Election Post Mortem

I say, there's no better title to this blog post than "Post Mortem" due to the election's political death of leaders, cabinet ministers, and other high-profile MPs.

Lorne Gunter has some insight on the NDP "surge" and how it was the Tories who actually surged through splits.

I lament, however, at no longer having the bulk of my posts focus on Dr. Michael Ignatieff.  It was fun to challenge his intentions to become PM.  I look forward to the next victim, Justin Trudeau, who will surely woo young soft Dipper support in Quebec once Quebeckers see that their new crop of NDP MPs won't deliver on anything and will turn on them so fast to look for the next best thing.  However, older soft-sovereignists will surely halt any exodus reciting "Je me souviens" and how Justin's father helped ignite Quebec nationalism.

And speaking of Quebec nationalism, Mr. Duceppe, it's been a slice, but your party, like your province, no longer has any real relevancy or power in Parliament.  Conservatives have shown that a majority is possible without Quebec and this will continue in elections to come as more seats are added to BC, Alberta, and Ontario.  Now especially with a few Quebec Conservative cabinet ministers getting turfed, Quebec continues to choose to be on the outside of government and the national stage.  So be it.

"Jack and Gilles went up the Hill to fetch a pail of water
Jack fell down, sprained his hip, recovered, and Gilles tumbled all the way thereafter."

For American-born, dual-citizenship, Elizabeth May, she and her party survive another day, despite losing 380,000 votes from 2008, that's a almost $800,000 the Greens WON'T receive in vote subsidies, but now, they won't have to pay her a salary.  I may spend some time focusing on her and her policies in future posts.

Speaking of salaries... over 100 MPs lost or retired.  How many qualify for the gold-plated pension I'm not sure, but many long-time MPs, including Gilles Duceppe, will live very comfortably for the rest of their lives.

For Prime Minister Stephen Harper, it has been a very long time coming.  Over ten years actually to get here.  After his hiatus as a Reform MP and leading the National Citizens' Coalition for a few years, in 2000, seeing Stockwell Day's days numbered, he returned with one intention--to unite the right. 

This election, I maintain that Harper was the one who engineered the election, trapping Ignatieff into holding the gov't in contempt.

I maintain that Harper let Jack attack Ignatieff on his voting record in the English debate and let him go toe-to-toe with Duceppe in the French debate.  Harper knew he didn't need Quebec to win, which is why Harper didn't have to say much and actually sacrificed Quebec and some of his cabinet ministers to the NDP to win it all elsewhere.

With a loss, two minority wins, and now a majority, Harper has proven as a skilled tactician, there is only one winner in a game of chess, not only with opposition leaders, but from within as well.  He is and will remain for many years, the last man standing up high on the Hill, with the only pail of water.

The Separatist Who Cried Shit Wolf

Ah Gilles!  Trying to build some momentum are we?  I see that you are using 2010 to drum up the old license plate adage "Je me souviens" so Quebeckers remember the round number anniversaries of the Levesque referendum (1980) where you "Oui"s lost, the failed Meech Lake Accord (1990) which sparked your little party, and the Bouchard referendum (1995) where you guys lost again!

Thus continued the whole "unity" debate, resulting in billions more federal transfer dollars pouring into Quebec, symbolically highlighted by kick ass Canada Day fireworks displays in Montreal.

And where does that get us?

Well according to you, nowhere really.  So to get the ball rolling (again), you go on a cross-Canada tour, which from what I recall, barely anyone noticed or even attended your little gatherings to see what Canadians thought of you guys.

But you know what?  We remember stuff too!  Remember when you said that it's "undemocratic" for the Conservative government wanting to remove the $1.75/vote taxpayer subsidy for political parties, where your party gets over 80% of its revenue from? Yet now you cry like a selfish child when its proposed that Ontario, Alberta, and British Columbia should get more seats to have a proper and fair representation by population in the House of Commons--you know, to achieve a better democracy that you claim to embrace!

Now, you release a poll from a pro-"sovereignty" company to show that Canadians outside Quebec don't want to open the constitution where Quebeckers overwhelmingly do. 

How convenient is that?

"Canadians have moved on to other things," he said. "They build their country as they see fit, that's all. They're no longer open to satisfying the ambitions of Quebecers. Federalism is a dead end for Quebec."

HAHA!  Ah, Gilles. You make me laugh so hard it hurts like my arteries do when chowing down a huge plate of hot poutine.  As you may or may not be aware, Mr. Duceppe, building Canada has largely included propping up Quebec, expanding bilingualism so far that even on WestJet flights you can start to make out the French recording translation telling you that "Il s'agit d'un vol non-fumeur".

Canadians have moved on indeed!  Why?  Because before, when you Quebec separatists whined and complained about EVERYTHING, we still came running to you with chocolate, flowers, calling you a "nation" with Craven "A" cigarettes, and begging you to reconsider, listening to your every word.

But now Gilles, this so-called momentum you're trying to move to reinvigorate animosity is falling on deaf ears.  This time, Gilles, no one's listening, because no one cares. Not even the great Bouchard gives a puck anymore.

All you and your Canadian taxpayer federally funded party are doing now is crying shit wolf.  Shit wolf, Gilles.  Shit wolf.

Iggy will divide the country

I recommend reading Ezra Levant's latest blog post on the Liberals receiving advice from Ekos pollster Frank Graves on invoking a culture war, and how that advice in congruency with Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff's position and support of the highly controversial NDP private members bill requiring all Supreme Court justices to be bilingual.

Even (former?) Ignatieff strategist, has commented that if this culture war is the new Liberal strategy, that they shouldn't talk about it publicly.

As the Globe and Mail reported:

In his advice, Mr. Graves could hardly have been more blunt. “I told them that they should invoke a culture war. Cosmopolitanism versus parochialism, secularism versus moralism, Obama versus Palin, tolerance versus racism and homophobia, democracy versus autocracy. If the cranky old men in Alberta don’t like it, too bad. Go south and vote for Palin.”

Nice. Real nice.  If Iggy and the Grits are taking this advice, which it appears they already are, then in my opinion, I think Canadians from coast to coast are really sick and tired of it.  I agree with Ezra here in that this culture war strategy will backfire, as Iggy himself, wanted to unite Canadians:

Michael Ignatieff: "A prime minister has one simple job: To keep the country together and not seek polarization...."

So why do you want to polarize then by taking polarizing advice from your own pollster?

Official bilingualism is one of those polarizing issues.
 What's my opinion on it?  It doesn't work and never has and is costing our country in wasted tax dollars, and in actually dividing the nation more than it unites us.  Why?  Anytime the government forces culture and language upon another culture, you get backlash, not only against the government, but against the other culture. Quebec separatists can then say, "See!  Canadians don't like bilingulism. They don't like French and they don't like Quebec."  That's the trap that legitimizes their political existence.

And it appears that Iggy and the Grits are falling into this trap. You watch, with this culture war, the
one the Liberals now appear to be using, they're going for the default federalist vote in Quebec, which also makes core Torontonians happy. It's an old strategy, one that worked for Trudeau and Chretien. But again, you'll recall, that it was under Trudeau (1980) and Chretien (1995) where the separatists got their referendum, reinvigorating the original Canadian culture war, the one between French and English, dividing the country... again.

If Ignatieff understood Canada, he'd know this. But maybe he actually does and doesn't care. If it gets him and the Liberals into power, then that's all that matters, damn the country.

Iggy on and off health care user fees

Oh Iggy, will you ever learn...

And, leaving aside explicit measures in this week's Quebec budget, doesn't Charest's startling proposal to charge patients $25 per doctor's visit, however hypothetical, at least merit an expression of mild disagreement?

Apparently not. "In our opinion," Ignatieff said, "what matters is maintaining universality of access to the system. We believe, and it's a question of details, that Quebec's propositions conform to the Canada Health Act."   How's that for a stirring call to arms?

 Source

and then after a Liberal caucus meeting to the media...

“I am saying no user fees,” he said. “I want to make it very clear that our party and I personally am a passionate defender of the Canada Health Act and we understand that provinces are facing substantial challenges facing the financing of their health care systems. 

Source

In summary... "Health care user fees, but not necessarily health care user fees."

Cirque Du Ceppe Ratist

Bloc Quebecois leader Gilles Duceppe (or Du Ceppe Ratist as I like to call him now), made some remarks comparing the French resistence movement to Quebec sovereignists.

"For the moment, we are resisters. But yesterday's resisters will be tomorrow's winners. Long live a sovereign Quebec!" he told supporters, who were gathered for a weekend meeting marking the party's 20 years of existence.

Don't you just love that Canadian taxpayers are footing the bill for the salaries, pensions, and now CAMPAIGNS for the members in this joke of a party?

Even the great Lucien Bouchard admitted that the Parti Quebecois separatists have become too radical. This should probably apply to the party he founded as well, don't you think, after Duceppe makes statements like this?

Oh, in other news... anyone seen Iggy?  After whining about Prime Minister Harper proroguing parliament, when that same parliament resumed, the Liberals decide to prorogue themselves, and it wasn't long after 37% of Liberal MPs didn't show up to vote on the budget, and Michael Ignatieff trotted off to do a cross-country tax and spend tour.

Again, aren't taxpayers paying for the leader of the opposition to be in the House of Commons, and you know, opposing?

If not, then we'll assume that he agrees with the direction of this Conservative government.

UPDATE:  Wow. In reading the comments about the article on the Duceppe slip at CTV.ca and CBC.ca, I'd guess that over 98% of them don't support the Bloc, with many thinking it shouldn't even be a federal party.  And most folks simply want Quebec separatists to leave because it seems everyone is just sick and tired of Quebec continually taking the majority of the provincial transfers, even allowing them to sit in the House of Commons, having former members collect pensions, allow funding for their campaigns, and yet the separatists still complain.  It feels like there's quite the silent majority out there.  Even for CBC.ca readers, I was surprised at the disdain for Quebec separatists.

Hey Gilles, quit whining!

Blogging from New York and I read this...

Bloc leader Gilles Duceppe has called for the federal gov't to deliver services in Quebec only en francais and called Prime Minister Harper AND Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff "rednecks".

I love the response from Soudas:

"There are certain days in the year when Mr. Duceppe should put aside his whining, his complaining, his constantly seeing the glass as half-empty," Harper spokesman Dimitri Soudas said Wednesday.

"Quebecers see the glass as being half full. Mr. Duceppe just comes across as a big whiner."

I was recently at the Montreal-Trudeau airport and the FIRST language EVERYONE spoke to me in was French.

So yeah, quit yer whinin' Gilles and let us rednecks tawk the English in Quebec will ya?

Quebec Tri-Election Analysis

While byelections don't amount to a hill of beans in relation to the next general election, the three byelections (or tri-election) in Quebec appear to have had a significant impact on each party's apparatus and confidence. All of this is good news for the Conservatives.

Warren Kinsella shows the total combined votes for all three ridings:

Conservative	31475	36.9
Bloc	23983	28.1
NDP	14587	17.1
Liberal	12118	14.2
Green	2197	2.6

So what does this show?

1. Exposed Liberal infighting. Rumours are that 2nd place leadership hopeful and deputy leader Michael Ignatieff, and perhaps third place leadership finisher, Bob Rae, secretly orchestrated the Liberal defeat in the traditionally Liberal-friendly riding of Outremont in Montreal to shed darkness upon the "leadership" of Stephane Dion. If this tactic continues, and there aren't big changes in the party apparatus by Dion and he stops appointing candidates, undermining the grassroots (not that the Liberals really have any), look to see Dion's Liberals get trounced next election, especially in Quebec. The sharks are circling around him big time. The question is how much of a bite do these sharks want to take out of the party?

2. False Hope for NDP. I like it when the NDP win where the Liberals should have. People have been wondering where Jack Layton's been lately. Apparently he was busy getting votes in one riding. One riding. Not 308. Outremont is a fairly wealthy riding and it seems the NDP appealled to the rich socialists who used to vote Liberal, because it was the "in" thing to do. The NDP candidate had slick looking signs everywhere--way more than the other guys. All in all, this "all-in" NDP riding only means Jack gets to be leader for another election or two and does not mean an NDP breakthrough in Quebec. It will mean that the NDP will put more wasted effort in Quebec and hopefully for the Conservatives, the NDP won't put as much time in British Columbia like they did last election where the Conservatives lost 8 ridings to the NDP. And keep in mind that the Green Party will continue to bite away at soft NDP voters.

3. Conservatives are strong in Quebec outside Montreal. In these two ridings, they easily won one of them, and came a close second in the other. The Liberals were wiped out. Either the Quebec "Nation" resolution earlier this year appears to have had a significant impact on Quebecker's minds, that the clear federalist option now defaults to the Conservatives because Dion is seen as a weak leader, or both. Harper can only dream that Dion stays on as leader for the next election. This tri-election means that the Conservatives are now well established in Quebec and provides a lot of confidence to build toward a majority next election, now likely in 2009.

Updated House of Commons party standings (from Wikipedia):

Parties		BC	AB	SK	MB	ON	QC	NB	NS	PE	NL	YK	NT	NU	Total
Conservative Party	*	18	28	12	8	41	11	3	2		3				126
Liberal Party	*	7		1	3	51	12	6	6	4	4	1		1	96
Bloc Québécois	*						49								49
New Democratic Party	*	10			3	12	1	1	2				1		30
Independent	*						2		1						3
Vacant	*	1		1		2									4
Total		36	28	14	14	106	75	10	11	4	7	1	1	1	308

Conservatives (126) + Bloc Quebecois (49) = 175
Liberal (96) + NDP (30) = 126

Even the Conservatives + NDP = 156 which is more than 50%.

These are the reasons why Harper won't call an election until 2009. He doesn't need to. The big issue then will be the mission in Afghanistan. This, however, won't play well in Quebec, where support for the mission is low. It will be interesting to see how Harper spins this.

In other news, Prime Minister Harper will be meeting His Holiness The Dalai Lama next month, despite objections from the Chinese communist government. Note that the Conservative government awarded honourary Canadian citizenship to the Tibetan Buddhist leader last year.

Mind your ADQs -- The Quebec budget '07

You know, I don't understand Mario Dumont, leader of the Quebec opposition and the Action Democratique du Quebec (ADQ).

During the recent Quebec election, Premier Jean Charest promised that the $700 million federal transfer funds to Quebec will go to tax cuts. Many have said that the election was timed in conjuction with such an announcement. This is likely.

I thought the ADQ party was about tax cuts, deregulation, and autonomy? I was excited that they did so well, but now it appears they're threatening to not support the latest budget. Why not support these measures? I don't get it.

Tax reductions in Quebec something I think they badly need to reinvigorate their economy. Instead, they remain the highest taxed group in Canada, and they continue to fall into debt.

Jean Charest is on the right track here. Time and time again history has shown that when governments cut taxes, they eventually GAIN tax revenue as the money goes through the economy to provide raises, better jobs and more of them, and thus a better tax base. They don't "blow a hole" in the budget as many socialists like to squawk. Government spending can be said to be that "hole" and it's no wonder why Quebec is still a have-not province despite a good Canadian economy.

Anyway, back to Mario Dumont. His party wants more autonomy for Quebec. Well if that's true then why is he supporting the use of money from the FEDERAL government, earned by people from Alberta and Ontario, to pay for things instead of giving it back to the people, you know, the QUEBEC people who earned it in the first place?

You know with the federal government not offering broad-based income tax reductions in its last two budgets, the Alberta government not doing the same thing either in its recent budget, and supposed conservative opposition parties voting against tax cuts, it kind of makes you wonder if there are any real libertarian-conservative parties remaining in Canada... except for Jean Charest's Quebec Liberals?

*sigh*

FLQ or ALQaeda?

This is very, very disturbing.

Why is this so-called "FLQ" threatening acts of terrorism? I don't know, sounds like Al-Qaeda to me.

But I've always wondered about the link between the FLQ and the PQ. Maybe they're aligning with the Al-Q?

It's a serious question.