The good news? He can’t be elected as long-term leader.

1. The right moves further to the right. The Tories, after spending five years walking all over Canadians as a minority, now get to walk all over Canadians even more as a majority. Harper believes – as he should, with these numbers – that he has a mandate from Canada to impose his agenda and move the government rightward. Forget the Shit Harper Did; what about the Shit Harper will do?
   
2. The left moves further to the left. The official opposition is now the NDP, not the Liberals. The same NDP who has campaigned on anti-Israel platforms; who cozies up to the labour unions; who believes that quota systems will provide equality.  The NDP is positioning itself as the de facto Tory alternative, and with nearly three times as many seats as the Liberals, it clearly believes that it is the voice of the left – or the potential leader of any merger or move to unite the progressive parties. Ironically, the jubilant Layton doesn’t seem to grasp that he had more power in fourth place in a Tory minority than he does in second place in a Tory majority.
   
3. The middle disintegrates. The Liberal party is in shambles. They lost over half their seats and most of their star MPs. They lost official opposition status. They will have to regroup and rebuild. And the common sense centre, the great balancing force against polarization, is severely crippled. Moderation is what suffers in this outcome.
   
4. A weaker official opposition. A Harper majority is a scary enough prospect. But now 102 NDP MPs – many of whom are complete political rookies – will be heading to Ottawa to serve as the official opposition. Even seasoned Liberal MPs would have had a hard time keeping the Harpers in check. There’s no way that inexperienced political neophytes from the NDP will be able to pull it off. Harper’s now got a majority with no strong opposition; he can basically do whatever he wants and get away with it.
   
5. Bloc collapses, but sovereignty gets a boost. The big news of the night was the Bloc Quebecois’s collapse from 47 seats to 4 amidst the Quebec “orange crush”, and Duceppe’s defeat and resignation. It should be good news for federalism? Right? Wrong. I’ve never seen so many Quebecers feel disenfranchised and alienated from the rest of Canada. This is going to provide a huge boost to sovereignty. I’m about as staunch a federalist as it gets, but even I have to admit that I see their point. Quebec voted overwhelmingly left-wing progressive NDP; the rest of Canada (except for Newfoundland) voted overwhelmingly Conservative. Is there any point in arguing that we’re not different here in La Belle Province?
   
6. Human rights? What human rights? With as many as four Supreme Court seats opening up to be stacked by Harper-crony Conservatives during this term. Abortion rights, gay marriage, rights of women, rights of minorities, immigrants’ rights… you name it, it’s on their agenda for attack.
7. No more funding for arts and culture. That is, unless the Calgary Stampede is your idea of a cultural event.
8. Technology and innovation? Not on Harper’s watch. With important issues facing our country around telecom consolidation, internet billing and metering, privacy, digital rights management… the only party who didn’t respond to Canadians’ concerns about internet and digital policy is the one now holding a majority in Parliament. Four or five more years for the rest of the world to advance while Canada lags behind? Will we even have an economy when Harper is done with us?
9. Canadians get slapped around; claim we fell down the stairs. We have a government who ignores us at every turn, walks all over us, and breaks the law with impunity. We get a chance to toss it out on its ear. Instead, we go crawling back to it. Domestic abuse on a grand scale, anyone? Basically, we’ve just sent Harper a message that he can get away with anything. And he will.
10. Harper plans to reward his “base”. The Alberta-native social conservative movement has been waiting a long time in minority to get rewarded for its efforts to put Harper in power. All this time, he didn’t revisit socially conservative issues because he didn’t have a mandate and knew that the opposition wouldn’t let him get away with it. Now, all these interest groups want their pound of flesh. Our flesh.

The silver lining is, it’s only 4 or 5 years. The question is, will we recognize Canada after all that time?

Read the platforms here:

• Liberal Party of Canada
• Conservative Party of Canada
• New Democrat Party of Canada
• Bloc Quebecois (in French)
• Green Party of Canada

Then, when you’re done, check out the candidates in your writing. Read up on their voting records, if they are already MPs. Read their blogs, find their  Facebook pages, check out anything they’ve written or published. Make sure you know who you’re voting to send to Parliament on May 2nd.

An uninformed electorate gets the government that it deserves. So get informed.

But there is little chance a private member’s bill would be able to get through the Commons and Senate by the time the 2011 census process starts in March.

I’m not sure which is the saddest part of the story here: The Conservative disdain for and lack of understanding of the far-reaching implications of their decision? The fact that this is the first time in years that I can remember that the Liberals actually did something I can support? Or the fact that our government apparently can’t get even a single thing done in five whole months?

A strategist more than an idealist, Ignatieff doesn’t arouse much excitement among disillusioned and disenfranchised voters. He’ll be painted as a neo-con and Harper wannabe by the left and as a boring academic with no new ideas by the right, and his three decades spent in the US don’t exactly bolster his credentials to lead Canada.

The Liberal party’s saviour? Hardly. Better than Rae? Absolutely.

Looks, it’s quite simple: You don’t have to like who’s elected, but you have to respect the will of the electorate. A power grab “just cause we can” is the last thing that the country needs.

Dion, Layton and Duceppe need to back off from the brink, cool off, and find a way to at least give the Conservative minority government a chance to work. For the good of everyone. Because Harper may have been elected by a minority, but that’s more people than the zero who voted for the proposed Liberal-NDP coalition.

Now that Parliament has been suspended, maybe it’s time to lock all four of them in a room together and force them to work out their issues and get back to the task at hand: Running the country.

The Toronto Star had cited Liberal party insiders who said Dion would make the announcement on Thursday and then stay on as leader until a successor is chosen.

But a spokeswoman for Dion said the Liberal leader would make no such announcement on Thursday and that her office would inform the media when Dion is ready to speak.

[ . . . ]

The paper quoted one well-connected party member as suggesting that if Dion didn’t announce his departure promptly, the party should move the furniture out of his office.

“How do you do a putsch on a guy who doesn’t understand he’s being putsched?” the Globe quoted the unidentified Liberal as saying.

Erm… Milton?

Seriously, though, while I think that Dion knows all too well that his days as Liberal Party leader are over, I think it’s disgraceful how he’s being treated by the media and his own party. He led a bad campaign, was the victim of circumstance, and unfortunately has the charisma of a turnip, but I don’t think Dion is a bad guy.

Dion took on the party leadership at a difficult time and dared to lead an environment-based campaign in a time when people were voting with their pocketbook. I think Dion was an ineffective leader, but is overall a smart man, and deserves a lot better than what he got.

Even he knows his time is up, though. This stand is just for the media. I doubt he’ll keep it up for longer than a few days.

(Via Damian Penny).

Update 10/20: That didn’t take long. Dion has announced his resignation.

That’s the number of seats where the Liberal-Green combined vote total was higher than the vote total for the winning candidate.

Of those 17 seats, 9 were won by the Conservatives. The remaining 8 went 5 to the Bloc and 3 to the NDP.

Of course, it’s illogical to assume that all or even a large portion of the Green Party’s votes would have gone to the Liberals. Despite both parties having run on “green shift” platforms, they are quite different, and many people who voted Green did so largely because they did not want to vote Liberal.

And yet… With all the discussions around vote-splitting, I can tell you that Stephane Dion is eyeing those 17 seats today and wondering whether his “friendship” with Elizabeth May was worth it.

As for May, she probably understands a bit better how Ralph Nader must have felt in 2000.

Is a Liberal-Green alliance really such an outlandish idea?

Voting is our most fundamental right and privilege. Regardless of your politics, make sure to exercise that right today and vote. Remember, if you don’t vote, you can’t complain about the results.

A Canadian Broadcasting Corp. reporter who covers Parliament will be reassigned because she inappropriately wrote questions for an opposition legislator, the public broadcaster said on Monday.

The ruling Conservative Party — no fan of the CBC — complained that television journalist Krista Erickson had given the questions to a Liberal member of a committee examining the dealings of a former Conservative prime minister.

Whatever your politics, you have to admit that this is a new low for the CBC. Our tax dollars at work.

The deal between the Liberals and the Green Party that will see the Libs step back so that Elizabeth May can compete seriously for a seat, is, on the surface, a smart move for both parties. The Liberals have made it clear that, under Dion’s leadership, the environment is their #1 issue. The Greens have always made the environment their #1 issue. So they’re competing for the same pool of voters, and that pool is getting bigger every day as climate change has gradually shifted from being a “polls well but irrelevant on voting day” issue to an issue that can actually affect election results.

But will it backfire? If the Libs move left, will that just open up more space for the Conservatives to make gains in the middle? Conversely, it was arguably the Green Party that – despite a lack of elected MPs – elevated the environment to such a key voting issue in the first place.

The Liberal Party can’t afford to become a one-issue party, even if it is tempting for them to spend the entire next election campaign attacking the Harper government on its environmental record. (The ads are already in the can, I hear). That’s what fringe parties are useful for; bringing single issues to the forefront. But both parties that can govern – the Libs and the Tories – need to campaign on a range of issues representing the broad spectrum of governmental responsibilities. Anything less simply isn’t fair to Canadians.

Trudeau will run in the Montreal constituency of Papineau, currently held by the separatist Bloc Quebecois. Trudeau, like his father, opposes those who want independence for the French-speaking province of Quebec.

Liberal leader Stephane Dion welcomed Trudeau’s announcement, telling reporters in Montreal that “I’m very impressed by the courage of this young man.”

His public appearances with Dion during the leadership campaign make the timing of this announcement logical. Trudeau and Dion share the same pet issue – the environment – and Trudeau’s public profile will be a welcome boost for Dion in the next election.

Pierre Trudeau was one of the most loved – and hated – Canadian Prime Ministers in history. He was divisive, but he was a larger-than-life legend. Regardless of your opinion of Pierre Trudeau’s place in Canadian history, it will be very difficult for Justin to carve out his own persona away from his father’s shadow. At least Justin has his own credentials and issues on which to run. And he has good taste in music, too – at least, judging by his guest appearances on CHOM when Terry DiMonte lets him plug in his ipod.

As former Prime Ministers’ kids go, Justin Trudeau is probably the most qualified for this job. Certainly more so than Ben Mulroney. So before we bemoan the fact that we’re apparently adopting familial political dynasties in Canada now, à la Bushes, let’s just consider that it could have been much worse.

The EKOS poll, which surveyed 1,022 voters on Tuesday and Wednesday and is considered accurate to 3.1 percentage points 19 times out of 20, showed the Liberals picking up support mainly at the expense of the left-leaning New Democratic Party.

The New Democrats were at 10.2 percent in the poll, well below the 17.5 percent they picked up in the January election.

The Conservatives have dropped 3 percentage points since January’s election, but the NDP has dropped over 7, demonstrating that the Liberals are primarily making inroads on the left, not in the middle.

Needless to say, this is not a happy development. With the Liberals moving leftward, there’s nobody left fighting for a centrist vision for the country. How long can it be, I wonder, before we start hearing calls to “unite the left” and move to a two-party system like in the United States?

Interestingly enough, support for the Green Party is actually up, indicating that the attention being called to environmental issues is actually outweighing any support that the Liberals under Dion’s leadership (and that of his dog, Kyoto) might be shaving from that camp.

They’re questioning his loyalty to Canada given his dual French citizenship, his commitment to centrist politics given his left-leaning tendencies, his ability to win support in Quebec given his long history of defending federalism and attacking sovereignty. (If you noticed that the first and third points seem a bit contradictory, you’re not alone).

We’re in that brief wide-open period in politics, when critics try on all sorts of different avenues of attack on a new leader, in attempt to find the ones that will stick the most. But this phase won’t last long. It can’t. The message is too diluted. Sooner or later, they’ll need to come up with a catchphrase, a means of attacking Dion that is equivalent to the Harper-is-Bush attacks heading in the other direction.

I give it about a week.

Eat your heart out, Toronto!

Despite myself, I kind of like Dion, even if he doesn’t have as fun a nickname as Michael “Iggy Pop” Ignatieff.

The quote of the day probably comes from Pauline:

Much is being made of Stephane Dion’s being *everybody’s second choice*. While that is mathematically a good thing, it doesn’t resound well for the future federal election campaign. I can see the bumper stickers now.

I think that Dion has a history as an impassioned defender of Canadian unity, which is good, and could certainly be said to deserve this much more than Ignatieff, in terms of his having paid his dues to the party.

But, like Pauline, I too am a bit uneasy at his foreign policy stances. He’s come out in opposition to the Canadian military role in Afghanistan, and his friendship stance with Israel has been questionable, particularly during the summer’s Lebanon war when he made some worrying statements. Nothing much worse than the rest of the Liberal candidates, really, but a far cry from the staunch friendship I would hope to see from the leadership of this country. Now that he is the leader, he will of course be called upon to clarify some of his stances, but we’ll have to see where he goes with this.

The next campaign is a lock to be about the environment now, thanks to Dion’s impassioned position on the Kyoto accord. And the great losers in the next election could be the Green Party if Dion successfully picks up support from that camp.

Final thought: the Liberal party – or any party for that matter – will think long and hard before holding another leadership convention in Montreal during ice storm season.

Looks like Damian Penny’s early predictions are surprisingly accurate.

But all now rests on what Bob Rae decides to do, and where he throws his support. If he frees his delegates, it’s hard to predict where they’ll vote. If he chooses to back one candidate or the other, it will lock up the leadership for that person.

We’ll know soon.

Update: Rae has released his delegates. With Dion as the current momentum canadidate, and given the strength of the anyone-but-Ignatieff movement in Liberal circles, I think that Dion will take all in the end… but we won’t know until they vote.

Bob Rae, Ignatieff’s chief rival, likened Harper’s comment to being accused of a hate crime, while Gerard Kennedy said Harper had surrendered his ability to act as prime minister for partisan purposes.

“I think that the prime minister’s comments were shameful,” Rae said. “This goes beyond the usual give-and-take of partisan life. It’s an appalling statement.”

He noted his own wife and children are Jewish and he’s travelled often to the Middle East.

Yesterday, Ignatieff insisted he remains a supporter of Israel.

“It is disgraceful that the prime minister is playing crass politics with the issue of the Middle East,” he said.

“The Liberal Party has always been a friend of Israel, and I will always stand shoulder-to-shoulder with Israel and the Canadian Jewish community to defend

Israel’s right to respond when it is attacked by terrorists or when its neighbours wrongfully deny its right to exist.”

Kennedy echoed the concerns. “I think he (Harper) has given up his sworn responsibilities as prime minister to play for partisan advantage, and I think it is highly unfortunate,” he said.

Kennedy described himself as “resolutely a friend of Israel” but also “a friend of Lebanon.”

Stephane Dion said: “I feel insulted by my prime minister.”

Sure, the Libs are seeing this as a way to try to attack Harper. But personally, I find it refreshing that, regardless of their actual individual positions, all the Liberal candidates seem to feel that it’s politically expedient to come across as being supporters of Israel. In a time when being anti-Israel is more and more “in”, it’s nice to see that the potential next leaders of our country still recognize that it’s “out”. In other words, it’s a relief to see that being perceived as being “anti-Israel” in this country is still bad PR.

Even as they attack Harper for being too pro-Israel and try to spin this into a political point for the Liberals, the leadership candidates seem to understand that they have to prove – or at least claim – to be friends of Israel in order to win the race. Cynical as this may be, it could be a lot worse; they could be trying to prove that they’re the most anti-Israel. (Of course, we’re talking about the Liberals here, not the NDP…)

Pieter’s not impressed and, as he rightly points out, the situation mirrors that of the Canadian Liberals a little too closely:

Many have pointed to the analogy with Canada where a defiant and successful ten-year stint in office was not sufficient for Jean Chrétien to ward off the coup by his former finance minister, Paul Martin. What is telling is that Martin’s successful attempt to dislodge Chrétien – who like Blair had long outlived his popularity – was not based on any justifiable policy difference or other quantifiable ideological rift, but on the simple logic that it was Martin’s turn. Not the greatest rationale for seeking the highest office in the land, and we have all witnessed the incredible mess that ensued as it became painfully clear that the absence of any sound content turned Martin’s tenure at Sussex Drive into an utterly forgettable one. It was a power grab for power’s sake, nothing more and nothing less.

It is too early to tell whether Brown’s move into Downing Street will yield the same sorry spectacle, but given the relatively late stage of Labour’s tenure and the strength of a resurgent conservative opposition, it may not be a very pretty one.

What is it with these finance ministers and their sense of entitlement, anyway?

Since I’ve never missed an opportunity to quote the West Wing, why start now? Here’s a quote from season four, shortly after Bartlet is re-elected for his second term, when Josh finds out that Vice-President Hoynes is already lining up precinct captains for the next election:

Josh: We got [Hoynes] on the ticket by convincing him it’s not his turn. We kept him out of the center ring ’cause it wasn’t his turn, and now…

Toby: There aren’t any turns.

When did Canada, the US or the UK turn into Cuba or North Korea? We’ve got politicians getting elected because of who their fathers were (*ahem* Dubya), politicians assuming it’s their “turn”, and power being handed over as though it was someone’s to hand.

Memo to the British Labour Party: Pieter’s right. The Canadian Liberals haven’t recovered from the Chrétien-Martin fiasco, and surely there’s a warning in there somewhere for you as well.

No surprise there.

• Don’t count out the Liberals just yet: I know all the polls have Harper ahead, but the gap has been narrowing over the past week and the latest polling data is at least 48 hours old. Vote distribution is a matter of interpretation, and the people doing the interpreting are just as guilty of bandwagon-jumping as the next person. Furthermore, what people answer in polls always differs from what they actually do on election day at the ballot box. I’m not saying Harper will lose, I’m just saying it’s not a lock that he’ll win either. If tomorrow ushered in another Martin minority government, I wouldn’t be shocked.
• Predictions of a Tory breakthrough in Quebec are premature: On the same note, I’m simply not convinced of polls that have the Conservatives picking up multiple seats in Quebec. While their support numbers are higher than the Liberals, the Libs’ support is concentrated here in Montreal and the Tory support is spread out all over the province. One Tory seat? Maybe. None, most likely. Certainly not eight or ten. Won’t happen. Not this election.
• The Bloc will likely hold the balance of power: That’s the most likely scenario in a Tory minority government. The Liberals will rarely support the Conservatives, and the NDP almost never. If Harper wants to govern, he’ll need the Bloc. That won’t be good for Canadian unity no matter how they spin it. And if Harper refuses to deal with Duceppe, it will be a very short time until we’re right back at the polls.
• Paul Martin’s dusting off his resume: If the Tories win tomorrow, Paul Martin can kiss his political career goodbye. If nothing else, that would help the Liberals move past the sponsorship scandal and start with a clean slate, so to speak. As for Martin, what do ex-Prime Ministers do nowadays when they’re not testifying at federal enquiries? Anyone heard from Kim Campbell lately?
• There will be a January 24th: Whoever wins the election, life will go on. The sun will rise in the east. Canada probably won’t be all that different from what it is now.
• A little perspective: We can quibble all we want over sponsorship scandals, constitutional reform, healthcare or tax cuts, but remember that whoever wins will be democratically-elected, relatively moderate, and won’t be killing people in torture chambers. Even those of us holding our noses and voting for the “best of the worst” would do well to pause for a moment and appreciate the momentous significance of having the right to vote at all. Because I look around the world and I realize that it’s no small thing.

Vote early, vote often, vote your conscience. Stay tuned for liveblogging of the results tomorrow night.

Hey Paul: When even the American comedians are mocking your ads, they have to be really awful.

Then again, I suppose we should cut the Liberals some slack for how bad their campaign advertisements have been this time around. After all, their ad agencies all went and got themselves indicted in the sponsorship scandal.

(By the way, Colbert also had Andrew Sullivan on the show as his guest tonight. True to tongue-in-cheek form, his first question was “what is a blog?”)

Apparently, according to the quiz, I should vote Liberal. How convenient. But I’m disclaiming any responsibility for your results.

(Hat tip: Elena).

Phoenix Coyotes captain Shane Doan filed a lawsuit against Liberal MP Denis Coderre on Tuesday, alleging the former sports minister falsely accused him of making a slur against francophones during an NHL game.

Doan also demanded that Coderre make a public retraction in the motion filed in Quebec superior court.

Doan is heading to Turin as part of the Canadian Olympic team that will hopefully bring home the gold. Coderre, meanwhile, is fighting to keep his seat in a much closer race in his home riding than last time. Which of these two men would you rather be right now?

Thought so.

So why vote Liberal, you may ask?

Is it because I think the Liberals have done such a great job? Not really.

Is it because I buy into the scare tactics about Stephen Harper being George W. Bush reincarnated, prepared to turn us into a far right-wing theocracy? No, I find those ads amusing at best and ridiculously disastrous for the Liberals at worst.

Is it because I think that the culture of corruption that has set in amongst the Liberals is worth rewarding? Definitely not.

Is it because I’m voting strategically, in a riding where a Liberal vote would prevent a Bloc or NDP candidate from getting elected? Nope, my riding has been solidly Liberal since 1968 and even the sponsorship scandal won’t be changing that anytime soon. I could safely lodge a protest vote with little impact.

Is it because Martin convinced me in the debates? Not at all; in fact, he’s probably one of the worst debaters I’ve ever seen, and he got his butt kicked all the way to Ellesmere Island and back.

Is it because I agree with the majority of the Liberal policies and platform issues? Not even.

Is it because I believe that a Liberal victory represents the best chance to keep Quebec in Canada and to fight sovereignty? On the contrary, I think it will probably hurt a great deal.

So, you’re probably asking yourself, why on earth would I vote for this party?

Good question.

The answer is simple: Despite all the scandals, despite all the corruption, despite the promises I don’t believe and the policies I don’t agree with, the Liberal party still is the “best of the worst” in my mind. On the major things the government has done lately, I’ve been much closer to the Liberal point of view than to the Tory one.

Some examples:

• The economy: Whatever else he’s done, Martin has balanced the budget and improved economic conditions. He did his best to stand up to people like Jack Layton against spending we can’t afford. He even stood up to Bono – and hey, if you can say no to Bono, you can say no to anyone. The Canadian dollar is up, unemployment is down, and while the economy is still plagued with problems, I simply don’t believe that Harper is better equipped to solve them than Martin is. The Tory promises to reduce the GST may play well in the media, but in practice there are plenty of other places worth cutting first.
• Social issues: Gay marriage is probably the most prominent example lately. As I’ve stated many times on this blog before, every Canadian – gay or straight – ought to recognize this as an issue of fundamental human rights. Any of us who belong to any kind of minority should understand that if you can have a majority-rules decision against one minority, the same logic could be used against any of us. Martin and the Liberals were on the right side of this one. Harper and the Tories were on the wrong side. And while I don’t really believe Harper will reverse it, nor do I agree with electing a party that has dedicated so much time, energy and resources to fighting it. I think the Liberals took a courageous position on this one and I respect them for it (if for little else).
• Voting for the candidate, not the party: Cop-out? Perhaps. But I like Marlene Jennings, the incumbent Liberal MP in my riding, well enough. Her voting record is often in step with what I believe (though not always), and she has been especially strong in defending Israel and in working to strengthen Canada’s ties with Israel, which is an issue of importance to me. And I’m comfortable having her represent my riding in Parliament, whether as a member of the government or as a member of the opposition.

So the upshot is, I’m not entirely happy to be voting Liberal and I’m not about to hit the campaign trail for Martin’s team. There are plenty of places where I flat-out disagree with the Liberals on policy, and there’s no doubt the party is about as corrupt as you can get. But I’m not going blue this time, for those reasons and for the reason that I simply don’t believe the Tories have presented enough of a positive platform. They’ve been stronger in attacking the Liberals, sure, but their policy initiatives haven’t won me over.

Okay, bring it on. I’m ready.

Now, there’s very little dispute that the Liberal campaign has been terribly run. These ads are a bit of a running joke, especially to those of us in the business. And they’re fun to parody and are probably hurting the Liberals more than helping them.

But since when is the negative tone of this campaign “news”? The Tory ads have all attacked the Liberals from day one. They were better ads, granted, but they still spoke exclusively of how bad the Liberals were and had nothing to say about the Tories or their platforms. This has been an attack campaign since the beginning; the only difference is that now the Liberals have climbed into the ring. And if these are their “knockout punches”, Paul Martin’s team is in big trouble.

In the meantime, the Tories have their own troubles, with the news that one of their candidates has been charged with smuggling. The Tories claim they didn’t know, which is probably true. But if they’re going to run a campaign attacking Paul Martin’s claim that he didn’t know about the sponsorship money, at the very least they ought to react to this with more than a “it’s not our fault, we didn’t know”.

And as the two parties throw mud at one another, here in Quebec, Gilles Duceppe is using the opportunity to build support for sovereignty. Regardless of the result of the federal election, the news for Quebec looks bleak.

We’ve got the NDP, who are a bunch of commie rat bastards.
We’ve got the Conservatives, who are a bunch of fascists.
We’ve got the Bloc Quebecois, who are a bunch of separatists.
And then we’ve got the Liberals, who are a bunch of crooks.

Pick the adjective that you find the least insulting and cast your ballot. May the least bad insult win.

Date of the election of the next (Liberal) government: January 23. Mark your calendars for the date of the big non-event.

Zzzzzzzzz.

“We cannot express confidence in a government that is under the leadership of a party that cannot be trusted to clean up the politics that it tainted,” Layton said in Toronto.

Of course, if that were true, the NDP wouldn’t have spent the last year propping up the Liberals. No, the real reason is that the NDP is no longer able to extract its pound of flesh:

The New Democrats have been the only party willing to keep the government in power and they wrung spending concessions from the Liberals in April in exchange for backing the budget.

But the partnership foundered when the Liberals rejected NDP proposals to limit private medicine. Layton said he was still open to an offer from Prime Minister Paul Martin, but thought this nearly impossible.

“If Mr Martin were to do a 180-degree turn and completely change the position that he gave to us, you always have to be willing to hear somebody out. I don’t think there’s really any possibility of that happening,” he said.

In other words, it’s okay that the Liberals stole billions of dollars of taxpayer money… just as long as they don’t allow privatized healthcare. What shall we call this? The blackmail protocol?

All this to say that I doubt any party will put forth a motion to bring down the government just yet. Nobody wants a Christmastime election. And by the time an election comes around, the Liberals will probably win back enough votes to once again form a minority government, thus making the election an exercise in futility.

Plus ça change…

So now what?

We all pretty much knew what it was going to say. If anything, the report was soft on Martin, putting most of the blame on Chretien and allowing Martin to escape relatively unscathed (though with serious questions as to how competent a finance minister who knew nothing about his government’s finances is at running a country).

Martin repeated his pledge to call an election within 30 days of receiving the final report. The Bloc wants to bring down the government right now, though that may have more to do with fuelling separatist fire in Quebec than with the actual governing of Canada. Whether now or later, an election is almost certain to yield increased Bloc support, similar Tory and NDP votes, and another Liberal minority government. In other words, something pretty close to today’s status quo.

Because the fact remains that no matter how badly the Liberals screw up, no matter how much money they steal from the electorate, there is no alternative. Nobody east of Saskatchewan believes that Harper’s the man for the job… the NDP will remain (thankfully) on the fringe, and the Bloc is a Quebec-only party that can sweep here and still never govern.

Want to break the logjam? De-unite the right. The Liberals look central because the NDP attracts the fringe left. Form a fringe-right party to house all the kooks, and suddenly we might have an electable Conservative party… if they can get off their holy crusades about gay marriage long enough to take the pulse of the nation and actually come up with a reasonable platform.

Until then, the Gomery report will fuel voter frustration and will increase support in Quebec for sovereignty while tying the Federal Government’s hands in a future referendum campaign. But it won’t ultimately have much effect on who leads the nation. Paul Martin could break into all of our houses in person and cart off our furniture; he’d still get elected until such time as a viable alternative exists.

Figures released by Elections Canada show the Liberals took in $5.2-million in the election year of 2004, while the newly merged Conservatives raked in $10.9-million.

So the big question is, what was the source of most of this funding? Because, judging by the tune that the Conservative Party has been singing all year, I’m willing to bet that a good part of that $10.9 million was chanelled from groups lobbying against same-sex marriage.

The bill will become official once it receives approval in the Senate, likely within days. With it the barriers to gay and lesbian weddings will tumble in Alberta, PEI, Nunavut and the Northwest Territories — the last jurisdictions where courts have not yet struck down the marriage law.

The legislation applies to civic weddings at public places, like city halls and courthouses. No religious groups will be forced to sanctify same-sex marriages if they don’t want to.

I’ve blogged extensively on this issue in the past, and I won’t rehash all the arguments I’ve already made on why I firmly believe in this issue. (If you’re interested, see here, here, here, here and here for some past posts on the subject).

Of course, the Conservatives have erased any hopes they might have had of being a viable alternative to the Liberals by marginalizing themselves as a single-issue party:

But Conservatives promise the debate isn’t over yet.

Leader Stephen Harper said he will bring back the same-sex marriage law for another vote if he wins the next election.

And with that, he’s pretty much guaranteed that he will never, ever win a Canadian election. Elections are won in the middle, not with promises to revoke a right once it’s been won.

This debate will rage on. And our American neighbours seem to be sadly heading in the opposite direction, so it may take them quite a while to get to this place.

But in my opinion, this is a great day in Canadian history. Just as we wonder what took so long for women or people of colour to be granted equal rights in the past, future generations will look back on this day.

Congratulations, Liberals. You finally took a stand on something. It took you long enough.

The Opposition Conservatives are willing to support the NDP’s $4.6-billion budget amendment, but only if the Liberals agree to delay same-sex marriage legislation.

The Liberals have the numbers to pass the budget even without Conservative support. So did the Liberals grow a backbone and tell the Tories to stuff it? Hah! Not exactly:

Reacting to word of the opposition offer, Prime Minister Paul Martin’s spokesperson Scott Reid said no deal had been struck.

“The government committed to make every effort without summarily cutting off debate and others’ views to get C-38 passed this session,” Reid said.

But, Reid added, actually getting the same-sex marriage legislation passed before Parliament rises may be out of the government’s hands.

“That remains our hope, but the fact of the matter is that if the Conservatives are determined to obstruct and filibuster, it may be difficult.”

In other words, they’re committed to the bill as long as it doesn’t make life too difficult for them. Oh yeah, that’s a strong stand.

Damian Penny thinks that the Tories have failed because they haven’t told Canadians in any clear terms what they stand for. I have to disagree. The Conservatives are making it blazingly obvious what they stand for: they have a single-minded obsession with gay rights that is trumping everything else on the agenda. Kate McMillan thinks the Tories need a three-syllable platform to win support. Well, how’s this for a three-syllable platform: “homophobes”.

Sadly, the Conservatives seem unable to get past being a single-issue party, and the Liberals seem unable to stand up to their blackmail. And of course, when auctioning off civil rights, minorities like Canada’s gay population are the first losers. Who will it be next?

With that view, Mr. O’Brien, why not just leap all the way to the Conservatives, where you can spend lots of time and energy opposing the rights of the gay minority in Canada to your heart’s content? After all, the Tories lost Belinda Stronach to the Libs, it could be considered a fair exchange.

Debbye warns us that Carolyn Parrish may be staging a comeback, now that Paul Martin’s so desperate to inflate his ranks with just about anyone. Why can’t she just disappear?

Imshin and Lisa both share travel tales.

And over at Peaktalk, a strongly-worded post criticizing the Liberals of playing politics with human lives in Darfur. On principle I agree, though I have to sadly admit that there’s precious little that Canada could do even if we were honestly committed to trying.

The NDP could seek a long-term agreement to prop up the Liberal government in exchange for a handful of concessions, party officials said Wednesday.

Fresh from winning $4.6 billion more for its priorities in return for helping the Liberals survive a confidence vote, the NDP is upping the ante and contemplating a more wide-ranging deal. The party inched closer to holding the balance of power in the House of Commons after this week’s Labrador byelection gave the Liberals another seat.

Some Conservative bloggers such as Damian Penny are lamenting the fact that the Liberals’ one usual saving grace – a balanced budget – will now be a thing of the past.

To all those who voted Tory and cheered the fact that the Liberals were reduced to a minority in the last election: starting to miss that Liberal majority government yet?

top member of Canada’s opposition Conservatives unexpectedly defected to the ruling Liberals on Tuesday, giving the minority government of Prime Minister Paul Martin a better chance of surviving a crucial budget vote this week.

Belinda Stronach, a leading light in the Conservative Party, joined Martin’s cabinet as the minister of human resources and will vote with the government on the budget on Thursday. If Martin loses, an election will be called.

Stronach, who ran for the Conservative Party leadership but lost to Stephen Harper in a landslide, certainly had some ideological differences with the rest of her party. She supported gay marriage in a party firmly opposed. She supported more liberal social policies in general. She claimed that the Tories don’t understand middle Canada – and she has a point there. In fact, she had represented the hope that the Tories would move closer to the middle, but her hopes seem to be dashed now.

But the timing of this switch was no coincidence. Stronach saw an opportunity (the budget vote), named her price (a cabinet posting), and made the leap at a time when she had the most to gain. The current math has the smart money on the Liberals winning the budget vote now, thanks to Belinda’s defection. After all, she in effect is adding two votes to the Liberal side of the fence, by switching her vote against to a vote for.

Will Stronach’s constituents support her decision and re-elect her? Or will they view her as a disloyal turncoat?

More importantly, will people still describe her as “Canada’s answer to Ann Coulter”? (She never was in the first place, but that’s besides the point).

If today’s opposition motion in parliament passes, then the Liberals say they won’t view it as a no-confidence vote, and they’ll simply ignore it. However, it clearly is a no-confidence vote, and there’s only so long they’ll be able to deny it.

However, if the Conservatives get their way and do succeed in bringing down the Liberal government with this motion, then they’ll have won the battle but lost the war. They can trigger an election but they don’t have the support to win it… and the Liberals will get right back into power with another minority and we’ll start all over again.

If Harper had any political horse sense, he’d lay off the no confidence votes and try to let the Liberals govern for a little while. In the meantime, he’d make some good speeches, hammer home some policy points, and try to look like a statesman. Instead, he’s continuing to push for this pyrrhic victory, regardless of the cost.

This is what we call a lose-lose situation. Unless, of course, you’re Gilles Duceppe.

Update: As predicted, the Liberals lost the vote but are still denying that it means anything.

It may seem ridiculous but denial, in this case, is golden, since if the Liberals continue to attempt to govern despite the motion, and the Conservatives are forced to use petty tactics like trying to shut down parliament, it doesn’t take much to figure out who will benefit at the polls.

It looks like there might not be an election after all, as the Conservatives’ polling numbers slip and Harper looks increasingly like a vengeful opportunist each day. The Conservatives are going to have to come up with a better argument than “we’re not the Liberals” if they want a turn in power. In the meantime, Martin’s gamble seems to be paying off, and his shaky government might get its life support extended a little longer.

More idiocy on parade as the annual workers’ event of May Day results in “clashes with police”. That’s the media’s non-judgmental way of saying that a bunch of idiots smashed things and then reacted violently to police who tried to get them under control. Oh yeah, and they really really don’t like Jean Charest. Just in case we didn’t know that already.

North Korea’s getting bolder as the Dear Leader of Death Camps slowly realizes that the rest of the world can’t or won’t do anything to stop them. Canada won’t sign onto the US’s missile defense plan, but Japan certainly sees the value in it.

Violence is on the rise again in Egypt, as suicide attacks on tourists by Islamist terrorists sent a chill through the region. This pretty much rules out any hope that last month’s attacks at Taba were isolated incidents. One thing we can pretty much count on: if Egypt’s tourism industry suffers, they’ll find a way to blame Israel somehow.

And last but certainly not least, Passover is over and I’m back to eating real food again. It’s great to have a meal that doesn’t taste like cardboard!

Martin may succumb to Layton’s blackmail by agreeing to defer corporate tax cuts in the federal budget in exchange for a promise for the NDP to support the budget:

The apparent concession came just hours after Prime Minister Paul Martin appeared to shut the door to NDP Leader Jack Layton’s demand that the cuts be scrapped. “We are prepared to discuss the possible deferral of the corporate tax measures,” the source said.

Martin’s fighting for his political life, so it’s obvious why he’s doing this. But the NDP doesn’t hold enough seats to prop up the Liberals if everyone else votes against. Martin will probably learn the hard way that Layton’s life raft is made of lead.

• People who are disgusted with political corruption in general.
• People who are disgusted by the Liberals’ corruption in this particular case.
• People who are disgusted that the sponsorship program existed in the first place, regardless of the fact that it got corrupted.

I think it’s a critical distinction, because it can have an enormous impact on our country’s future.

The second category of people – of which I am a member – despises the way the sponsorship program turned into a palm-greasing, pocket-lining program for the Liberals and their friends. But they believe that the basic idea of fighting to promote Canada and keep the country together is a good one, and was worthy of government spending.

The last category splits between Quebec separatists who hate the fact that the Federal government is spending money to deny them their independent nation of Quebec, and people in the rest of Canada who are fed up with Quebec’s whining and wish that we’d just separate already so they can get on with their lives.

Why is this important? Because as a federalist Quebecer, I’m – according to the last two referendum results – in the majority. But I often feel like I’m in the minority. With so many people in Quebec pushing to leave, and so many people in the ROC wishing us a good riddance, I sometimes wonder who will be fighting alongside me when the next referendum is inevitably called.

The Charest Liberals are in freefall, the PQ is almost certain to get back into power in a couple of years, and Gilles Duceppe’s Bloc holds a virtual lock on most of Quebec’s seats in Ottawa. All the strongest politicians right now are separatist. And with the fallout from the sponsorship scandal, the Federal government – whoever they are – will think long and hard before spending more money on any kind of sponsorship, scandalous or otherwise.

One of the reasons we won the 1995 referendum with such a razor-thin margin was that, the weekend beforehand, thousands of Canadians poured into Quebec to show their support and solidarity. People suddenly felt wanted. Obviously this had little effect on staunch federalists like myself, but it made some fence-sitters think twice about a yes vote.

But with Quebec thinking this is a Canadian problem, and the ROC thinking this is a Quebec problem, I see the chasm between the Two Solitudes widening again. Only a couple of years ago, sovereignty almost seemed passé. But suddenly, it’s a looming threat again.

We cannot stand for corruption in government. There’s no doubt that the sponsorship program went horribly wrong. But the risk is that the fallout from the scandal will make the Federal government gun-shy about fighting for national unity in the future.

It worries me. A lot.

Watching him was a bit wince-worthy, but ultimately he got his message across. He apologized without admitting direct involvement or guilt, accepted responsibility as a leader, and vowed to prosecute the offenders. To be fair, he did what I would have done in a similar situation. The only surprise was a promise to hold an election within 30 days of the end of the Gomery inquiry – a stall tactic if I’ve ever heard one. But I think that this desperation move may pay off for him.

In contrast, the other three leaders looked like they were launching campaign speeches. Harper attacked Martin straight-on, but his speech may have the unintended effect of making Canadians wary of a mud-slinging campaign. Duceppe had me wishing – not for the first time – that he wasn’t on the wrong side, because as usual he stole the show with a fantastic opening line to his speech, something to the effect of “the last time a prime minister addressed the nation, it was 1995 and Chretien was fighting to save Canada; this time, Martin’s fighting to save the Liberals”. He picked up votes for sure.

As for Layton, his small smile bugged me even more than it did during last summer’s debates. But he implied that he’d be willing to make a deal with Martin to attempt to stave off a no-confidence vote in exchange for changes in the Federal Budget to give the NDP what they want. This is Layton’s chance to blackmail the Liberals for all they’re worth, and don’t think it hasn’t occurred to him.

I think that, though this mess is with the Liberals, most people are cynical enough to realize that corruption is rampant in all political parties, and there’s quite a bit of distaste for the perceived opportunism of Harper and the other opposition leaders in this situation. I think people are already tired of hearing about Gomery. Mostly, I think people are tired of elections and their options are severely limited when it comes to actually voting.

What will happen is anyone’s guess. But I wouldn’t write off the Liberals just yet.

Sure, we can’t just let them get away with such corruption. But what does anyone think would happen with an election? Is there really any chance of a party besides the Liberals getting into power?

Last time, the Bloc nearly swept Quebec. They’d probably do even better this time. The Conservatives might pick up some seats in a new election and the NDP might pick up one or two. But we’d still end up with a Liberal minority government, albeit a somewhat weaker minority than this time. Not much would change. No lessons would be taught.

And the clincher: we’d waste even more taxpayer money. Hundreds of millions on the scandal itself and on the inquiry are already down the toilet. Do we really need to pay for an election, too?

Admittedly, I’m saying this as someone who’s always – grudgingly – voted Liberal, and who probably would again. I’m no big fan of Martin or most of his team but they’re the “least worst” out there right now, sponsorship scandal or not. I’m still a fan of my own riding’s MP, Marlene Jennings. Besides, what’s my alternative, the Bloc?

With the current math of the country, the point is moot and a new election would just be a waste of money. Let’s identify and prosecute the guilty in this scandal and look to weed out this kind of corruption from all our politics, instead of covering it up with just more political finger-pointing.

For one thing, the Martin government released a federal budget, which was another snoozer. Lots of promises to everyone that will deliver not a whole helluvalot to anyone. By my calculation, the “massive tax cuts” promised will save me exactly $14 in income tax next year. That’s two movie tickets and a small popcorn on cheapy night. Yippee! The budget was designed with one purpose in mind: to keep the Liberals in power. Well, mission accomplished, I suppose.

From the maybe-yes-then-again-maybe-no department, Paul Martin has proven himself, in the grand tradition of Canadian leaders, to be incapable of making a decision if it might cost him a few votes. Martin has opted not to participate in the missile defence program with the United States, on the grounds that, well, it would give him bad press because of rampant anti-Americanism. Oh, and the NDP might use words like “Star Wars”. Everyone knows that Star Wars are scary. Especially “Attack of the Clones”. That was just awful.

Anyway, I don’t quite get it. And neither does Paul Cellucci:

“I personally don’t think it’s in Canada’s sovereign interest to be outside the room when a decision is made about a missile that might be coming toward Canada.”

Paul, Paul, Paul… haven’t you learned anything in your years as ambassador to Canada? It’s not that we’re not interested in defending our country. It’s that we Canadians have deluded ourselves into thinking that if we smile and are nice and polite to everyone and refuse to take a stand on much of anything, that nobody will ever attack us. As for those pesky terrorists, well, they’re mainly just misunderstood, and we’ll give them an immigration hearing in about 6 months.

Moving on. Syria might withdraw from Lebanon in response to massive public and international pressure following the murder of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik al-Hariri… maybe. I guess the Syrians don’t particularly relish the thought that the ever-pervasive “End the Occupation” posters at ANSWER rallies might be directed against them, instead of against Israel. Of course, everyone knows that Baby Assad is really just stalling, hoping that the issue will blow over and the world can go back to merrily ignoring Syria’s sins and condemning Israel. That should happen in about 10 seconds, when the Israelis begin heightening security measures in reaction to today’s suicide bombing in Tel Aviv. If there’s one thing the Arab world can count on, it’s the rest of the world’s single-mindedness when it comes to Israel.

Finally, from the Good Riddance to Bad Rubbish department, Holocaust-denier Ernst Zundel will finally be deported from Canada, after hanging out in a Toronto jail for the past couple of years, trying to fight extradition to Germany on the grounds that he would immediately be prosecuted there for hate crimes. Somehow, I can’t see anyone shedding any tears over his departure.

In one of the statements that particularly angered Mr. Chrétien in December, Mr. Justice John Gomery, who is presiding over the inquiry, said the fact the fact the sponsorship program was used to buy golf balls with the former prime minister’s signature on them “small-town cheap”.

Upon questioning by his own lawyer, David Scott, Mr. Chrétien’s pulled out a number of golf balls he said had been given to him by “small town guys” including one George W. Bush from Crawford, Tex., along with other examples of “small town guys” such as former democratic leader Al Gore, and former president Bill Clinton.

He also had golf balls provided to him by Ogilvy Renault, a Montreal law firm which includes Judge Gomery’s co-counsel, Bernard Roy. He said those couldn’t be called “small-town cheap” because the firm is located in Westmount, a wealthy district in Montreal.

Chrétien’s deadpan delivery of the parting shots to Gomery made his disdain for the whole inquiry process plainly obvious. I mean, do we really need to be spending 60 million dollars finding out why money was spent on golf balls?

Independent MP Chuck Cadman’s single seat could give a Tory-BQ voting bloc enough votes to overcome a Liberal-NDP partnership. On Tuesday, he told reporters that he is “pretty well neutral” on the issue of bringing down the government at the moment.

No pressure, eh?

Of course, there’s still some horse-trading going on before that point is reached. I sincerely doubt that the government will fall today… if only because any party who causes it to collapse will pay the price dearly in the next election. The Liberals will probably make enough promises to the Conservatives to get them to come on board for the time being.

Still, these alliances are indicative of things to come. It could be a rocky few months.

Prime Minister Paul Martin promised selective tax cuts to boost the economy while renewing commitments to strengthen Canada – U.S. relations and enhance social programs in a Throne Speech designed to keep the opposition parties from defeating the Liberal minority government.

The speech promised tax cuts, economic reform, and education programs. It made no mention of investing in the cash-strapped military (our newly-purchased submarine is dead in the water).

The NDP will probably vote for. The Conservatives will likely vote against. The Bloc is anyone’s guess, though I’m betting they vote for – it’s not in their best interest to have another election so quickly. Of course, I could be wrong.

Don’t beat yourselves up too much, guys. The pollsters had it way wrong. There’s going to be a lot of questions being asked at Ipsos-Reid this morning.

Big journalism reacts as well. The Gazette thinks that the Liberals won because “fear overcame disgust”. The Globe and Mail says that Martin’s victory was only provisional, and that he should resist NDP pressures to swing too far to the left fiscally. The CBC speculates on what’s next for Martin, and questions his role as a leader. And of course, the separatist paper Le Devoir lauds the Bloc’s “remarkable victory” and says Quebecers gave the Liberals a “kick in the ass”.

Indeed. It was the Quebec Bloc sweep that cost the Liberals their majority government.

There’s a lot of speculation going on about what comes next. Will Martin manage to form a stable minority governing coalition? Or will the whole house of cards collapse in a few months? We’ll have to see.

135	99	19	54	0	1

Overnight, a couple of extra seats were lost from the NDP and the Libs and gained by the Tories. This puts the combined Liberals and NDP at 154 seats – or one shy of the 155 needed to form a majority.

Sweet relief!

While on most issues this will make no difference – an extra vote is generally easy enough to find – it does mean that in theory, the Conservatives and the Bloc (and one independent) can all combine to vote down a Liberal-NDP initiative.

Some of the margins were razor-thin; it will be interesting to see whether recounts affect any results.

At the moment, the NDP and Liberals are combining for 157 seats. Remember that 155 is needed for a majority. That’s a close enough number that any recounts, slim losses, or bolting of MPs may put the notion of a Liberal-NDP coalition in danger. Or at least one can only hope…

If Layton gets his way, his popular vote will translate into a lot more seats next time around. But I can’t imagine any of the other parties approving proportional representation. It’s not in their best interests.

And of course, if Duceppe has his way, then Quebec won’t be in Canada in time for the next federal election. And to think that in 8 ridings, the Conservatives stole enough Liberal votes to elect Bloc MPs. *Sigh*.

Update: The combined Liberal-NDP total is now down to 155 predicted seats. However it ends up, it’s going to be close.

Liberals: The nominal winner, Paul Martin, managed to hang onto a plurality, pulling ahead of expectations in the final days of the campaign and making a stronger showing than many people thought. He’ll keep his job. But he also lost his majority, several cabinet ministers, and a whole lot of seats. He also lost his ability to move his party rightward and bring in fiscal reforms, now that he will have to deal with the NDP. He probably has mixed feelings tonight.

Conservatives: Harper’s campaign was the biggest disappointment of the night for his supporters, and his opponents are breathing a sigh of relief. Despite peaking numbers and some crazy-talk about a Tory majority, Harper will be relegated to official opposition status yet again. Despite picking up a few seats, he’s the big loser of this election, no question.

Bloc Quebecois: Duceppe’s virtual sweep of Quebec was a big victory for Duceppe, as he brought his party to levels not seen since the Bouchard days. Predictably, he’s now claiming that this was a vote for sovereignty, and it looks like we might be facing the prospect of another referendum here in Quebec. On the other hand, Duceppe has to be at least a little disappointed that his party will not be holding the balance of power in Parliament.

NDP: Layton and his ragtag bunch of lefties are the night’s big winners. Despite getting the least number of seats of the big 4 parties, and only 15% of the popular vote, it is the NDP that will be setting the agenda in Parliament with this minority government. They will hold the balance of power, and Paul Martin will be forced to make all kinds of concessions to them in order to govern. Layton’s camp is ecstatic tonight.

Overall: In a way, this was the worst possible result. The Liberals had an opportunity to win a majority and move the party closer to the center. Instead, they will be forced to deal with the NDP. In a way, I would have almost preferred a Conservative minority, because at least then the government would’ve been powerless to do anything, propped up by the Liberals only long enough for them to regain their popularity, and then soundly defeated in an election that would restore a Liberal majority. Now, instead of more centrist ideas getting respect, we will be hearing about all of the NDP’s nutty policies getting attention. Tomorrow’s Canada is worse off than yesterday’s, and that says a lot.

So I will head off to sleep, feeling a mixture of relief and disappointment. And then I will remind myself that none of this really matters all that much anyway.

I will update the table above intermittently when candidates are declared elected, but I assume most people will be watching the coverage live. Instead, I’ll post some comments as I go along.

8:15pm: So far, the results for the Liberals aren’t looking nearly as grim as most of the media had been predicting.

They just announced that Scott Brison managed to win his riding – as a Liberal. Very interesting. Unlike a lot of people, I don’t view switching parties as a sign of being a “traitor”, but more as a sign of wanting to stay true to one’s ideals. Some people accused Brison of opportunism, but I think he just found that his values fit better with the Liberal party. Apparently, most voters in his riding agreed.

On the other hand, John Herron, who also switched from the Tories to the Libs, lost to the Conservative candidate in his riding. Win some, lose some.

8:50pm: Bad news for the Conservatives all over Eastern Canada, as they are down in seats and way down in popular vote. The Liberals have done what they needed to do in that part of the country, at any rate. There won’t be much more news until results start to come in from Quebec, Ontario, and Central Canada.

9:10pm: The first Bloc Quebecois MP has been elected, in Gaspésie/Îles-de-la-Madeleine. A sign of things to come in Quebec as a whole? Probably.

9:25pm: Local Conservative Party headquarters in Montreal are in a friggin’ Cage au Sports! That’s hysterical!!!

9:30pm: Polls are now closed in most of the country. Results should start to come in pretty quickly now.

9:45pm: Everyone’s talking about Layton versus Mills in the hotly-contested riding of Toronto-Danforth. But the big story that hasn’t been reported there is that the Conservative Party candidate, a guy with the odd-sounding name of Loftus Cuddy, is the brother of Blue Rodeo’s lead singer Jim Cuddy. (Blue Rodeo’s concert on Saturday at Bourbon Street North was awesome, by the way).

10:05pm: CTV just predicted a Liberal win, though they’re not saying yet whether it will be a majority or a minority.

Remember folks, you heard it here first.

10:15pm: With only 2 out of 205 polls reporting, my riding of NDG-Lachine has been declared a win for incumbent Liberal Marlene Jennings. No surprises there. I knew when I voted for her that it wouldn’t be much of a race.

10:30pm: The media networks are all projecting a Liberal minority now. As happy as I am that the Liberals will be taking it, my relief is tempered by the fact that the NDP might get enough seats to combine with the Liberals for a majority, thus giving the NDP all kinds of undeserved power in government and swinging policies to the far left. I’m crossing my fingers that they’re wrong.

10:45pm: David Pratt, the Liberal minister of defence, was defeated in his riding. Some big-name Liberals are falling to the Tories, but it won’t be enough for Harper’s team to take the reins. The Liberals are still way ahead.

10:50pm: At the moment, using elected and leading totals, it’s looking like Liberals + NDP will combine for enough seats for a majority. Goddammit! This is bad, bad news for Canada.

11:00pm: L. Ian MacDonald is talking about a “Lib-Lab” coalition, and Jack Layton dusting off his shopping list. With the NDP holding the balance of power, this is probably one of the worst-case scenarios that could have emerged. The Liberals had a golden opportunity to move rightward, towards the middle, under Paul Martin. Instead, thanks to the Bloc sweep in Quebec, the party will be forced to move leftward.

11:15pm: It’s all over now but the fat lady singing.

Gilles Duceppe just gave his triumphant victory speech after his sweep in Quebec, and – surprise surprise – is suddenly talking about sovereignty again nonstop (after swearing that this vote was not about separation). I don’t know why this stuff even bothers me anymore, it’s so expected. Still, this is bad news for Quebec.

In the rest of the country, it’s pretty much understood that Paul Martin will govern with Jack Layton’s help. The NDP agenda will be front-and-center, and we can kiss Martin’s fiscally-responsible policies, like debt reduction, goodbye.

The good news is the Liberals won. The bad news is, well, everything else. Unfortunately, I predicted this.

But here’s the thing: Quebec no longer sends 73 Liberal MPs to Ottawa. The Bloc has won most of Quebec’s seats ever since the 1993 election, leaving the Liberals with around 35 Quebec MPs at most. The Bloc is far ahead of the Liberals this time around, and if Martin wins 25 Quebec seats, I think he’ll be lucky.

That means the Conservatives would have to win 25 more seats than the Liberals in the rest of the country – hard, but not that hard. The Liberals will likely win most of the 32 seats in Atlantic Canada, but the Conservatives will win all but one or two of the 28 seats in Alberta, thereby cancelling out that advantage. SES now puts the Conservatives ten points ahead in Ontario, ahead by 6 in B.C. and ahead by 7 in Manitoba and Saskatchewan.

If these numbers hold, I think we’d looking at a Conservative minority government. As for a majority, alas, Sari is right – you can’t realistically do it without picking up at least a few Quebec seats.

The thing about polls, as I’ve been arguing, is that they don’t reflect political reality in Canada because they aren’t added up by riding. The party that wins the popular vote doesn’t always win the election. We almost take the system for granted at this point.

I still don’t think that this is Harper’s election. The last time a Conservative government won in Canada (during the Mulroney years), it had the backing of considerable political forces in Quebec. Since then, the Liberals’ dwindling support in the rest of Canada might very well go to the Conservatives, but the Bloc will be picking up the support here in Quebec.

Polls are also notoriously inaccurate. People may feel no pressure to say one thing on the phone to a pollster, but when they actually go vote where it counts they can do another. With the slips lately from the Harper camp on divisive issues like abortion, some people may be getting scared. The public is fed up with the Libs, but I simply don’t see the Conservatives getting elected in Canada without more than perhaps a single seat won in Quebec – which is the most they can realistically hope for here. No, I think this is a polling blip and that we will end up with a Liberal government, albeit a minority one.

The party that will gain the most? Sadly, the NDP. Their swing votes will suddenly matter in parliament in the case of a minority government, and their agenda given much more attention than usual. Good news? Hardly.

Which of us is right? We’ll have to see in three weeks, I suppose.

If you’re not reading Imshin, you should be. She has been blogging in her typically insightful fashion lately about Shavuot and Zionism’s true meaning, and about antisemitism at Berkeley.

LGF has the photo that proves just how little the UN can be trusted in the mideast. And Meryl has some biting commentary on the latest news emerging from Israel.

In Canadian news, the election talk that seems to be dominating the airwaves. But Damian Penny and David Janes have a disgusting story of racism interfering in custody cases that proves just how dangerous these “PC” policies can be for innocent children. As for the election, Paul Jané comments on the Liberals’ transparent scheme to make ridiculous healthcare promises at the eleventh hour that they clearly have no intention of keeping. (Anyone else remember the “no more GST” promise? Remind me again why I keep voting for these guys?)

Let the attack ads, insults, and petty politics begin.

In the meantime, having recently moved out of the riding I’ve voted in my entire adult life, I’ve have been getting a crash course in the politics of my new riding, NDG/Lachine. It’s been educational, to say the least.

For one thing, I’ve discovered that the incumbent candidate is Marlene Jennings, who, from what I know about her, has been one of the Liberals whose views I’ve tended to respect.

Jennings is almost sure to win a third term in office. She is being challenged by candidates from the Bloc, the NDP, and the Green Party. There is no Conservative Party candidate running in my riding, interestingly enough. I’d never voted Conservative (in any of their previous incarnations) before, but if they really wanted me to consider voting for them this time, they should have at least run a candidate.

I still don’t know what I’m going to do come election day. Politically, I tend to diverge with all the major parties on at least some issues I consider critically important. Like a lot of Canadians I’m fed up with the Liberals. Even before the sponsorship scandal, I was getting sick of the waffling on important issues, the pandering to interest groups, the annoying way that the party assumed they were in power forever and didn’t actually have to do anything… But I don’t see too many viable alternatives out there.

I’m sure I’m far from the only person who’s annoyed that there are so few people to vote for. In provincial elections, I always hold my nose and vote Liberal because I’m a federalist and, well, that’s what federalists do. In federal elections, I liked the notion that there were more choices. But it’s starting to seem like the hold-nose-and-vote-Liberal-mantra is going to become more common in federal elections as well.

Somehow, it’s hard to get energized by such a meaningless vote.

In suggesting Harper is proposing “U.S.-style health care,” the Liberals are resorting to U.S.-style attack ads. For the Liberals, the great danger is that Harper might not turn out to be so dangerous. Harper must prove that he’s no more dangerous than he looks, which is to say not dangerous at all.

The Liberal attack ads are intended to scare the daylights out of voters in the great Canadian middle who might be considering a vote for the Conservatives, or the Conservative-Alliance, as the Liberals style them as part of their scare tactics. Their problem is that Harper doesn’t look, or sound, scary.

I’m not endorsing the Conservatives. I don’t agree with their positions on a myriad of issues. But I also am disgusted by the apparent intentions of the Liberals to play dirty politics. Paul Martin would be well to remember that if you wrestle down in the mud, your clothes are bound to get dirty.

No! Shocking! Quick, someone call a reporter!

Yep, this ranks up there in “duh-factor” with last week’s shocker of a news headline: That if a federal election were to be held in Canada today, the Liberals would win.

You don’t say!

Tomorrow, I’ll probably open the paper and see it announced in big letters that yes, the Earth is in fact round.

So here’s my ten-second breakdown.

Healthcare: Mainly a provincial issue, but very little new money to help bail out the provinces. Instead of spending it on medicare or on, oh, important stuff like equipment, doctors and nurses, and patient care, the government’s gonna create yet another useless level of bureaucracy, this one to address “public health” (like the SARS crisis). Never mind that there are hundreds of times more people needing everyday healthcare. But it seems that there can never be enough levels of waste for the Libs.

Taxes: Breaks for small businesses and aid for venture capital financing. Both good things. Nothing much for big business (cause, of course, the Liberals can’t be seen to be getting too cozy with the devil). Oh, and a big chunk of cash to find “environmentally-friendly technologies”. I guess that’s the only way a Liberal government can fund business. Anyway the most important question is how much more of my own money will I get to keep on each paycheck. The answer? Not a whole helluvalot. Thumbs down.

National Debt: A commitment to pay it down considerably. This is good. The people don’t always see the debt as a priority, but reducing the debt means reducing interest payments, and that can only help the economy. Let’s see if the government keeps this promise. (Echoes of the “we will cancel the GST” promise sounding in anyone else’s ears?)

Defence: Peacekeeping only. Money for missions in Afghanistan and Haiti. Oh, and a throwaway gesture that says that troops don’t have to pay tax on earnings while deployed abroad. Nothing that could be perceived as Bush-cozying or war-mongering. Heaven forbid Canadian troops get planes that don’t need to be held together with duct tape!

Education: Also a provincial area. Textbooks are now deductible for students. And “learning bonds” to give minuscule amounts of money to low-income students… in about 18 years or so. That’s about it.

Stupid Liberal Wastes of Money: Refreshingly few. Of course, these are usually the small-ticket throwaways that may not have hit the headlines yet. I’m keeping my eyes peeled for a “multiculturalism fund” or a “help the CBC produce more aboriginal-related programming” fund increase. Excuse me while I roll my eyes.

Miscellany: Money for farmers hit by mad cow. Yeah, ok, that one sucked for them. And I certainly wouldn’t want to have to grow my own food, so I guess we can throw them some bones.

Overall: It’s balanced, so that’s good. It’s not excessive with a bunch of stupid spending to buy votes. So that’s also good. But not enough of the fat has been trimmed, and not enough of taxpayers’ money is being put back into taxpayers’ pockets. That about sums it up for me.

Update: Paul has a one-word summary of the budget: YAWN.

Prime Minister Jean Chretien announced he will leave office on December 12, allowing prime minister-designate Paul Martin to ascend to the office.

“We have agreed the 12th of December will be the date when … the new government will be sworn in.

“On the 12th, he (Martin) will be the prime minister,” Chretien said in a jam-packed press conference.

Paul Martin, 65, was elected late Friday by nearly 94 percent of Liberal Party delegates to be the party’s leader, who automatically becomes the next prime minister.

Chretien, 69, initially said he would retire in February 2004, but when the party’s organizing committee — which was packed with Martin supporters — decided to hold the leadership convention in November it created an usual period in which one leader was elected while another had not yet left office.

Finally, the period in which we have one lame duck Prime Minister and one PM-in-waiting will be over. And not a moment too soon.

Does anyone else suspect that, if not for the personal feud between Chretien and Martin, this would have happened a long time ago?

Damian has the latest on the politician who just won’t leave office, and Paul has a few thoughts on the corruption within the Liberal government under said politician’s leadership. Steve has the shoot-an-FLQ-terrorist video game . . . and the offended reaction of a bunch of separatists with way too much time on their hands. And Occam’s Toothbrush has a link to a George Jonas story in the National Post on the real problem in the Palestinian society. (You’ll note that, unlike Jonas’s horribly sexist article on why women should be flattered to be groped by Arnold Schwarzenegger, this article has a web link).

Allison has a few thoughts on how the Israeli government can step up its PR by recognizing the contribution of bloggers to the pro-Israel effort. Lynn has a brutally honest article by what passes for a “human rights activist” in Jordan (read: someone who wants to destroy Israel). And Imshin helps Lynn figure out what Israeli turkeys say. (Personally, judging by the menus at most Israeli restaurants I’ve ever been at, I’d guess they probably say something like “I don’t want to be schnitzel!”)

The Canadian Alliance’s motion asking MPs to reaffirm the heterosexual definition of marriage was defeated by a vote of 137 to 132 Tuesday night.

[ . . . ]

Tuesday’s motion was similar to one passed by a vote of 216 to 55 by the House in 1999, in which many Liberals voted to preserve the traditional definition of marriage.

Because of the 1999 vote, the Alliance succeeded in embarrassing the Liberals who voted against today, but in favour of the similar motion only four years ago. But their hopes of pre-empting the Liberals’ planned vote on extending marriage rights to gays, and embarrassing the government even further, were dashed.

So what’s changed in 4 years? Has society become that much more in tune with human rights? Or did the recent court decisions in Ontario and B.C. act as catalysts for change? Either way, Martin Cauchon is right:

“I believe it is about equality, dignity and respect for all Canadians,” said Cauchon.

“We are at a historic moment in time. We have the opportunity to challenge our simple assumptions and beliefs and do what is right in terms of equality,” he added.

The defeat of today’s Alliance motion, of course, doesn’t mean that the Liberal motion to legalize gay marriage will pass. The tiny margin indicates that it’s a contentious topic that isn’t going to be clearly resolved anytime soon. It’s likely to become an election issue, which, given the Liberals’ virtual assurance of getting into power, will probably be used as leverage to weaken their majority and strengthen the religious right.

But besides all the politics, we have to remember that a society makes progress by recognizing and correcting past and present wrongs. “It’s always been that way” is a lousy argument for the status quo, if we’re slowly recognizing that the status quo denies basic rights to a minority population. “My religion says so” is even worse. These are just excuses that the majority likes to use in order to keep the minority from attaining rights, and we should look back in shame at how long it took us to recognize that when it came to the rights of women, or people with different skin colours.

You can see how your local MP voted on today’s motion here.

Why Sheila Copps is still bothering to keep her hat in is a mystery beyond me. I guess Martin needs at least one rival to pull off the facade of a leadership race.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to address the anti-Israel petition that was filed in the House on March 31 by the member for the riding of Quebec.

There is no connection between Israel’s struggle with suicide bombers and Saddam Hussein’s many years of non-compliance with UN inspections. Israel is a democracy and an ally in our campaign on terrorism.

The fundamental cause of the ongoing crisis in the disputed territories is the reluctance of the Palestinian side to accept Israeli existence, to renounce a strategy of terrorism and compromise, something that I hope will happen with the new Palestinian prime minister.

Israel has the responsibility to protect its people from suicide bombers. It is careful to minimize civilian casualties, and the allegations of Israeli massacres are fabrications.

Israel proved its commitment to peace at Camp David in July 2000 when it put forward a two state solution. Yasser Arafat responded with a strategy of violence. Terrorism cannot bring peace to this region, and Canada must stand by its Israeli allies in our campaign against this global threat.

This statement was published by the CJC as part of its regular reporting on issues discussed in Parliament that affect its constituents. It’s nice to see someone besides the Canadian Alliance making a strong pro-Israel statement for a change.

If the Liberals are all over the map on Iraq, it’s because they’ve failed to articulate a clear foreign policy since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. 

[ . . . ]

A new foreign policy must start from a dual premise: that our relationship with the United States is of pre-eminent importance and that maintaining global security in the 21st century means dealing firmly with rogue states and terrorist groups.

The Iraq issue is a difficult one because it turns on the credibility of the UN inspections process. How much faith do we have in the ability of inspectors to find Saddam’s concealed weapons?

So far, Canada has said international law and UN approval should govern military action against Iraq. But diplomacy can only go so far when a duplicitous regime is determined to flaunt its international obligations.

Soon, it may be time to forcibly disarm Saddam. And it will be time for Chrétien to check his moral compass and consider who his friends are.

He’s not the only one with an opinion. Progressive Conservative Party leader Joe Clark also wants the government off the fence, but on the other side:

“The prime minister is being dangerously ambiguous as to what Canada’s position would be,” Clark said.

“No one knows where Canada stands. Our allies don’t know, our citizens don’t know, (Chretien’s) own government doesn’t know.”

Canada should only support military action if it is sanctioned by the United Nations, Clark added

Well, that sure clears that up! And yes, it’s a strange political landscape when the Conservative party is telling the Liberal party to take a softer line on military action.

The good news is that the Bloc Quebecois is virtually disappearing from the scene in terms of popular support – although it is sure to keep winning several stronghold seats here in Quebec due to the riding system. But with the NDP and the Conservatives virtually neck-and-neck in second place, the prospect of a Liberal government and an NDP opposition are – needless to say – quite disconcerting. Not that I expect that to happen . . . but the trend is an unhappy one.