Not any given Sunday for this proud Pop

By macleans.ca - Wednesday, January 28, 2009 at 9:00 AM - 0 Comments

Larry Fitzgerald Sr., sportswriter for the Minnesota Spokesman-Recorder, has been covering the Super Bowl every year since 1981. This Sunday’s game in Tampa presents his proudest moment in sport, and his greatest journalistic challenge, reports ESPN columnist Rick Reilly. How do you objectively cover the game when one of the most electrifying players of this season happens to be your son, Larry Fitzgerald Jr., ace wide receiver for the Arizona Cardinals. “I’ve come too far to suddenly show up in the press box with pompoms,” says Dad. “But if you could put a monitor on my insides, you’d find a whole fan club in there.”

ESPN

Shara Arlene Flanigan 1973-2009

By Rachel Mendleson - Wednesday, January 28, 2009 at 9:00 AM - 2 Comments

Shara Arlene Flanigan was born on Jan. 12, 1973, in Orangeville, Ont., the first of two girls to Patrick “Pat” Flanigan, a Ford worker, and his wife, Arlene, at the time a stay-at-home mom. Named after the title character of a Harlequin romance, Shara had blue eyes, tight blond curls and an easy smile that made her a ringer for Shirley Temple, despite being all gums until age one. Recalls Arlene, “I was panicking, thinking she wasn’t going to get teeth.” A well-mannered child who loved dresses and bedtime stories, Shara was also a natural athlete with an inherent fearlessness, says Arlene. An early propensity to “pump the living daylights” out of the glider on the family’s swing set later gave way to diving into swimming pools backwards and flying planes.

From the start, says Arlene, Shara and her sister were “amazingly close.” Tamara, who was two years younger and afraid of the dark, says she wound up in Shara’s room “pretty much every night.” After Pat and Arlene divorced in 1979, the girls moved often with their mom, but didn’t dwell on low points. Whenever they started at a new school, they’d swap progress reports at recess, and at Sunday mass, Shara would induce fits of “crying-laughing” by stepping on Tamara’s heels as they walked up the aisle to take communion, she says. Though they took the familial transitions in stride, including remarriages, half-siblings and stepsisters, the girls remained attached to their first home in Orangeville, where they stayed with Pat on weekends. Once, he took them on a tour of an abandoned house, which, says Tamara, gave them “the bug” to find other destitute properties and, later, scour real estate websites.

Continue…

100 days of decision: day 1,101

By Paul Wells - Wednesday, January 28, 2009 at 8:55 AM - 23 Comments

Monte Solberg, who served in this Conservative government for nearly three years, has decided that — darn it — it’s time for this Conservative government to decide what it wants to do when it grows up:

This budget isn’t a conservative document so much as it’s a political document; a document that will give the Conservative government the room necessary to craft a compelling conservative vision for the future.

They must craft that vision without hesitation, and they must do it in a way that makes people want to be a part of it.

Richard Branson offers a job to his most famous critic

By macleans.ca - Wednesday, January 28, 2009 at 8:50 AM - 0 Comments

Never one to allow a marketing op go by unexploited, Virgin Atlantic Airlines’ CEO Richard Branson has offered the author of a now-famous customer complaint letter  about his airline’s cuisine a job (linked below), reports the Telegraph. After the excoriating take-down became the talk of the Internet, Branson telephoned the letter writer to join him selecting food for future Virgin flights. The former passenger, who wrote that opening the lid of the meal was like being given a “dead hamster for Christmas,” has not confirmed whether he or she will take Branson up on his offer. If it happens, count on the cameras to role.     
 

Telegraph.co.uk

Complaint letter: “Dear Sir Richard Branson, Your food sucks”

Ottawa’s best-kept secret?

By Philip Slayton - Wednesday, January 28, 2009 at 8:50 AM - 3 Comments

In early September, when Stephen Harper nominated Tom Cromwell to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court of Canada, he brought the first part of a promised and formal selection process to a sudden and premature end. Cromwell was still supposed to be publicly interviewed by a parliamentary committee before his appointment was confirmed, but the Nova Scotia judge was left twisting in the wind while an election was fought and Parliament prorogued. Then, without any public interview, Harper made his choice final, burying this important announcement the same day he announced a long list of Senate appointments. The whole process took almost four months, ignored procedures that Harper himself had earlier approved, involved neither Parliament nor the public, and left a bad taste in many mouths.

The botched selection process was a pity because it tainted an otherwise sound appointment. Almost everyone agrees that Cromwell, 56, was a good choice. His resumé is impeccable, if a little dull—he’s from what political scientist Peter Russell calls the “grey middle.” Cromwell has been a full-time law teacher and a judge. He’s a graduate, in music and law, of Queen’s University in Kingston. He went to Oxford University and graduated with the notoriously difficult bachelor of civil law degree. From 1982 until 1997, Cromwell taught at Dalhousie Law School, taking a three-year leave of absence to be executive legal officer for then-Supreme Court chief justice Antonio Lamer. He was appointed to the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal in 1997. He’s bilingual.

Continue…

First one to call this his "walk in the snow" has to go out and shovel it

By kadyomalley - Wednesday, January 28, 2009 at 8:42 AM - 79 Comments

ITQ will be liveblogging the Liberal leader’s press conference this morning. She has absolutely no idea what he’s going to say, although she’s hoping for a Yeats quote; apparently, he’ll fill us in on whether or not his party is leaning towards supporting the budget, bringing down the government or introducing some sort of amendment that would provide the PM with the perfect opportunity to demonstrate his newfound appreciation for nonpartisan cooperative collaboration.

Check back at 11am to find out!

(An aside: You guys, this is so exciting! Don’t you love those days on the Hill when our journalistic unified theory of the immediate short term everything can be summed up thusly: “Wait, what? Did we miss something? What’s going on?” And how infuriating must it be for the Prime Minister that the day after his government delivered the most extraordinary-est budget in the history of modern Canadian political ever, all eyes are not on him or his government, but on Michael Ignatieff? Unless this is all part of that craftily designed time-release communications strategy, of course. [Insert hoary chess/checkers cliche here.])

10:41:19 AM
Ahh, that’s more like it – You’ve no idea how much I missed my trusty berry during yesterday’s lockup. Liveblogging on a laptop just isn’t the same – you can’t get up and wander around, for one thing. Not that I’m doing much wandering at the moment, of course: I am stationed in my usual just-past-the-pillar seat in the National Press Theatre, listening to the room fill up with my slightly snow-encrusted colleagues, wondering – as is our lot in life – what on earth will happen next, and what about after *that*?

Team Ignatieff is already here – well, the Team, not sure about the Ignatieff – but they’re not letting anything slip as far as what their boss is going to say. What ITQ *can* report, however, is that he won’t be saying it from behind a desk; the middle leaf of the trademark NPT table has just been hauled off the stage and replaced with a lectern that I’m fairly sure is actually taller than me.

11:01:17 AM
Well, he’s now officially late, although that *may* be due to the last minute addition of the lectern, which forces the assembled camera crews to shuffle around until they’re satisfied that the angle will make any looming by the star of the show sufficiently ominous.

Continue…

Toilet haiku

By macleans.ca - Wednesday, January 28, 2009 at 8:40 AM - 0 Comments

In Japan, home to the world’s most advanced toilets, an environmental research group has found a way to cut down on paper use in public loos: post a “toilet poem” at the eye level of a person seated in the cubicle. Tests show that the short poems—including “That paper will meet you only for a moment”, “Fold the paper over and over and over again” and “Love the toilet”—cut toilet paper use by up to 20 per cent. Now the group is looking to have its posters displayed in 1,000 public toilets.

Scientific American

I’m still here

By Elio Iannacci - Wednesday, January 28, 2009 at 8:40 AM - 2 Comments

It’s 3 p.m. on a scorching June afternoon in New York’s Upper East Side, and 81-year-old singer Eartha Kitt hasn’t had lunch yet. Unlike most women her age, she’s spent the day in back-to-back business meetings, sorting out concert contracts and signing legal agreements for her recently released DVD, Eartha Kitt: Live at the Cheltenham Jazz Festival. With the help of her 47-year-old daughter/manager/driver, Kitt Shapiro, the pair manages to make it on time for a sound check for one of the 80-plus gigs she has booked for 2008. Tonight’s performance marks her return to the Café Carlyle—where Kitt has been seasonally showcasing her acclaimed one-woman show for nearly 10 years.

After finishing up with her band, squeezing in a wardrobe fitting, an hour of yoga and some phone time with her L.A.-based publicist, Kitt sits down for a light snack during her interview with Maclean’s—slotted a mere two hours before the night’s 6 p.m. showtime. Her to-do list—which still includes a makeup and hair sitting before curtain call—sounds manic for anyone, let alone a person in her ninth decade. Yet Kitt insists she is “taking it easier than ever.”

Continue…

Now you can drop $1,000 on eye cream

By Rachel Mendleson - Wednesday, January 28, 2009 at 8:10 AM - 0 Comments

So how many Shoppers Optimum points do you get for buying a $1,060 bottle of eye cream? Now consumers can find out. Shoppers Drug Mart has just launched an upscale new chain called Murale that will not only offer exclusive cosmetics, such as pricey $1,000 lotions from Natura Bissé, but will pamper customers with a luxury in-store spa.

Murale launched with a 7,000-sq.-foot store in Ottawa in November, and last month it opened a 8,200-sq.-foot location in Montreal. Both feature pristine white interiors, curved walls and boutique-like displays. In addition to luxury brands and niche products, Murale employs “beauty masters” with at least three years of “artistry” experience. The stores also house a spa where shoppers can undergo everything from antioxidant treatments to cellulite removal to facials. The philosophy, says spokesperson Tammy Smitham, is that “a customer’s basket size increases following a treatment.”

Continue…

Magna edges closer to making cars

By Colin Campbell - Wednesday, January 28, 2009 at 8:00 AM - 0 Comments

Could Magna International grow from making just car parts into a full-fledged carmaker? It’s not all that far-fetched, say some industry pundits.

Last week, the Aurora, Ont.-based company hired former Chrysler executive Wolfgang Bernhard as a consultant, prompting a wave of rumours that the company was in talks to buy pieces of the struggling auto company. Magna, after all, had talks with Chrysler just last year about teaming up to build cars, and Bernhard had worked with Cerberus Capital Management when it took control of Chrysler in 2007. Both Magna and Chrysler immediately denied the reports. But that hasn’t dampened speculation that the company is looking to do more than make parts.

Continue…

Michael Jackson may go to court (for something else)

By macleans.ca - Wednesday, January 28, 2009 at 7:30 AM - 0 Comments

Hot on the heels of the news that Michael Jackson’s “Thriller” is being developed as a Broadway musical, the singer is being sued by the man who directed the iconic video. Director John Landis (Animal House) claims that for the last few years, he hasn’t been getting the 50% share of “Thriller” profits that he’s entitled to by contract. Since the video hasn’t actually been making much money in the last few years, what with everybody viewing it for free on YouTube, Landis won’t get much money out of the lawsuit, but who can pass up an opportunity to embarrass Michael Jackson?

The Wrap

Obama in Afghanistan: a tougher stance?

By Paul Wells - Wednesday, January 28, 2009 at 1:32 AM - 6 Comments

The first hints about what Barack Obama’s strategy in Afghanistan might be, beyond “more troops:” a clearer division of labour, with the Americans concentrating on the military-security challenge and leaving development and reconstruction to “the Europeans.” (I believe, but am not certain, that that includes us.) Hamid Karzai worried for many months that a meeting he had with Joe Biden, in which Biden left in disgust after less than 10 minutes, was a bad omen about how he might be treated by any administration in which Biden played a key role. Looks like he was right: Karzai’s fortnightly video calls with the former president, for starters, will not continue under the new one.

“The Europeans” should not be naive about the burdens this division of labour, if implemented, would pose. One of the biggest reconstruction challenges is police training. The scale of European efforts on that front, though not the quality of individual trainers, has so far been risible. What if Obama and Bob Gates ask, not for 15,000 more soldiers, but for 5,000 more civilian police trainers from Bremen and Maastricht and Leeds — assigned to mentor beat cops in Kandahar and Lashkar Goh? Recall that in each of the last two years, more than 1,000 Afghan police officers have been killed on duty…

White House style: Glamour for the people

By Lianne George - Wednesday, January 28, 2009 at 1:02 AM - 5 Comments

In a recent interview, fashion doyenne Donatella Versace identified Barack Obama as the inspiration for her spring 2009 men’s collection, describing his style as that of “a relaxed man who doesn’t need to flex muscles to show he has power.” Perhaps better than anyone, the Obamas have mastered the high-low aesthetic. Michelle Obama, it is well-established, looks equally at home in a Narciso Rodriguez gown and a J. Crew dress. The President shops at Burberry, but insists he wears the same suits repeatedly, even to the point of patching them up. Indeed, despite the GQ covers, Obama is not so stylish that designer Tom Ford can’t see room for improvement. “I think he’s a great-looking guy,” Ford told British Vogue, “but I think his suits don’t fit him very well.” We know that each U.S. president is a living symbol of the type of America he intends to manifest. In style terms, Barack Obama is the presidential equivalent of the frugalista. He is, in New York Times “Sunday Style” parlance, populist fabulous.

Since day one, American presidents have wrestled with the question: how much pomp is too much? “When they created the American presidency in 1789,” says Harry Rubenstein of the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History, “they combined the duties and functions of both a monarchy and a chief executive into one office—and this has been a problem for presidents ever since.” On the one hand, America is a democracy, created as a violent rebuke of imperialist European monarchies. On the other hand, its people want a leader they can proudly showcase on the world stage—and, let’s face it, Americans love the glitz. And so the trick for each new president has been to broadcast “for the people,” without descending into “of the people” territory.

Continue…

Look at us, we're doing stuff (II)

By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, January 28, 2009 at 12:49 AM - 11 Comments

I regret to admit that I posted about the morning’s photo op in haste.

Indeed, had I taken the time to more fully research the situation I would have realized to precisely what degree our ministers of the crown were positioned like potted plants and other bits of scenery, as explained in this clip from CBC (courtesy of BCer in Toronto). Continue…

Budget ’09: Fearful asymmetries

By Paul Wells - Wednesday, January 28, 2009 at 12:30 AM - 33 Comments

Andrew Coyne will be leading our budget coverage in the next edition. He felt more strongly about the budget than I did, as you will already have noticed. My own column will be kind of wistful. I do want to make a few points, not necessarily connected, in the meantime.

• Last spring I wrote a column arguing, tongue in cheek, that Liberals and Conservatives were already running a coalition government. Andrew wrote a column more recently, suggesting more seriously that they give such a thing a try. This budget is clearly designed to form the basis for a Conservative-Liberal coalition de facto. It’s surprising, though I suppose it shouldn’t be, how little attempt the Conservatives make to placate the Bloc or the NDP. In the latter case especially, that’s obviously a big change. The cozy little arrangement by which Jack Layton and Stephen Harper paid to Martin Liberalism, and which lasted well after the 2006 election, is over. This is the price Layton pays, perhaps gladly, for turning the NDP caucus into a machine for voting No to the Conservatives. But it points up an interesting feature of the political landscape since the last election and, at least, until the next: the Liberals are going to govern in coalition with somebody. It can be the Conservatives or it can be the NDP with Bloc support. But the Conservatives can’t govern alone and they can’t govern durably with the other opposition parties. And the NDP-Bloc can’t govern alone or with the Conservatives. That leaves the Liberals, and only them, with the freedom and the obligation to choose. Continue…

Budget '09: A view from the West

By Nicholas Köhler - Tuesday, January 27, 2009 at 8:33 PM - 2 Comments

Response to today’s federal budget was slow to seep out of Western Canada today, with premiers in Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba still mum on what they thought of Finance Minister Jim Flaherty’s stimulus package. But one big city mayor, Calgary’s Dave Bronconnier, appeared pleasantly surprised with what the budget puts on the table. “There is much to like,” Bronconnier told a radio show this afternoon, part of a media blitz the mayor conducted in the wake of the budget’s release. “What I believe the government was trying to do, which is a short-term stimulus to deal with the creation of jobs. And when you look at it short-term, $4 billion for infrastructure funding, that is directed towards jobs.” Continue…

Budget '09: Make the next generation pay

By Duncan Hood - Tuesday, January 27, 2009 at 8:06 PM - 3 Comments

So the budget is out and it looks like the Tories are going to take us time travelling. Poof! It’s the 1970s again, and there’s no problem the government can’t spend its way out of. Never mind that it didn’t work then, and it left us with a government debt that crippled a generation and was only recently paid down to a reasonable level.

The truth is that we’ve been living beyond our means for a while now, and the only solution is to get used to living within our means. There is no black magic that can make that ugly truth go away. Running consecutive deficits is simply a way of borrowing more money in a desperate attempt to keep the party going. But it won’t stop the pain, it will just delay it. It’s like dealing with a hangover by going on another drinking binge. Excessive government debt will have to be paid back down again in the future, so we are simply punishing “future” Canadians for our mistakes. By running up a deficit we may make life better now, but we’re making our future less bright.

I saw Warren Buffett give a talk in Toronto about a year ago, and he observed that there has never been a case where a government had run up a large debt where it didn’t subsequently crank up the money presses and allow the value of its currency to fall, thus reducing the amount it owes to its creditors. Problem is, that usually leads to inflation. No one can predict the future, but with governments running up big debts all over the world, it doesn’t seem impossible that global inflation could be a huge problem five years from now. If it is, it will only make things worse.

Anyone would be in favour of stimulating the economy if they knew it would make things better, but I’m not 100 per cent sure that it will. Not the way this budget does it, anyway. Even the Tories seem to have misgivings about what they’re doing, hinting that they’re being pushed into something that they’re not entirely comfortable with. I can understand spending government money on bridges, roads and other infrastructure projects, because that stuff needs to be done anyway. But I’m not sure I like the idea of bankrolling my neighbour’s kitchen renovation, which is exactly what this budget forces me to do. It will no doubt help my neighbour, but I don’t think it will help the country—and it certainly won’t help me.

The Commons: 'Our government shares that regret'

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, January 27, 2009 at 7:54 PM - 9 Comments

When it was all over, when Jim Flaherty had finished with his mind-numbing ode—24 pages in all—to these mind-numbing times, the Liberals sent up Siobhan Coady, a rookie MP from Newfoundland, to respond. From the back row of the opposition side she wondered aloud about what has happened these last few months—the buying opportunities of October, the optimistic projections of November, the Prime Minister’s abrupt dash from Parliament, the grave pronouncements of now and the Canadians rendered jobless in between.

“Ya gonna vote for it or not?” yelped a Conservative, apparently eager to have the budget approved and this dalliance with bipartisanship done with.

“As I’m sure the honourable member knows,” Mr. Flaherty said in Ms. Coady’s direction, “we are living in extraordinary times.”

No doubt here was a rare motion that might pass this place unanimously. Continue…

Serenity now

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, January 27, 2009 at 7:45 PM - 1 Comment

Full column on the day to follow shortly. Not including this, Michael Ignatieff’s official—at least until he meets with reporters tomorrow morning—response to the budget.

“We stand here today at the end of January with thousands of Canadians out of a job since the House was adjourned. The government did not make the right choices when times were good. Now that times are hard, times are tough, it is up to this party to decide whether the choices it has made today are the right ones. The House should know, this will be a close call. This will be a tough vote. However, we will make that choice calmly and serenely.”

Hope, opportunity and anti-americanism?

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, January 27, 2009 at 7:42 PM - 3 Comments

John Baird, scrumming with reporters this afternoon.

We’ve got some good news for Canadians who are suffering from a made-in-the-United States recession and we’re going to combat that. We’re going to give some hope and opportunity for Canadians.

Hey, It's That Guy, Sam Anderson!

By Jaime Weinman - Tuesday, January 27, 2009 at 7:15 PM - 8 Comments

It’s not often that a network sends a guest star out to do media for a single episode, particularly when the guest is a character actor rather than an actual star. But TNT appears to have done that with Sam Anderson for his guest stint on tonight’s episode of Leverage, and I couldn’t be happier to see him doing some interviews; the man has been constantly on TV for the last 30 years. You’ve seen him on Lost, on Angel, on Growing Pains and Everybody Loves Raymond (where he was a brilliant last-minute substitute for another actor in the guest role of the FBI guy who turns Robert down for a job). You’ve seen him on NBC’s hit show ER, starring George Clooney, and you didn’t see him on CBS’s flop show E/R, also starring George Clooney. He’s one of those actors who is the modern equivalent of those great movie character actors in the ’30s and ’40s: he can play many different types of roles on many different types of shows, and can always be counted upon to steal a scene without unbalancing the episode. Stephen Root is another actor with that ability.

Here’s 411mania.com’s interview with Anderson;

Here’s IF magazine’s interview with Anderson, same day.

Anderson and Stephen Root are two guys I’m always happy to see in a guest role, because I feel no matter what the quality of the episode or the show, they will do everything they can to make it better. Another actor like that is Wendy Schaal (The Burbs, American Dad). No matter how bad an episode is, Wendy Schaal can improve it with her off-kilter, off-center sexiness.

So, question: which actors make you go not only “hey, it’s him/her!” but “oh, good, it’s him/her?”

Budget '09: The Reaction

By macleans.ca - Tuesday, January 27, 2009 at 6:27 PM - 7 Comments

NDP leader Jack Layton: “This budget fails to restore confidence in Mr. Harper’s ability to protect the vulnerable in Canada.”

Bloc leader Gilles Duceppe: “Le bloc québécois va voter contre ce budget injuste et idéologique, qui ne répond pas aux priorités du québec.”

Green Party leader Elizabeth May: “A deficit of staggering proportions will be created with nothing more than a wish and a prayer in the government’s projections to return to balanced budgets. It is hard to imagine the budget being supported by fiscal conservatives or social progressives. Indeed it is hard to imagine anyone thinking this budget meets the needs of Canadians.”

“To top off the economic incompetence of this budget, there is nothing for the environment.”

Liberal MP Scott Brison: “It’s tough to trust this government on the numbers. The deficit numbers keep growing, and we’re concerned that if we can’t trust their numbers over the last couple of months, we can’t trust it over five years.” Continue…

Budget '09: Tories take a final leap into the void

By Andrew Coyne - Tuesday, January 27, 2009 at 4:46 PM - 165 Comments

Say what you like about the Tories: they don’t do things by halves. When they spend, they spend. When they go into debt, they do it $100-billion at a time. And when they decide to put an end to conservatism in Canada — as a philosophy, as a movement—they go out with a bang.

We can safely say that the strategy of incrementalism, at least, has been put to bed. With this historic budget, the Conservatives’ already headlong retreat from principle has become a rout: a great final leap into the void. For there will be no going back from this, for the party or for the country. Whatever the budget’s soothing talk of “temporary” this and “extraordinary” that, and for all its well-mannered charts showing spending obediently returning to its pen, deficits meekly subsiding, “investments” repaid in full, we are in fact headed somewhere we have never been before. We are on course towards a massive and permanent increase in the size and scope of government: record spending, sky-high borrowing, and — ultimately, inevitably — higher taxes. And all this before the first of the Baby Boomers have had a chance to retire, and cough up a lung.

Continue…

Budget '09: Bailout

By Philippe Gohier - Tuesday, January 27, 2009 at 4:38 PM - 9 Comments

Just about every industry in Canada will find at least something to smile about on budget day. From forestry to ship-building to tourism, Ottawa plans to spread its bailout around, albeit unevenly.

The auto sector—and the victims of its collapse—will take home the lion’s share of the money intended to soften the recession’s blow. Supplementing the government’s previous announcement of $2.7 billion in loans to the Big Three is a program to encourage Canadians to buy more cars. The newly-created Canadian Secured Credit Facility will have a $12 billion bankroll to help finance vehicle and equipment purchases by Canadian consumers and business. The southern Ontario communities most affected by the downturn in the auto industry will also receive over $1 billion over the next five years to help to diversify local economies.

Also at Macleans.ca
Budget ‘09: Tories take a final leap into the void
Budget ‘09: The Overview
Budget ‘09: Stimulus
Budget ‘09: Economic Outlook
Budget ‘09: Personal Finance

The forestry sector is also the target of significant government largesse. Ottawa will invest $170 million in the sector over two years in order to help its diversify its product base and introduce new processes. Though it’s not explicitly targeted to a specific region or industry, forestry towns will be able to draw from a separate $1 billion fund, paid out over two years, to help them survive the sector’s struggles. In his budget address to Parliament, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty said the Community Adjustment Fund “will help communities across Canada facing unique challenges, from the mountain pine beetle infestation to the declining demand for seafood.”

Though they don’t figure as prominently in the budgetary allocations, virtually every other major industry in Canada stands to receive government money in some form or another. Farmers will receive a $500 million boost over five years, in addition to a $50 million investment in the expansion of Canada’s slaughterhouse capacity; Canadian shipyards can count on $175 million worth of new orders from Ottawa; even the much-maligned arts and culture sector will get a boost, with an extra $20 million earmarked for the National Arts Training Contribution Program, and a $200-million allocation for the Canadian Television Fund. In one of its most understated moves, the Conservative government has also revived the sponsorship program with a $100 million commitment to support “marquee festivals and events that promote tourism” over two years.

Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff says opposition politicians can take credit for the budget’s more generous provisions. Though he wouldn’t reveal whether his party was willing to support the document, Ignatieff conceded “there are some positive sides to this budget.” Ontario Finance Minister Dwight Duncan was, for his part, enamoured with the money Ottawa plans to send his way to help struggling industries. The strategy to fund just about every sector imaginable was indeed intended to garner widespread support. That it will likely do so is at least partly due to the fact its fiercest ideological opponents are the ones who drafted it.