those on the front lines of the struggle against abuse, rather than political convenience, and the Conservatives are showing a lack of leadership, and failing Canadians in this regard.

PQ and separatist movement has not evolved since "money and the ethnic vote"

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/montreal/story/2007/10/19/pq-ban.html

With hearings on "reasonable accommodation" going on, and the PQ eager to gain back nationalist voters from the regions who voted ADQ because Mario Dumont raised the Montreal Muslim boogeyman more often, it is unsuprising to see the PQ table such an offensive and less subtle motion. While Marois also discusses the need for more French learning programs for immigrants, which is a fairly uncontroversial idea that could help both the tensions of accommodation and the economy, the main thrust of this bill is simple: discourage immigrants from joining the political process. With the ADQ, the federal Conservatives, and even now the PQ looking to roll back the Quiet Revoultion and using increasingly xenophobic rhetoric in hope of picking up nationalist votes, Liberals and Liberalism in Quebec must clearly draw a position in favour of tolerance, secularism, and cultural growth as part of a framing agenda to protect the values of Quebec within Canada. Never forget the words of liberal thinker and forerunner of the Quiet Revolution, Jean-Charles Harvey: "French has a chance of survival only if it becomes the synonym of audacity, culture, civilization and liberty". Liberals must show they are the party of audacity, culture, civilization and liberty.

Ottawa Centre

So Yasir Naqvi managed to hold on to Ottawa Centre from the NDP, who had this as one of their top targets. What does this mean for the riding federally?

The NDP does own the seat federally, with Paul Dewar being the incumbent. His victory over arch-Martinite Richard Mahoney in 2006 was somewhat of a surprise, as it was thought that Mahoney (who had he been elected would have most certainly been given a high level cabinet post) had only lost to the NDP in 2004 because former leader and living legend Ed Broadbent was the candidate. Let's examine the both the 2000 and 2004 Federal results:

2000:

Liberal
Mac Harb
22,710

New Democrat
Heather-Jane Robertson
13,515

Canadian Alliance
David Brown
10,163

Progressive Conservative
Beverly Mitchell
7,501

Green
Chris Bradshaw
1,529

In 2000, an election which saw Chretien at the height of his power, the Liberals easily held the seat. In 2004:

New Democrat
Ed Broadbent
25,734
41.05%

Liberal
Richard Mahoney
19,478
31.07%


Conservative
Mike Murphy
11,933
19.03


Green
David Chernushenko
4,730
7.54%

A massive surge for the NDP, a drop for the Liberals, and the growth of the Greens are all notable here. Now, making allowances for the drop the Liberals saw overall in this election, and the star candidate make the NDP victory less surprising in retrospect. By 2006 however, the Liberals wanted the seat, and given that Broadbent was not running for re-election, Mahoney was figured by many to have a much easier go. The results though, didn't pan out:

2006:

NDP
Paul Dewar
24,611
36.9%

Liberal
MAHONEY, Richard
19,468
29.2%

Conservative
FOUNTAIN, Keith
15,105
22.7%

Green
CHERNUSHENKO, David
6,765
10.2%

Another NDP victory, although both the NDP and the Liberals appear to have lost some overall percentage to the rising Greens and Conservatives. Something to remember though, the rough breakdown of the votes was 35%-30%-20%-10%.

Lets examine the provincial scene. The incumbent Liberal, Richard Patten, had been around forever, and left in a bit of a huff, (although he still played an active role supporting Yasir's campaign) leaving the riding fairly open. In step 4 youngsters in Yasir Naqvi, Will Murray, Trina Morissette and Greg Laxton to try and win the divided riding, although only Yasir and Will had an actual chance, save for a massive PC lifting. For context, here are the 2003 provincial results:


Liberal
Richard Patten
22,295
45.1


New Democrat
Jeff Atkinson
11,362
23.0


Progressive Conservative
Joe Varner
11,217
22.7


Green
Chris Bradshaw
3,821
7.7


So Richard has a fairly safe seat, and the NDP and PC's battle it out for second. Oddly enough, a glance at the provincial results show that although the PC's never won the seat, they were extremely competitive, coming in under 10% behind in every election from 1967-1981, and after that, finishing well behind the eventual winner, with the exception of 1999, coming in 6% behind.

Now, in between the last provincial election and the 2007 one, the NDP had won the riding fairly convincingly twice, and seen the long-time incumbent MPP leave. Ottawa Centre was probably amongst the top 5 targets for the NDP in this election, and a must win seat if they had wished to hold the balance of power in a minority situation. They focused lots of resources on the seat, with federal MP Paul Dewar showing his face frequently, and numerous visits by Howard Hampton. The Liberals ran a tough campaign, wanting to show the NDP that they didn't own the riding yet. The results are as follows:



Liberal
Yasir Naqvi
18,239
35.0


New Democrat
Will Murray
16,074
30.8


Progressive Conservative
Trina Morissette
10,410
20.0

Green
Greg Laxton
6,438
12.3

So what do we see? My first reaction was that the share of votes for each parties position was nearly the exact same as the previous federal election, with the winner taking 35%, the runner up 30%, (with the actual winner and loser being reversed) and the Conservative and Green votes remaining similar, at 20-ish% and 10-ish percent. Now of course, federal and provincial dynamics are different, but I can draw similarities between Yasir and Paul's victory. Both saw victory despite a decline in overall vote share, both were running to take over from high profile incumbents, and both faced tough fights. Overall, the fact that we were able to run a more effective campaign is what kept the riding Liberal. Will Murray had a potential pool of 40% of the voters who went NDP only 3 years ago, and was only able to get 30%, while Yasir and his team were able to raise the Liberal vote from below 30% to a victory. The victory was certainly a morale raiser, and should help the team manage to get Penny Collenette a very good shot at knocking off Paul Dewar, who didn't seem to help Will Murray much.

On Victory

I remember when I first started working on Charles' campaign way back in June. We had no literature save for a general piece about the budget that we had slapped a Sousa sticker on. We had no campaign HQ, we were basically operating out of the back of Charles' van and kitchen. I would go over to Charles' house, and if he was stuck and traffic and was late, his wife would feed me spaghetti apologetically. All the days, weeks, and months of knocking on doors, dropping literature, making phone calls, fundraising, and everything else paid off. I was expecting a Sousa victory of course, but the size of it stunned even me. I assumed we would win in a very tight race, and so did everyone else, but I can't complain about getting 47% of the vote in a riding that used to be one of the safest PC seats in the province. Everyone on the team worked so hard for the victory, and I was honoured to be working on his campaign. Mr. Sousa will be a wonderful MPP for Mississauga South, and will ensure that we keep moving forward.

10 reasons to vote against Tim Peterson

1. His floor crossing showed his lack of respect for the democratic process and the people of Mississauga South

2. He does not have a single idea or thought that was not first had by John Tory

3. He would be Queen's Park voice in Mississauga South, not Mississauga South's voice in Queen's Park

4. His weakness and indecivness on faith based schools, refusing to take a clear position on the issue

5. He crossed the floor not out of conviction or purpose, but because he didn't think he could get re-elected as a Liberal after the riding boundary re-adjustment

6. Was handed PC nomination in an undemocratic process criticized by previous PC MPP Margaret Marland called "despicable"

7. Sold out the family business

8. Turned his back on the investments made by the Liberal government in Peel and embraced a PC legacy of cuts and downloading.

9. On every issue he claimed was a reason for leaving the Liberals, he had prior praised the government on

10. Because Charles Sousa simply deserves it

Tim Peterson's lack of leadership on faith-based schools

While Ottawa Centre Progressive Conservative candidate Trina Morissette is far from my favourite person (both politically, and personally, the first time I met her at a Carleton Campus Conservative meeting I was attending because several of my friends are involved she lectured my ear off for about 5 minutes after she found out I was a Liberal) at least she has taken a stance on the John Tory destroying issue of the campaign, faith based funding. Trina has always been a firm supporter of the plan, and pledged to vote in favour of it if elected and the Conservatives form government. Now as the Conservatives are going to be in opposition benches for awhile now, and Trina herself has/had zero chance of winning her left-leaning riding, it may just be her attempt to gain favour with party insiders, or at the very least, appear to take a stand. Now while Trina's stance is obviously wrong, I do give her credit for taking a stance.

Tim Peterson, the current pseudo-incumbent in Mississauga South, fails in this regard. As the only PC candidate currently in office, Peterson is the standard bearer for John Tory in this city. And yet while other PC candidates such as Mississauga East-Cooksville candidate Zoran Churchin, who has come out loudly against the plan, as has Nina Tangri, the Mississauga-Streetsville candidate, and Mississauga-Erindale candidate David Brown who seems moderately in favour of the plan, Peterson has refused to take a clear stand on the issue, which given his flip flopping, floor crossing ways is not a surprise.

In the Mississauga News:

"Tim Peterson, the Mississauga South candidate and only PC incumbent in Mississauga, also said he'd wait for the legislation and vote based on the will of his constituents. "Certainly my community leans against it, but I want to talk to them and see what the options are and what the legislation is," Peterson said. He added, "There's also quite a strong feeling that came out that everybody was surprised by, that there should be no funding for any faith-based schools, including the Catholics. We have to look at that as a possibility, too."

I find it supremely ironic that Tim is discussing following the will of his constituents, because his track record on that is hardly stellar. So basically, although you've known the content of the platform since you joined the party, you've had months to talk to policy advisers, community leaders, and the people of Mississauga South, you are still "undecided", and will basically vote as the polls see fit. Also apparently getting rid of Catholic schools are going to be part of the Progressive Conservative plan, according to Mr. Peterson.

The official press release is no better:

" John Tory is a principled Leader who listens to people. He has heard the message from people that there are different views across Ontario about his plan to bring faith-based schools into the public education system. As a result, John Tory confirmed today that he would ensure a free vote at Queen’s Park on this issue, demonstrating that he is listening to the concerns that were raised. I will consult with you, the people of Mississauga South by telephone, fax, Internet and mail to ensure your views are heard and I will vote according to your views. As you know, I feel passionately about representing your concerns. Over the last four years, Dalton McGuinty and his government have failed to address the many problems that confront you. I welcome the opportunity to continue working for you. I ask for your support and vote on October 10th. "

Yes, because principled leaders change the central campaign plank mid-election. Apparently Howard Hampton will wake up tomorrow and realize he better start campaigning in favour of the MPP pay rise (although given 2 of the NDP members didn't attend the vote on the raise because they privately agreed with it, maybe this isn't such a long shot).

So basically, if you vote for Tim, according to this release, you are voting for a candidate who hasn't made up his mind, is indecisive, and needs more time to come up with an about-face answer. That is not leadership, and that is not what Mississauga South needs.

The meaning of signs

I've always been interested in the ways people visually identfy themselves politically. This has brought me to an interest in pins and buttons obviously, but also posters and signs. Having been in a number of different ridings over the course of the election, the differences and similarities between the parties and candidates is very interesting.

Liberals

Charles Sousa-Mississauga South, Yasir Naqvi-Ottawa Centre

Most Liberals don't stray very far from the template, as seen above. Strikes a nice balance between the central party and the candidates individual name, and the candidates personal website. The only candidates who I've noticed have different signs are Ministers like Jim Watson, who I included in the collage above. Jim has had that "re-elect a good MPP" since forever, and was allowed to grandfather it in. Dalton also has a few different designs, seen here: although he also has plenty of "standard" designs.

I'm assuming Ministers have more choice in choosing a custom sign vs. a standard sign, such as Kathleen Wynne's standard bags:

compared to George Smitherman's "last name only" signs

The template is designed to show both party solidarity, and highlight the individual, which is a good reflection of the Liberal team values.

Progressive Conservatives

Tim Peterson-Mississauga South, Trina Morissette-Ottawa Centre

Now here is a good example of how psychology can effect a candidate and his or her sign choices. Tim Peterson, the floor crosser, has a sign that has little Conservative blue in it, and has that stupid by-line "Your John Tory Candidate" as well as a link to the "leadership matters" campaign website. For Tim at the start of the campaign, this would have made sense. First, avoid using partisan colours as much as possible. In the period in which he was an Independent, Tim largely stuck to a neutral yellow and grey template in his literature, his MPP website, and in this official photo.

So using a white sign to try and give something of a non-partisan image makes sense. As does the ignoring of everything Tim Peterson related but the actual name on the sign. "John Tory candidate" is because Tim's entire platform is John Tory, and was thought up in the pre-flip flop days when Conservative candidates thought Tory would lead them into to promised land with his leadership on faith-based funding, instead of electoral oblivion. Same goes for the "leadership matters" webpage. For those of you who still doubt the slavish devoution Tim has for all things John Tory, look at this banner outside his campaign office.

You can't really get a proper scope of size from that photo, but this thing is HUGE. With Peterson headed for defeat at the hands of Mr. Sousa, perhaps he will ponder what could have been had his attendtence record not been so poor, and his floor crossing not so unpopularly recieved.

Trina is a whole different story. Unlike the psedo-incumbant Tim, Trina would never have won her seat, even in a best case scenario, considering Ottawa Centre is a Liberal-NDP battleground. But her sign is all Conservative blue, has her own personal website listed, and none of that "John Tory for insert every riding in province" bull here. She also has the riding listed, which is something that is becoming increasingly rare on political signs.

It is important to note that both Trina and Tim's signs have the PC logo cramed in as small as legally possible, probably to avoid voters connecting the candidates to the Harris days. Shocking, how voters have a tendancy to hold parties responsible for what they did in government.

New Democratic Party

Ken Cole-Mississauga South, Will Murray-Ottawa Centre

I couldn't actually find any online pictures of Ken and Will's signs, but since they both use the same template as shown in the collage, it is not a huge loss. The NDP, more so even than the Liberals, are very focused on consistancy in signs. The only difference in any signs I've seen personally or could find online is that Lynn Hamilton in Ottawa West uses a someone darker shade of orange, and Ric Dagenais in Ottawa Vanier uses a different template, white background with black text and orange and green highlights, which I couldn't find pictures of. Oh, and Ric and Will both have the bi-lingual aspect on the signs, with NDP alongside NPD.

That Ken and Will would use the same design is interesting. The NDP design as is seems to focus much more on the candidate, with the NDP (or NPD) logo cramed into the green highlight. Ken in Mississauga South faces an unwinnable fight, as the NDP has struggled, particularly in the last few decades, to even put in a respectable showing, usually finishing with below 10%. Ken might be better served with the current signs, as the NDP brand is not particularly strong here, and he does have some name exposure from being the perpetual NDP candidate, having run in the last few provincial elections and one recentish federal election for the Dippers.

Will Murray however, is locked in a tight battle with the Liberals, in a seat the NDP already have federally. Given Murray's profile (like all the major candidates, to be frank) is somewhat low, I would have figured Murray would strongly rely on the NDP brand name to help him out in an area that has elected NDP'ers both federally and provincially before. Both signs also fail to mention the individual website, and provide a link to the party one, although the green shadow used on the white text makes it very hard to read the smaller print of the website adress from any sort of reasonable difference. Lynn Hamilton's slightly darker shade of orange makes the website somewhat easier to see.

Greens

David Johnson-Mississauga South, Greg Laxton-Ottawa Centre

Couldn't find any pictures of David's signs, but they are the same template as Greg's. The Green signs are a classic example of placing brand first. The last name of the candidate is large enough to get you to remember it, but the main emphasis is on the colour green, and the word "green" (dunno why they like lowercase so much). This makes sense considering the Green brand rather than the individual candidates are more likely to pick up voters. The Greens further shun individuality by giving the party website, as opposed to the candidate website, and interestingly, follow the PC's in placing the election slogan ("Real Issues. Real Answers") on the signs.

NDP-Green Dynamics

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ontariovotes2007/story/2007/10/02/ov-green-parry-071002.html

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ontariovotes2007/story/2007/10/02/ov-green-parry-071002.html

So the 2 parties which can't form government are starting to fight with each other. What I can say from personal experience is that de Jong is basically correct when he accuses the NDP of attempting to spread misinformation on the Green platform and try to convince Green voters that the party is something it's not. NDP canvassers are told to knock on doors that have Green Party signs on the lawn, and "enlighten" the voters about the Greens "real" position. They try to paint the Greens as eco-libertarians, and that good leftish voters have no business voting for them.

I can imagine this strategy is being less successful this time around for a number of reasons. Firstly, this is the first election in which the Greens have actually gotten publicity and coverage, so voters who have decided to vote Green are probably aware and agree with the Green platform, as opposed to just the Green brand. Secondly, given that the rise in Green numbers hasn't been matched in a fall in NDP numbers, many voters who will be voting Green this election are likely Conservative voters turned off by faith based, or Dalton disliking Liberals, who are attracted to the Green's eco-capitalist ideas and emphasis on fiscal responsibility, so they wouldn't be attracted towards the NDP anyway. Having to deal with the Greens is probably the last thing Hampton and the NDP want at this point in the campaign, as they want to try to pick up leftish Liberals voters and maybe disgruntled Tory's who want to cast a protest vote in narrow ridings. For the Greens, any publicity is good publicity, and expect de Jong to continue to attack the NDP for the next couple of days to try and get Hampton off message.

Because "leadership" is flip-flopping on your central campaign theme

http://communities.canada.com/nationalpost/blogs/ontarioelection/archive/2007/10/01/tory-confirms-free-vote-on-religious-funding-if-elected-premier.aspx

"In Guelph last Monday, Mr. Tory said: "It's obviously an important element of our platform and I would expect that people will support what's in our platform. It's do what you said you would do."

That was then.

"MPPs will be allowed a free so that they are at liberty to vote their conscience and represent the wishes of their constituents...Through this free vote, in this significant way, the public can be more involved in the decision making."

A week or so, and a 10 point Liberal lead later, this is now.

And of course, "leadership" is also being attacked by members of your own party:

"One long-time Mr. Tory said the decision “reinforces” the impression among some that Mr. Tory has bad judgment. “The rest of his policies are all so mushy,” said the source. “It didn’t give him any place to go when he came forward with the faith-based thing.Here’s one big policy and the rest is all so vague and mush that he didn’t have an escape hatch.”

And of course, "leadership" is having front bench members discuss leadership races during campaign crunch time.

"Supporters loyal to Mr. Hudak and Mr. Flaherty (and potentially Ms. Elliott) have been distancing themselves from the faith-based “fiasco” lately, the source said, telling party activists that the unpopular funding approach was always second best to a tax credit. Some party members think Mr. Klees, a social conservative who lost to Mr. Tory in the September 2004 leadership race, would have difficulties running again. He is widely credited as the force behind Tory’s disastrous religious school funding policy. "

Greg Sorbara, Finance Minister and Liberal campaign chief, I think, says it best:

“It took an awful lot of gall on Mr. Tory’s part , today of all days, to talk about leadership and his special style of leadership...this is an appalling example of bad leadership and weak judgment. The fact is, the issue remains the same. Mr. Tory proposes to continue the debate into the next two, three or four years with all of the incumbent destabilization in public education, all of the division, all of the rancor.”

Leadership is restoring balance to the public system and civil society as a whole after the 8 years of mean-spirited cuts, public sector chaos, and fiscal mismanagement that is the legacy of the Harris/Eves governments. Leadership making the tough choices that serve the people, not political personality. Dalton McGuinty has displayed leadership in 4 years by acting less like a polititan, and more like a public servant. Leadership is also admiting areas that you've fallen short, and setting acheiveable and reasonable goals to fix those problems, and keep moving forward. John Tory's "leadership" as demonstrated throughout the campaign is empty promises, Karl Rove style negativity, glossed over platforms, and now, flip floping.

As I always say, John Tory is right about one thing, leadership does matter, and John Tory is not a leader.

EDIT: This: http://www.thestar.com/OntarioElection/article/262654 is hilarious!

"Progressive Conservative Leader John Tory’s scramble to change the channel from his flip-flop on funding faith-based schools suffered a setback this morning when a former party supporter ambushed him in a Scarborough supermarket."

Charles Sousa, Mississauga South Liberal Candidate, on health care

In 2003, the future of our publicly funded health care system was at risk.

There weren’t enough family physicians, wait times weren’t being measured let alone reduced, and hospitals were being closed.

The Liberal government is making real progress.

We set ambitious targets to combat wait times and we have met those targets. In Mississauga South, we invested in the Trillium Health Centre as part of our successful Wait Time Strategy. As a result, wait times have been reduced by 78% for angiography, 57% for angioplasty, 64% for cataract surgery, 26% for hip replacements, 42% for knee replacements, 23% for cancer surgeries, 48% for CT scans and 41% for MRIs.

We have invested millions to redevelop and expand our local hospitals. Construction of a new wing at the Trillium Health Centre is underway and will include 135 beds, as well as expand cardiac surgery, diagnostic, intensive care and support services. Credit Valley Hospital is undergoing an expansion that includes additional beds, operating and procedure rooms, and space for clinical services, including complex continuing care and palliative care.

We’ve invested in medical technology so that we can offer the best treatments and services available closer to home, including a new MRI machine at the Trillium Health Centre and a cancer centre and radiation treatment bunker at Credit Valley Hospital.

We’ve also delivered better access to family doctors. Half a million more Ontarians now have access to a family doctor thanks to increased medical school spaces, 150 new Family Health Teams and an expanded number of spaces for internationally trained doctors so they can practice medicine here. Starting in 2008, some of these doctors will be trained in our community at the new University of Toronto at Mississauga medical campus.

And we’re going to do more. Our plan to further strengthen health care means that we will deliver 50 more Family Health Teams, create 100 more medical school spaces and accredit more internationally trained doctors so that another 500,000 more Ontarians will have access to a family doctor.

We will also expand our progress on wait times to more services: emergency room visits, children’s surgery and general surgery.

In contrast, John Tory intends to rip $3 billion out of public health care, plus another $1.5 billion in unidentified cuts, which puts the progress we’ve made in health care at risk.

We’ve come a long way since the days of firing nurses and closing hospitals. We can’t afford to turn back to the days of Conservative cuts and neglect.

On October 10th I ask for your support – together, we can keep Ontario moving forward.

Conservatives placing ideology above objective facts: Canada does not need a war on drugs

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/070929/national/tories_drugs

The Conservatives are fully prepared to overlook the positives that out come out of places like the Vancouver's Insite safe injection clinic, and the lesser load on the criminal justice system that comes from liberal drug policies, in the face of kow-towing to social conservatism and American style rhetoric. This is an issue that the Liberals, should pounce on, particularly given the background and experience of a man like Dr. Keith Martin.