acanuck's picture

    A CANADIAN ELECTION PRIMER

    We Canadians take our politics very seriously. Also our hockey. Hard to say which we care more about. Oh no, wait. It's not:
    http://sports.nationalpost.com/2011/04/10/french-debate-rescheduled-to-avoid-habs-playoff-game/

    It sounds preposterous, but the switch makes perfect sense. The whole point of a televised debate between the prime minister and the three other main party leaders is to be watched – which virtually no one in Quebec would do if it coincided with the Canadiens-Bruins matchup. New Democratic leader Jack Layton said he'd probably opt for the game too, if he weren't taking part in the debate.

    On to the election campaign itself. The big news is that there actually is an election campaign, and the good news is that it's already half-over. Canadians view an election like we do sex: it should be fast and cheap, and leave us feeling slightly dirty afterward.

    This vote should meet our expectations. The government fell on March 26, and we'll vote for a new Parliament May 2. That's less time than the U.S. takes between electing a president and swearing him in, much less the 18-month campaign period that Obama just kicked off. Yeah, this country has one-tenth the population. But get real!

    Same for costs. On the donation side, no corporate or labor-union contributions allowed. Each citizen can give $1,100 to a political party and $1,100 to a candidate. That's it! Oh, and each party collects $2 for every vote it got in the last election. Expenses are also strictly limited, depending on the number of potential voters the candidate is trying to appeal to. Constituencies (quaintly, we call them ridings) vary a bit in size, but the average limit is less than $100,000. Exceed that, and you might have your victory annulled. Although I'm not sure of that since, being Canadian, nobody ever cheats.

    As for feeling dirty, we're still in jockeying-for-position mode. Nobody is desperate enough yet to go for a really low blow. But the English and French-language leaders' debates are now scheduled for Tuesday and Wednesday, and there might be some fireworks then. Or not.

    What's at stake:
    Ours is a parliamentary system, so it's basically the 308 seats in the House of Commons. The four party leaders run for a seat like everybody else, but the one whose party wins an absolute majority gets to be prime minister. You can get to be PM with a minority of seats as well, but that's much less fun since you have to compromise all the time to get anything passed. Stephen Harper hates that.

    After two elections in which Canadians gave him minority governments, Harper is hoping the third time's the charm. A majority of Canadians hope it's not.

    What's not at stake:
    Queen Elizabeth II, who's technically our head of state, is not up for re-election this year. She never is.

    Ditto for our appointed governor-general, who is our de-facto head of state, since he lives here and the queen doesn't. He's David Johnston, a respected but boring former principal of McGill University. Some of you will remember fondly the two hot exotic babes who preceded him; Harper apparently decided to break with that tradition, for which I'm hoping he pays a political price.

    Also secure in their jobs: the 102 members of the Senate (three seats are vacant). They are appointed, hold office until 75, and exercise no real power. In the past, the Senate was a dumping ground for party hacks and bagmen, leading one senator to call such an appointment “a taskless thanks.”

    The parties:
    Conservatives (Tories): Roughly 40% popular support. It's useful to understand that today's ruling party is only indirectly related to the Progressive Conservatives who gave Canada four prime ministers over 50 years. The PCs imploded in 1993, falling from a majority government to just two (2) seats. Out of about 300! A western upstart party called Reform (later rebranded as the Canadian Alliance) stepped into the small-C gap, and eventually merged with the PCs' remnants. They picked up the Conservatives' time-honored name, but their base is Tea Party Lite – rural vs. urban, anti-bilingualism, anti-gun control, anti-gay, anti-immigrant, pro-military, pro-business, tough on crime. Stephen Harper is the smooth-talking, well-coiffed face of the party, whom nobody quite trusts.

    Liberals (Grits, though hardly anyone calls them that anymore): 30% popular support. For decades, the Liberals were called Canada's “natural governing party,” producing prime ministers who won election after election: William Lyon Mackenzie King, Louis St-Laurent, Pierre Trudeau and Jean Chretien. A massive funding scandal and a string of weak party leaders gave the Tories their opportunity to take power. Current Liberal leader is Michael Ignatieff, a former long-time Harvard prof who many feel is unattuned to Canadian priorities. For example, he backed the Iraq War. Bad start.

    New Democrats: Roughly 15%, nudging 20% in some provinces. Canada's “socialist” party, although it grew out of prairie populism. Tommy Douglas, who sold voters on single-payer medicare by showing it could work in his home province, was its iconic founder, polling as the greatest Canadian of all time. Jack Layton, the party's current leader (who happens to be battling cancer), polls ahead of both Harper and Ignatieff as voters' preferred prime minister. People generally like NDP policies, but tend to vote strategically.

    Bloc Quebecois: Less than 10% of the overall Canadian vote, but far higher in Quebec. The Bloc, which runs candidates only in that province, is in theory a separatist party. Over the past 20 years, however, it has grown comfortable with its influence at the federal level. Several old-time MPs have retired on generous pensions. Led by Gilles Duceppe, the party has slipped a bit in early polling.

    Greens: Slightly over 5%. Environmental, progressive party that has yet to win a single parliamentary seat. Its leader, Elizabeth May, is well-respected, but the consortium organizing this week's televised leaders' debates excluded her from participating. She appealed that decision, but lost.

    That's the bare bones of the parties and personalities competing for attention with the first round of the Stanley Cup playoffs. There are policy issues as well, but the simplest way to think of it is: Conservatives = Republicans, Liberals = Democrats, NDP = Bernie Sanders, and the Bloc = a French-speaking Ralph Nader. And in the bizarro world of Canadian politics, the Conservative color is blue and the Liberal color is red.

    A useful daily tracking poll: http://www.threehundredeight.blogspot.com/

    Comments

    I'm rooting for the NDP. Ignatieff looks to much like a typographical error. Smile


    I may end up voting Liberal, but Ignatieff is indeed some kind of error.

    Two points: As we enter the second half of the campaign, would-be NDP voters are starting to look at the polls and ask themselves if they want to risk wasting their votes. A lot of them, like me, will feel denying Harper a majority is the No. 1 priority.

    Also, tomorrow's televised debate could really affect the outcome. Three of the party leaders are old hands at this, but Ignatieff is leading his first national campaign; he admits he's a bit nervous. Most pundits and voters will focus on how he performs. It could tip the election either way.


    I use to follow Canadian politics more closely when RCI carried The World at 6 and As it Happens. But they no longer do and have gone to that silly DRM for their shortwave broadcasts. Yes I know I can get both as streaming but it's not the same as I would listen while fixing dinner which I cannot do on the computer.


    Cutting back Radio Canada International was such a short-sighted budget move! For many people, especially expats, it was the only Canadian perspective on the news available where they were. Of course, that was before everyone had a laptop or a tablet.


    I liked As It Happens. It could get pretty snarky sometimes.Smile


    We used to get This Hour Has 22 Minutes and its companion comedy; damn they had fun with Deceppe!

    But you think scheduling around hockey is funny; Obama had to schedule around American Idol!!

    Good luck, and too bad May got rooked; she shouldda gotten Celine to go to bat for her.  ;o)


    May makes a good case that, if they could switch the date of the debate to accommodate a hockey game, they could have expanded it to include her. But I agree with the decision to exclude the Greens, along with the Marxist-Leninists, the Marijuana Party, etc. Until you've won at least one seat in Parliament, you're not a national party.


    Good piece, Canuckster.

    Although you forgot to note that if the Habs lose to the Bruins, we're likely to see roughly 500 cop cars set alight, and Montreal burned to the ground by "disappointed" fans. 

    Then again, last time they did this when they BEAT the Bruins, so, ummm, there you go.

     


    And also. ;-)


    Never happened. That footage is totally faked. Gaddafi's troops fired on us first!


    Did I mention that Harper molests beavers, and Ignatieff dines on human flesh? 

    Well, they do.

    And Layton - who is now my local MP - is almost human? Really, I've met him, and he's as close as to a perfect replica as the robot scientists can presently make.

    What the hell are we dealing with here, Canuck? Can't we at least have a choice amongst HUMANS? Arrrrgh. Makes me wanna go burn cop cars.


    You know it is the inside story that grabs my interest!


    This post wasn't intended to get into campaign issues, but this -- coming out a day before the party leaders are set to debate -- is just too juicy to ignore:

    http://www.metronews.ca/Toronto/Canada/article/829129--ag-says-she-can-t-release-controversial-report--page0

    Skimming off $50 million for a cabinet minister's riding is probably not that unusual or that big a deal, but the alleged "misinforming" of Parliament is. It especially resonates because the vote that brought down the government on March 25 found it "in contempt of Parliament" -- for precisely the same reason: lying to MPs about an entirely different matter. The Harper government's perceived arrogance in ignoring legalities and bending regulations is one of the biggest knocks against it, and the reason many are so scared about it winning a parliamentary majority.

     


    And now this! The auditor general publicly accuses the government of misquoting her, taking a remark she made in 2010 about decade-old events and misrepresenting it as referring to the G8/G20 funding controversy. These people are shameless!

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2011/04/11/cv-election-weston-ag-fraser.html


    SHAMELESS CONTEMPT!! CONTEMPTIBLE SHAMELESSNESS!!!

    Latest Comments