Inkless Wells

Paul Wells on all the latest out of Ottawa—along with the occasional post about jazz. Follow Paul on Twitter: @InklessPW

Categories: Capital Read, Inkless Wells

Yay! Election speculation!

by Paul Wells on Friday, March 6, 2009 9:05am - 62 Comments

Because what’s it been, three months? I was getting antsy, just like you. And the best part of it is, if we hurry up and vote we can get on to the real business of the nation: more election speculation!

Tags: thanks to circular breathing you can play a note forever

More by Paul Wells

steveh

There should be celebration. There’s nothing easier than cutting and pasting the latest ipsos-reid poll press release.

Richard

Where did you get the latest Ipsos Reid results and what do they say?

PolJunkie

What they always say and that is that Harper will win a majority. Why anyone would Ipsos the time of day is beyond me.

Dot

I think the author of the piece is revealing a temporary insanity from having spent too many days watching question period from the public gallery.
http://carnewsandviews.com jwl

I think between McCallum speculating when Libs would attempt to bring down Cons, and now Libs making a big deal about this $3 billion, I would say Libs are preparing Canadians for another election any time now. It’s been nearly 4 whole years since Libs lost power and they are tired of it apparently so we will get constant elections until they win. Libs remind me of EU pooh bahs who make countries vote again when they don’t vote the ‘correct’ way the first time.

Andrew

I don’t think that’s a fair assessment. Whatever pathologies the liberal party might have, we’re in a minority parliament and the opposition’s most powerful tool for influencing the government is to threaten elections.

What’s more, I think Canadians like their opposition leaders to lead the opposition. The last guy did everything he could to avoid confidence motions, and look what happened to him.

Northern PoV

“threaten election”

While I agree with your post in general, isn’t ironic that the threats were (as usual) coming from Harper

we never had a dysfunctional Parliament – but we still have a dysfunctional gov’t that can’t accept it is a minority

golfers digest

Well I’d say let the Conservatives have their sponsorship scandal, but billions being spent without monitoring is just on another scale…

HRDC scale? Nope, still bigger…

Maybe you don’t care about accountability in government, but don’t think other Canadians will continue to turn a blind eye to this government.
Mike T.

There’s a much more apt comparison, a lot closer to home…
Lord Kitchener’s Own

Libs making a big deal about this $3 billion

Look, I’m going to go as far as some and compare this to a slush fund, or the sponsorship scandal (after all, $3 billion is MUCH bigger than the sponsorship scandal ever was, lol… OK, OK, that was just a joke, I’m not being serious, just couldn’t help it…). However…

Since when is $3 billion in spending without the normal oversight not a big deal? To this point, the Tories are even balking at saying where they plan to spend the money in broad, general terms. I’m convinced the opposition could be convinced to allow this money to move pdq, but in a minority Parliament you have to convince the opposition, not just dictate to them. In less than five months our government has gone from “We’re never going back into deficit again, and there are some wonderful buying opportunities out there for investors” to “Armageddon approaches, we need a $34 billion deficit and the power to spend $3 billion yesterday or the whole house of cards might collapse”. Now, I’m actually more willing to believe that their current statements are closer to the truth (!) but one can’t expect the entire country that these are the same people who though things were just fine back in October when they had an election to win (which was patently ridiculous to anyone who was paying even a LITTLE bit of attention).

The government can’t just keep up this “it’s our way or the highway” mentality forever. It’s a MINORITY parliament, and you may not need to convince the Opposition that your plan is the right one, but at the very least you have to try to look like you might theoretically, under certain circumstances, be willing to consider the possibility of perhaps, maybe, trying to convince the Opposition that you’re serious about making an attempt to possibly convince them.

Lord Kitchener’s Own

LOL typos…

“one can’t expect the entire country to forget that these are the same people who thought things were just fine back in October”.
http://macleans.ca kc

LKO
I charge you sir with shamelessly attempting to confuse and confound this HOC [this house of commenters]
In particular the last sentence is appallingly explicit in it’s attempt confuse the above aforementioned minority resposibilities of this govt with highways, myways, houses of cards that collapse in deficit and yet offer buying opportunities that are both wonderfully, theoretical and patently rediculous and one and the same time. And no iwasn’t paying attention and you wonder why voter turnout is leading to apathy and yet more pointless minority govt scandels.

Lord Kitchener’s Own

You think THAT’S confusing, try understanding the government’s position on the economy over the last six months! Here’s a hint: don’t try comparing the government’s rhetoric on any given day to their rhetoric on any other given day. That way lies only contradiction (and sadness… and laughter… and then sadness again).

If I’m not mistaken, the government’s position on the economy is that they must always move forward, not backward; upward not forward; and always twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom!!!

LOL

Paul Wells

I’m not at all sure Chantal’s wrong about this. As a wise fellow — OK, it was me — said a couple of months ago, I’m pretty sure the part of every MP’s brain that controls “getting along with people” is broken after the past couple of years. I’m pretty sure election brinksmanship is all anyone knows how to do any more. So let’s get on with it! Toga party!

Andrew

If you were leader of the opposition, what would you do short of brinksmanship? Seems to me this is the way the system is set up, especially when the minority PM likes to talk about inclusion and consultation but hates to actually do it.
Dot

Well, if I understand her comments correctly from last night’s At Issue she said something to the effect – “Blame the media. We award hyper ventilation over substance a lot of the time.” So, her following day’s column does seem to be a bit ironic. Wouldn’t this tend to get the war drums banging louder?
Northern PoV

OK – but as usual this latest round of brinkmanship originated straight out of the PMO.

credit where credit is due!

DT

That is to be succinct, BS. Iggy has been threatening the “on probation” government since budget day. And his addled fincance critic is just acting as his pathetic henchman.

Douglass

Right because it all started with Iggy. Such short term memory. Harper was put on probation because of Harpers sad excuse for a fall fiscal update. The politiacl brinkmanship started in one place the PMO.

Sean Stokholm

Probably a stupid musing on my part, but I wonder if a few years of having our government “in flux” has had any effect upon the operations of our civil service? (Put another way, to what extent – if at all – do stable majorities and minimal cabinet shuffles benefit the various ministries?).

Adam

Not a stupid question and one that doesn’t get asked a lot. The short answer is a resounding yes. The revolving doors in minister’s offices, deputy minister’s offices, and the spreading around of ministerial responsibility has posed many challenges. The growth of “portfolio coordination” groups within the PS has been astounding.

Claude

Impact yes. WHile the growth in some groups may be great, the flip side is the difficulty in getting major files moving forward when the major players change every few months!

Adam

Claude: Agreed. This another problem. The short run political dynamics make it nearly impossible to advance major policy issues in a systematic, rationale way that involves significant information gathering, coherent analysis, and consultation with all affected stakeholders.

NoName

The impact has been, and continues to be, deep and wide-ranging. Ministers and their staff are mainly (only?) concerned with short-term, no mistakes micro-management. Longer term policy files are ignored. Program and policy proposals are usually cobbled together overnight to respond to the crisis of the day, so that the government can make an announcement right away. Senior management is being run ragged by incessant demands night and day to get information on whatever crisis is happening or anticipated. Working level staff spends a disproportionate amount of their time compiling information (usually financial, usually dating back, for some strange reason — can you guess why ? — to 1993) to feed the beast. And this leaves aside the fact that minority governments tend to attract very young, inexperienced ministerial staff who let their sudden “power” get to their heads, creating needlessly adversarial relations with the civil servants who are supposed to help them.

Successive minority governments weaken the policy capacity of departments, focus everyone on short-term initiatives, burn people out and lead to an incoherent patchwork of micro-initiatives which, eventually, are “rationalized” through “expenditure reviews”. Your tax dollars at work !!

http://macleans.ca kc

Wow! Who would have guessed that minority govts were really a make work project for our under-employed media types? Personally i suspected it all along! Blame the media has a nice ring to it. And the real beauty of it is – they get to write those headlines too! If you listen closely to those PW/AC videos i swear you can hear the sniggering as they fade to black.
Seriouly, the inside scoop on the side effects of MG is gloomy news!
Sean Stokholm

thanks for the insights, folks!

golfers digest

It would make an injection of about $300-million into the economy.

Paul Wells

Stimulus! Let’s do this!!!

golfers digest

Best two-out-of-three?

http://macleans.ca kc

We could combine it with yet another Q referendum and maybe open up the constitution – you know, maybe see if it’s gone off at all? That!! Should keep all those guys busy – meanwhile i’m off on a long delayed trip to Aussie. Bon appetit!

TobyornotToby

CTV.ca News Staff

Canada’s economy defied expectations in October, adding 9,500 jobs, but economists note it was thanks to a one-time hiring boost related to the federal election.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20081107/jobless_rate_081107?s_name=&no_ads=

http://www.jackmitchell.ca Jack Mitchell

Another case of life imitating satire.

Anon

I think an election would be good. In fact, I hope we’ve elections every three months or so. That’ll be only $1.2 billion for the year, still less than the 30B+ deficits that the government plans on running. I think the hustings is the best place for politicians right now — they can’t do any damage “governing”.

archangel

Yeah, I was thinking along these lines too. We could permanent elections and retrain laid-off auto workers to be career scrutineers.
Lord Kitchener’s Own

I think the hustings is the best place for politicians right now — they can’t do any damage “governing”

There’s an excellent point from Anon.

Perhaps an election right now would be the safest bet! It seems to me entirely plausible that the only thing worse than not having our leaders in Ottawa working on dealing with the financial and economic crisis is having our leaders in Ottawa working on dealing with the financial and economic crisis.
http://www.iheartmusic.net matthew

And think of the jobs it would create!

Though when turnout dips to lower-than-municipal levels, it’d be a little worrisome, but it’s not like we deserve much better…

dan in van

Certainly the parched newspaper barons would agree that an election is just what the doctor ordered. nothing like rotating hustings of various jurisdictions to keep the ads flowing in, and the bottom line a little less red-dish.

Riley

Here’s a thought: is the lack of one party with a majority of voter trust a direct result of Canadians wanting multiple parties to work together, or a result of a strong lack of impressive leaders at the top.

I’m not talking Obama-style bring the rafters down with a speech, but actual Canadian leaders who reach out to the public and talk about issues as if we’re not morons.

I look at the current leadership of all the major parties and in their front benches, it is hard to see “performers” who make you feel they know what your concerns are.

Mulroney and Chretien were both performers I think. They seemed to have done well.

Derek Pearce

Rae is an excellent performer but comes with too much early 90s baggage so people tune him out.
http://macleans.ca kc

Oddly enough our PM has been taliking lately, just not in this country.[ sorry PW, i know you like that! ]
Ted

I believe and have long believed that if Stephen Harper had shown a modicum of statesmanship instead of constant brinkmanship that he would have had a majority government a long time ago.

Look at what Trudeau, Mulroney, Chretien even Mike Harris did as leaders: they typically left the real mud throwing for underlings so that they could pretend to care about all Canadians. Harper seems to really relish being on the attack. He is never considered to be more on his “game” than when he is pouncing and attacking Liberals.

But there are lots of people who have voted Liberal who might vote Conservative but who are as turned off by this tactic just as those many Conservatives who might have voted Martin but were personally turned off of Martin’s “conservatives are scary” campaign. The red Tories were completely rejected by Martin himself not just the Liberals and the blue Liberals were rejected by Harper. If you don’t even think a leader might ever actually care what you think then you are not going to vote for him.

A little statesman like pretending he cared about those who might have voted for other parties before and Harper would have had a majority. Now it is too late to just bring out a sweater vest and claim to be a statesman.

http://macleans.ca kc

That is a good pt, and one that Harper will never seemingly learn. I guess he hates libs so much he can’t even bear them voting for him!

Riley

Speaking of his foray into the United States, has anyone noticed just how many ministers (Harper included) have been down to the U.S. since Obama’s visit, and how many senior officials they have been meeting?

It seems like they are getting some fairly good access.
Wayne

ROFL : I love it … persoanlly I am hoping against that there is an election .. I love the things I’d go to one every year forever if given the opportunity as I love throwing out some bums and getting some new ones in. However there seem to be a lot of people who don’t appreciate constant short term elections. When you get right down to it there are only 2 things every canadian has in common (1) we are not americans (2) we get angry if we have too many elections. If an election were to occur before the fall (we will tolerate annual elections for a little while but not long and will vote in a majority out of spite … it’s happened before) it would be the political death of the party that was stupid enough not to anticipate the vote in the house. Now while Chantal is correct up to a point I doubt right now whether my boy Stevie would care one way or another if he was returned with a minority or a majority after all he governs as if he had a majority anyways and as every day he sits in the seat is another day down in history and another day he get’s to make the tough calls. Now the usual harper haters will vent and rant about everything under the sun however the consequences for the LPC are far more in doubt than the CPC if we went to the polls too soon as this time there will be no ABC no Coalition of the Unwilling and no one voting Liberal. Of course Iggy gets a bump in numbers the LPC could have crowned a chair as an interim leader and gotten the same bump in numbers they key will be the long term trend lines and that will require another few months yet to see.

Sean Stokholm

I know times are tough, but I still think commas and periods are worth the money. :)
http://macleans.ca kc

Wayne
Voter turn out was low last time, one reason being lack of confidence in our leaders – particularly Dion. One thing that absolutely wont happen next time is liberals staying home again. Cons on the other hand may have a beef or two with Steveie boy this time – we’ll have to see.

Chuck VS Macleans

Yawn..

The Media is dreaming again. There is no way there is going to be a election anytime soon. This is just a replay of the last Parliment. There will be a election when the fixed election date limit comes up, or Harper calls one.

So sorry Canadian media, “No stimulus for you”

Lord Kitchener’s Own

“There will be a election when the fixed election date limit comes up, or Harper calls one“.

There’s one of the most succinct expressions of the utter futility and laughability of the Tories “fixed election date” law I’ve read in a long time.

Chuck VS Macleans

Whatever you say…

But don’t worry ,come Oct 09, you will be spinning how Harper is in bed with the BQ…

Lord, you overlook that it takes all three opp parties to take down the government..

Bottom line Harper holds all the cards, the only question is how the spin goes. And frankly, we have all seen this movie before IMHO…

Chuck VS Macleans

Lord Kitchener’s Own:

Is Stalin in your avi?

Please don’t tell me Rogers/macleans supports Stalin…

I could be wrong..

.

http://macleans.ca kc

Yeesshh, maybe our education system is screwed. Or did i miss a funny?

http://www.jackmitchell.ca Jack Mitchell

In all seriousness, it would be daylight madness for the Liberals to force an election just now. They’ve only just started rewiring themselves, and even if they picked up 20 seats an election would stop that process in its tracks. Not to compare Iggy to Jesus or anything, but you have to fast three days in the wilderness before you can repudiate Satan effectively.
Paul Wells

Apparently Ralph Goodale scrummed this morning to dampen down the election fever. Threatening an election and then backing down — boy, things sure have changed since that wimp Dion was Liberal leader!

Ted

Was he dampening down election fever or was he saying we will do what we have to in order to avoid an election? Obviously a big difference but I did not see the scrum.

(BTW, how does one get their own picture under their name id?)

Paul Wells

Globe’s got a short squib. I didn’t hear the scrum. If I get a transcript, I’ll post it. As for the little “gravatars” under our names, um, I’m not sure how civilians do it, although you might find out at http://www.gravatar.com

Ted

Thanks. And thanks.

http://www.jackmitchell.ca Jack Mitchell

If you register as a user with wordpress, you can add/change your gravatar under your profile settings. Works with all wordpress blogs (incl. Maclean’s).

archangel

Funny, my picture is always right there next to my name.

Wayne

Harper :He contended it’s impossible to provide details in advance of how the money would be spent because the government is still negotiating with the provinces on specific projects. But he said the details will be revealed between now and June as projects are approved. “Look, it’s in this government’s interests to get those details out as quickly as possible. We will,” he said. “But there is no excuse for an opposition that has been saying we need to deliver money more quickly to now say we need to delay that money or say things like we need to have parliamentary sign-off on every individual project. That is not realistic. It’s not going to work that way.”
-> up to Goodyear now ?

http://macleans.ca kc

I’d say, that leash must be chafing right about now!

Wayne

Real short leash alright! Iggy : Mr. Speaker when will the PM submit an intemized list of the pet projects for our consideration and stalling to play our little political games with? Harper : Mr. Speaker let’s vote on it —- Iggy wait a sec Mr. Speaker I did not really mean an itemized list I meant to say which gov’t programs get the money? Harper : Mr. Speaker let’s vote —- Iggy : wait a sec Mr. Speaker I didn’t mean to imply anything and I’m certain that over the next few weeks we can come to some sort of compromise. Harper : Mr. Speaker – lets vote – Iggy: Mr.Speaker please withdraw my previous suggestionjs as the Liberal Party is always here to negotiate, compromise and since the moneys are not in a sluch fund and are merely accelerated additional funds to existing budget items I think we are satisfied! ROFL LMAO – some leash! Dion would be proud.

http://macleans.ca kc

if either of the guys really want an election in the present economic climate their welcome. I for one would be pissed. I can see the look on the GGs face as Mr H “drives” over.
” you again! I thought i told you to play nice or else”!
SH:
“Bbbuutt he made me do it! Hhheee wwants to kkknow exactly what i’m doing for some rrreason”?
GG sternly:
“I can’t say i blame him after last time! Now bugger off, the simpsons are on”!
SH meekly turning away mutters;
“I guess a peek wouldn’t hurt, just this time mind you”!
GG
” Just remember Mr Harper, i can porogue you”!