Here, on how Justin Trudeau seems to have taken up the cause of unaccountable executive power even from his third-party place in the House of Commons.
For further reading…- For some of the background on of the Libs’ entitlement hangover following the Cons’ taking power, see here (insisting that Parliament has no place in approving of military engagement) and here (criticizing the Accountability Act as a response to their actions while in power).- Josh Wingrove reports on the attempt by privacy experts to challenge the Cons’ appointment of Daniel Therrien. And Lisa Austin highlights some of the (Read more…)
This and that for your Tuesday reading.
- Mitchell Anderson compares the results of corporate-friendly Thatcherism to the alternative of public resource ownership and development in the interest of citizens – and finds far better results arising from the latter: Thirty-five years after she swept to power as British prime minister, it is ironic that socialist Norway now has $830 billion in the bank and enjoys fully funded social programs that most of us can only dream of. Meanwhile the U.K. is enduring another round of wrenching austerity and owes over £1.3 trillion — about US$2.2 trillion. (Read more…)
Assorted content to end your week.
- Jonathan Freedland discusses how the UK’s Conservative government is forcing its poor citizens to choose between food and dignity: Cameron’s statement rests on the repeatedly implied assumption that the only people going hungry are those who have opted for idleness as a lifestyle choice, who could work but don’t fancy it. This assumption is false. The majority of poor households include at least one person who works. As Rowan Williams, the former archbishop of Canterbury, put it this week: “People who are using food banks are not scroungers who are cynically trying (Read more…)
If there’s anything to question in the latest reporting about possible post-election cooperation between the NDP and the Libs, it’s the impression that Thomas Mulcair’s willingness to pursue a coalition to replace the Harper Cons with a better government somehow comes entirely out of the blue. But while the story may not be entirely new, it’s certainly well worth pointing out: The leader of the New Democrats said on Tuesday he is willing to form a coalition in order to take power after the next election, even as the other opposition party leader, Liberal Justin Trudeau, played down the idea. … (Read more…)
Assorted content to end your weekend.
- Lana Payne highlights the Harper Cons’ culture of hate with just a few recent examples: Veterans. Informed-debate. People’s right to a union and free collective bargaining. Voting rights. These are all under threat in Harper’s Canada.
This really is a government that hates; hates anyone that disagrees with them. Hates unions and the ability of people to work collectively to get a fair share of the economic pie. Hates democracy. Hates people who vote for other parties. Just plain hates.
This is not healthy for our country, our society. This is no way (Read more…)
This and that for your Thursday reading.
- Ken Georgetti discusses how the corporate tax giveaways of the past 15 years have hurt most Canadians: The Conservative government and special interest groups claim incessantly that cutting corporate income taxes is good for the economy and for individual Canadians. We have been led to believe that tax giveaways to corporations would lead companies to reinvest in research and development as well as machinery and staff training to boost productivity. This is supposed to stimulate economic growth and create better paying and more secure jobs. But that is not what has happened (Read more…)
The Liberals, at their self-perceived best, lag many years behind the principled curve set by the NDP.
(Meanwhile, who’s taking odds as to the number of formerly-Lib Senators who will be recruited by the we’ll-take-anybody Greens?)
I won’t break down in detail the bevy of reviews of the current position of Tom Mulcair and the federal NDP – including pieces by Bruce Stewart, John Ibbitson and John Geddes. But it’s worth highlighting the areas where I’d see no need to challenge the consensus reflected in those articles – as well as the one where some pushback is absolutely needed.
On the bright side, there’s little reason to see anything but opportunity in the public’s views of both the NDP as a voting option, and Mulcair as a leader. As Geddes in particular notes, the main (Read more…)
I’ve previously pointed out the problem with framing electoral outcomes solely in terms of which party wins the most seats. And EKOS’ polling about which single party is most likely to form government thoroughly misses that point in previewing the federal campaign in 2015.
But that omission aside, EKOS’ results do offer an interesting contrast to the media narrative of a two-party race: We asked the panel to rate the percentage likelihood of each of the three contending parties winning the next election; it gave us an interesting insight into how Canadians view the next election. While the election is (Read more…)
Others have been quick to give Chantal Hebert’s take on the NDP more credence than it deserves. But while Hebert is right to note that there’s more to the NDP’s path forward than merely challenging Justin Trudeau, she falls into a familiar trap in assessing the party’s public appeal – and indeed rewrites an awful lot of history in the process: A strong New Democrat performance in Quebec could block the path to power for the Liberals. But it does not follow that it would pave the way for decisive NDP gains in the rest of Canada.
In 2011, Layton’s (Read more…)
Here, on how this week’s federal by-elections seem to confirm that another minority Parliament is a real possibility in 2015 – even as the main parties all rule out any discussion of what would happen under that scenario.
For further reading…- I make reference in the column to John Ivison’s rough calculations as to how a 2015 seat count might look. But his greater thesis seems to utterly miss the point that if the Cons finish with just a few more seats than each of the NDP and Libs (and far less than the two combined), they’ll be (Read more…)
Miscellaneous material for your Monday reading.
- Paul Wells and Dan Lett offer roundups of today’s federal by-elections, while Chantal Hebert offers some advice to the candidates (whether or not they’re elected to Parliament today). And Murray Dobbin explains why there’s only one true progressive choice in Toronto Centre in particular: McQuaig’s Liberal opponent in the riding is Chrystia Freeland, a parachute candidate who is being touted as a progressive with deep concerns about inequality. Trudeau has tried to boost her profile by stating that he wants her in his “inner circle.”
The problem is that there is nothing (Read more…)
Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.
- Michael Den Tandt and Jonathan Kay both point out the willingness of conservative (and Conservative) supporters to brush off the obvious misdeeds of their political leaders. And Glen Pearson rightly concludes that the responsibility to elect deserving leaders ultimately lies with voters: We are guilty of asking to little of ourselves. We find it remarkably easy, natural even, to blame our representatives and yet we put them there. They have no real answers to our unemployment situation, but we either continue to support them because of the party we serve or because we (Read more…)
It may not come as much surprise that I thoroughly disagree with Murray Mandryk’s paean to corporate protection agreements. But his take on the CETA does signal one point worth highlighting.
Last week, my column dealt with the shift toward seeing politics as a matter of marketing and microtargeting, rather than the development of (and advocacy for) broad ideas as to how society ought to function. Using Susan Delacourt’s terminology, the most obvious move is toward MOP rather than SOP-style politics.
But while Stephen Harper’s Cons may have won over swing voters by focusing on the former, they’ve certainly (Read more…)
Paul MacLeod’s post-mortem of Nova Scotia’s election campaign is well worth a read. But following up on Kevin Milligan’s astute point, I’ll point out how one of the main factors in the outcome looks to hint at partisan politics taking yet another turn for the worse – even as it signals what activists may need to do to bring about change which may become increasingly difficult through the party system: It was around this point that the Liberals decided they needed a new game plan. They had recently been trounced in the federal election and the Liberal brand was (Read more…)
Nanos’ latest poll on the parties under consideration by voters has received plenty of attention. But the discussion so far seems to miss the most plausible explanation for the poll results.
Compared to previous polling, the latest survey shows:- little change in the actual support levels of Canada’s federal parties; and- a dramatic drop in the number of voters listing each of the national opposition parties as “under consideration”.
Now, the first point means that – contrary to the initial analysis by Nik Nanos – we shouldn’t interpret the poll as affecting the “shine” or first-choice popularity for (Read more…)
Assorted content for your weekend reading.
- Lana Payne discusses Unifor’s goals in the wake of its founding convention: The hope is that, collectively, working people can push back in new and profound ways against what has been a decades-long, anti-worker agenda perpetuated by both governments and corporations.
But just as importantly, the hope is that we can build social progress again for all Canadians. That progress has been virtually halted, stymied by the incredible growth and concentration in corporate power here at home and around the world and the subservience of governments to that power.
Corporations have been emboldened (Read more…)
Not surprisingly, Linda McQuaig‘s entry into the NDP’s Toronto Centre nomination contest against Jennifer Hollett has set off plenty of discussion this morning. And much of the focus has been on a possible by-election battle between McQuaig and Chrystia Freeland – the authors of the two most prominent recent books highlighting the gap between the rich and the rest of us.
But I’ll suggest that neither The Trouble with Billionaires nor Plutocrats figures to be the most important piece of reading material for the Toronto Centre by-election. While the campaign will hopefully raise the profile of economic inequality as (Read more…)
Paul Wells offers a note of warning for the Libs in recruiting Chrystia Freeland as a candidate. But I see a greater problem for Freeland herself in pursuing the role.
It’s not hard to see how Freeland might seem appealing as a means of papering over the Libs’ disconnection from the general public: Chrystia Freeland, winner of the 2013 National Business Book Award for her book Plutocrats: The Rise of the New Global Super-Rich and the Fall of Everyone Else (Doubleday Canada), has confirmed her foray into federal politics.
The race to replace MP Bob Rae in the Toronto Centre (Read more…)
This and that for your Thursday reading.
- Richard Eskow offers up some ugly facts about corporate wealth accumulation and tax avoidance.
- David MacAray writes about the challenge facing labour activists when much of the public has been trained to engage in gratuitous union-bashing even while fully agreeing with union priorities: A union official I correspond with (the International Vice-President of a West Coast labor union) recently shared an interesting anecdote. He said that whenever he meets someone for the first time and they casually ask what he does for a living, he answers by saying he’s a (Read more…)