ImminentLiberalMeltdownWatch Day Three – Liveblogging the post-QP scrums

By kadyomalley - Wednesday, September 30, 2009 at 2:50 PM - 35 Comments

Will the fizzling economy finally overtake the Coderre Affair in the race to capture the hypermercurial imagination of the national press? Tune in at 3pm as ITQ hits the Foyer for a third straight day.

(Hey, she has to find some way to keep the liveblogging muscles limber until House committees are up and running, right?)

2:57:42 PM
We’re baaaack! We being the nation’s ever-intrepid press, that is; the nation’s elected officials, whose intrepitude varies from day to day, are still holed up inside the House, Wednesday’s QP being the most likely of the week to run late. That doesn’t mean that there’s not plenty of scurrying and pre-scrum positioning going on, of course, although there is much gloom at the continuing absence of Denis Coderre. Funny, he didn’t always play so hard to get.

Speaking of sudden shyness, ITQ can report that the Liberals’ much — okay, slightly — ballyhooed morning media availabilities with the leader seem to have gone the way of, well, Denis Coderre, ever since Monday’s installment, which marked the start of the newscycle of their discontent.

3:06:17 PM
Mill, mill, mill. I swear, it’s amazing there aren’t more head injuries, what with so many of us bent over our BlackBerries amid all those potentially lethal columns.
3:08:24 PM
And here’s Gilles Duceppe, who is — or at least, has been for the last few days — invariably the first politician at the mic. Then again, why wouldn’t he be? Of all the leaders, his shrug is the most convincing.

Continue…

PBOWatch: "He wants more information on infrastructure spending? Hasn't he seen the ads for the website?"

By kadyomalley - Tuesday, September 29, 2009 at 4:57 PM - 49 Comments

As noted by Colleague Wherry earlier today, midway through the Toronto Star’s coverage of the all-but-buried-by-the-Coderre-Affair-and-don’t-think-for-a-second-that-was-a-coincidence plank walk by now former Conservative candidate Gordon Landon comes the not entirely astonishing news that the parliamentary budget officer is having some difficulty prying loose the numbers behind the government’s claim that some impressively large percentage of projects to be funded under the Canada Action! Plan are already underway:

Page said his office filed a request for specific infrastructure spending at the end of August but was stonewalled.

“We got a letter back from the deputy minister of transport and infrastructure just last week saying this is a significant data request … and they weren’t prepared to give us this data (at this time),” said Page, who has been a thorn in the Harper government’s side.

Page has embarrassed the federal government by casting doubt on Ottawa’s price tag for the Afghan mission and accurately predicting the deficit would be far greater than forecast by the Conservatives.

“We are looking at where the bar has been set in other countries on openness and transparency on stimulus money and … we will keep asking for the information so we can do our own analysis on money going out the door,” he told the Toronto Star.

For the record, here is the letter that Page sent to Transport in August:

Response_013

… and here’s the reply — which, according to the datestamp, Page’s office received on September 23, 2009:

Info_Request_013

The good news? The department has assured the PBO that they are ‘working diligently” to provide his office with the requested information “within a reasonable time frame such that it respects the intent of the Act.” The bad news? They don’t seem to be willing to say exactly — or even approximately — how long that will take. What ITQ wants to know, however, is why it seems to be such an arduous demand to make, considering that all that information seems to be readily available to provide examples of shovel-festooned projects to ministers and Conservative spokesthingies faced with scepticism over the speed by which the money is flowing out the door. Why would it be so hard to collect all those talking points together and send off the whole package to Kevin Page?

Once more unto the scrums, my friends: Liveblogging the post-QP madness

By kadyomalley - Tuesday, September 29, 2009 at 2:55 PM - 44 Comments

Well, since ITQ has been deprived, albeit temporarily, of tender, juicy committees to which to bring her unique liveblogging ministrations, she may as well hit the Foyer for the first — wait, no, make that second — post-QP scrums of the Post Coderre Era (to be styled ‘PCE’ on second reference). She’ll be reporting live from the chaos, so check back after 3pm for full coverage, provided she doesn’t suffer from permanent and debilitating neck crickage brought on by insufficient height.

2:57:27 PM
Okay, this time, I’m going to do my best to make it to the mics in sufficient time to actually hear what’s going on, although it’s still a bit of a challenge when one is surrounded by such hulking and/or looming colleagues. Coderre, apparently, isn’t in the House — insert heartfelt collective moan of disappointment from the assembled masses here — but that’s not going to stop us from asking everyone else who comes within boom range what *they* think.

Continue…

Memories of Outremont-induced Liberal meltdowns past …

By kadyomalley - Tuesday, September 29, 2009 at 12:15 PM - 94 Comments

Dear Liberals,

Okay, the parallels may not be exact, but ITQ’s unsolicited advice from the last outbreak of Quebec-related stark, staring bonkers-going still stands, as far as she can see.

In case you haven’t figured it out by now, the one thing we Hill journalists love more than an imminent parliamentary crisis, or free sandwiches at committee meetings,  is, and will always be, a Liberal family feud. No matter how eerily familiar the plot twists and surprise cameo appearances may be, we can’t help but be mesmerized to watch it unfold.

That said, we’re a sporting bunch, and we do enjoy a challenge, which is why we spend so much time trying to beguile Conservative MPs into saying something even remotely critical of the government or the prime minister, not that it ever works. Well, not nearly often enough, at least.

Given all that, it’s just no fun when you make it too easy to declare your leader and his advisors — who are unfailingly written off as too clandestine/wildly indiscreet/authoritarian/incapable of imposing discipline/inexperienced/past their prime/unproven/serial losers –  as a dead campaign team walking.

Continue…

Attention, fellow obsessive committee watchers: Don't panic.

By kadyomalley - Tuesday, September 29, 2009 at 9:47 AM - 27 Comments

Despite its current appearance, the main committee website has not, in fact, been hijacked by a fringe group of malicious political geek hackers looking to unleash parliamentary chaos by cancelling scheduled meetings with wild abandon. (Although come to think of it, that would actually be pretty cool.)

Continue…

Brevity is … wit: Liberal confidence motion REVEALED!

By kadyomalley - Monday, September 28, 2009 at 4:26 PM - 71 Comments

Hey, look, everybody! The Liberals have released the text of Thursday’s confidence motion! And — it’s exactly what we expected:

That this House has lost confidence in the government.

I’m not sure if there’s really anything more to say about that — except that, given recent (and, for that matter, not-so-recent) events, it was probably wise not to get too cute with the wordplay.

The Coderre Affair vs. The Stimulus Update

By kadyomalley - Monday, September 28, 2009 at 3:47 PM - 24 Comments

2:55:32 PM
Welcome back to the liveblog, where, after a brief QP-induced hiatus, ITQ has left her perch in the Hot Room for the crush of the Foyer, where reaction to the update, she still holds out hope, is about to pour forth. It’s a frenzy of activity here already; reporters circling the waiting mics like so many psychic vultures. There will be blood! We can smell it! Wait, no, that’s just the Coderre contingent.

3:00:54 PM
Hey, here’s Jack Layton!

Continue…

If you were an Irving-employed machinist, you'd be home now: Virtually liveblogging the PM's Action! Plan update

By kadyomalley - Monday, September 28, 2009 at 12:15 PM - 43 Comments

That’s “virtually” as in, through the magic of television, not almost, but not quite doing so, although if the networks don’t cooperate by running the whole thing live, that may end up being what happens.

Anyway, check back at 12:30 for what ITQ fully expects to be full coverage of the sporadic split screen images of an empty stage on the Hot Room flat screen, as increasingly frantic segment producers rediscover the mercurial magic of prime ministerial scheduling. Or maybe he’ll be on time for once. Who knows? In any case, stay for the show — or as much of it as makes it to broadcast — as well as reaction from the Hill.

12:21:50 PM
Greetings, armchair stimulus spending analysts and/or ordinary Canadians, and welcome to what ITQ feels fairly secure describing as the biggest media circus to hit the Southern Railway mechanical shop in Saint John history: the latest installment in the long-running serial, How I Spent My Your Taxpayer Dollars, starring the one and only prime minister of all of Canada, Stephen Harper. Is everyone excited? ITQ hopes so, since there was some concern expressed yesterthread that we-the-media were focusing far too much attention on the process — why New Brunswick? Why today? What’s the angle? — and not on the substance of the report itself, which has made her even more determined to follow every last carefully-framed moment of today’s announcement.

12:29:34 PM
One minute to go! Oddly, the networks don’t seem to have switched to the live feed yet. Y’all have played this game before, haven’t you?

Incidentally, ITQ actually has a copy of the report, which was deposited with the gallery under strict embargo earlier this morning. I don’t think it’s violating any parliamentary procedure to note that the covers features a stylized ‘STAYING ON COURSE’ action! sign. The fork logo doesn’t look any better in print, in case anyone was wondering.

12:35:16 PM
Five minutes late! Which is practically early by PMO standards.

12:37:34 PM
And here we go! Hey, who’s that? Is that Jim Flaherty? What on earth is *he* doing there? Shouldn’t he be tabling a report in the House?

Continue…

While we wait for the Stephen Harper Action! Plan Update …

By kadyomalley - Monday, September 28, 2009 at 10:10 AM - 21 Comments

… which will kick off sometime around 1:30 pm Atlantic time — that’s 12:30 pm in Ottawa, for those of you who are, like ITQ, a wee bit timezone-challenged, and yes, the plan is to liveblog it, although via television and not, alas, from an Irving-owned machine shop in Saint John — a question for the ITQ breakfast club: Was it, in retrospect, a critical strategic error for the Liberals to have agreed to break for the G20 just days after the fall session had officially begun?

Continue…

UPDATED: Dubious Poll Reporting Achievement of the Week Award: Sun Media/Leger Marketing

By kadyomalley - Monday, September 28, 2009 at 8:19 AM - 14 Comments

Honestly, ITQ isn’t trying to pick on Sun Media or Leger Marketing here, but — well, actually, she sort of is, but only because this story — on support for the Afghanistan mission —  is such a perfect example of how media outlets can unwittingly (at least, she assumes it’s unwitting) render the findings of even a fairly stark and straightforward poll utterly meaningless:

Almost half of Canadians say our troops should remain in Afghanistan, but only if the mission changes from a combat role to a training and development mission.

A Leger Marketing poll says 45% of Canadians support staying for a non-combat mission, while 12% want the troops to stay until the war is won.

Okay, let’s do some math. 45 +12 = 57. 100 – 57 = 43.  So what did the 43 percent of respondents — just 2 percent fewer than those who back a continuing, if non-combat role for Canadian troops in Afghanistan — think about the future of the mission? We don’t know, because – somewhat unbelievably – that result simply isn’t provided. Seriously, ITQ reread the article three times, thinking she was  somehow missing it, but no, it’s just not there. The fact that it isn’t, and that we don’t even know what the third option*–  if any — might have been, makes this poll virtually useless as far as presenting anything approaching an accurate snapshot of Canadian public opinion.

UPDATE:ITQ partially retracts her accusation, and takes full responsibility for her sloppy interpretation of the regional data, buried in which is the fact that 37 percent of respondents want to see Canadians leave “immediately,” although that still leaves six percent unaccounted for. But she maintains that that number — which is higher than she would have expected, frankly — should have been presented with the rest of the topline data. So there.  (She also now wonders why there was no option that would have troops leave in 2012, with no continuing mission — “development and training”-focused or otherwise, and can’t help but think that including that as a possible outcome could have substantially altered the results. But that’s a polling nitpick, not a reporting one.)

Oh, and the story also fails to give field dates, sample size or margin of error — all of which is helpful, if often overlooked information when attempting to determine how much credibility to give a particular poll, but that’s a comparatively minor sin. Excluding the views of 43 percent of respondents, on the other hand, is pretty much indefensible, not to mention inexplicable.

*For the record, ITQ suspects that there was, in fact, a third choice presented to respondents, although really, even if there wasn’t, the fact that such a sizeable contingent was undecided, or went with ‘none of the above’ would still be noteworthy; based on previous polling on the Afghanistan issue, it almost certainly proposed a scenario in which Canadian troops would remain until 2012, but then withdraw on schedule, and withdraw completely, not simply reconfigure the mission into one focused on ‘training and development.’

Let the (non) confidence games begin! (Yes, again.) UPDATED

By kadyomalley - Sunday, September 27, 2009 at 12:08 PM - 218 Comments

Scroll down for updates!

Well, we haven’t yet gotten the official word from PMO — hey, what’s up with that, guys? Y’all don’t work on Sunday mornings anymore? — but according to the dependably chatty John Baird, who made an appearance on CTV’s Question Period earlier today, the Stephen Harper Stimulus Reporting Experience will hit Saint John, New Brunswick sometime tomorrow, during which the prime minister will unveil the third — and, as far as ITQ knows, final — report on the Economic Action! Plan.

For those of you wondering why he’s doing so at an out of town venue, rather than, say, in the House of Commons — yeah, ITQ was also under the sadly mistaken impression that the Liberals had been clever enough to stick a provision to that effect in the agreement that averted a June election, but as it turns out, that’s not the case. The only requirement is that it be tabled there, presumably just as the balloons drop and the Tory-blue dyed doves are released at an undisclosed location somewhere in New Brunswick.

What does that mean as far as the fall season of election speculation? Let’s get out the calendar and find out!

Continue…

GiornoWatch: Well, since we're on the GEDS site anyway …

By kadyomalley - Friday, September 25, 2009 at 4:40 PM - 16 Comments

… why not cast a curious eye on the other changings of the guard underway over at PMO?

After all, it’s been a while since the last update on the Giornoverse.

First and foremost, ITQ is saddened to report the demise of the once … well, not all-mighty, but reasonably-mighty-under-the-circumstances office of Strategic Initiatives and Public Liaison. A relatively recent addition to the Giornorganizational chart, SI-PL, as it was known amongst its wide circle of friends and admirers, operated under the experienced and watchful stewardship of erstwhile PMO policy director Mark Cameron, who departed Langevin for parts as yet unknown a few weeks prior.

Continue…

UPDATED: Sterling, Cooper … Giorno? ITQ investigates the shadowy world of PMO's in-house ad shop

By kadyomalley - Friday, September 25, 2009 at 1:26 PM - 51 Comments

As GiornoWatch enthusiasts no doubt recall from previous dispatches, the fact that PMO has its very own in-house advertising department — or advertising and market research unit, to use its official title — is not, technically, news — not, at least, to those with a borderline obsessive interest in the ins and outs of Langevinian palace intrigue.

The two-person team that now reports directly to the Chief of Staff himself first came into existence back in 2007 or so, when it was part of the sprawling territory of the Muttartian Empire  – or “Strategy”, as it was far less evocatively described on the official PMO org chart. In fact, it was wasn’t until the Dark Lord of Demographancy’s departure earlier this year that it ascended to independent unitdom — or as independent as a unit can be when it falls under the control of the Giornoverseer General.

What it actually does, however, is another question.

Continue…

Mad Man (and Woman): Liveblogging Michael Ignatieff and Martha Hall Findlay on partisan political advertising

By kadyomalley - Friday, September 25, 2009 at 9:00 AM - 42 Comments

Hey, remember that $34 million in Economic Action! Plan-related ad spending that Canadian Press wrote about earlier this week? Well, the Liberals are finally getting around to holding a press conference to denounce it — like Dirk Gently, five days late but moving fast – and ITQ will be there to liveblog the festivities, starting at 10am, so be sure to check back for full coverage.

Oh, and speaking of possibly partisan advertising, an ITQ mini-challenge to commenters, just to keep y’all busy while waiting for this morning’s antics to get underway: How many ways does the Action! plan website — a Privy Council Office production that was the object of its very own traffic-driving ad campaign, which included over $1 million for the most recent spot, which warns viewers that, although the plan is working, “we’ve got to stay on track” — violate Treasury Board standards for common look and feel?

Post your count in the comments, and ITQ will meet you back here at10am.

9:42:50 AM
Greetings, members of the Whatever Happened To Party of Accountability Club! ITQ is installed in her usual seat in the second row of the Charles Lynch Press Theatre, waiting patiently for what is now being teasered by bright-eyed Liberal research operatives as an announcement. What could it be? ITQ would put her money — her *own* money, not cabinet-approved and signed off on by Treasury Board, for the record — on a proposal to create some sort of gimlet-eyed independent commissioner to monitor all government ad spending for illicit partisan messaging — maybe even a new Officer of Parliament! It could be called — the Federal Accountability Act. (What do you mean, ‘that’s been taken’?)

9:54:26 AM
As the Wall of Cameras angling for the best shot of the Ignatieff/Hall Findlay powerwalk down the hall, the room is filling up with media:CanWest, Sun News, the Toronto Star, Canadian Press, of course – after all, it was Bruce Cheadle who broke the story – a surprisingly good turnout for a Friday morning presser, but then again, it’s not like there’s much else happening on the Hill today.
9:57:48 AM
Two minute warning! Whee!

Continue…

UPDATED: EKOS spin-off post: Who's the rich, urban internationalist now, Patrick Muttart?

By kadyomalley - Thursday, September 24, 2009 at 12:00 PM - 27 Comments

(Sorry, sorry; just couldn’t resist, given how he characterized the new Liberal ad campaign last month.)

Anyway, given all the excitement over the metropolitan breakdowns in the latest EKOS weekly, which seemed to show the Conservatives poised to paint both Bay Street and the Byward Market blue, ITQ asked EKOS pollster-in-chief Frank Graves if he could provide a little more detail on just what those numbers might mean. Obliging soul that he is, he did:

The Ottawa numbers are quite striking although , as in the case of Toronto, they are an amalgam of the CMA. This is how Statistics Canada defines metropolitan areas but it includes both the metropolitan core and the outer lying suburban and ex-urban areas. In the case of Ottawa this also includes a sizable rural area as the Ottawa-Gatineau CMA is a huge geographical area. Clearly there are major difference between those living in the downtown areas and those living in the dormitory communities on the fringes. In recent history, and this is still largely the case the Conservatives do very poorly in the downtown core. This echoes a similar finding in the United States where Republicans also fare very poorly in the largest metropolitan centers , The Conservatives are much more competitive in the outlying suburban neighbourhoods which include a greater concentration of young families . The Conservatives also do much better in the rural areas of these CMA districts.

Our data are aggregated to the CMA level and we don’t have sufficient cases to break them down reliably by say the 416/905 portions. It may be the case that nothing has changed in the down town metro areas but the CPC has really taken off in the 905 areas.

At some point we may aggregate our data over several reporting periods and take a look at this but at this point it is unclear where the progress is being made by the Conservatives.

One interesting note is that hasn’t been picked up is that the CPC vote is far more committed than the Liberal vote at this point and that should yield a significant advantage at the ballot box. It is also interesting to see that (despite the limited sample size) Ottawa is the hot bed of political commitment in Canada.

The fact that the CPC polled ahead of the LPC in the Toronto CMA is interesting but certainly the aggregated CMA data don’t tell us that downtown Toronto has become a Tory stronghold . It is entirely possible that nothing has changed in downtown Toronto . The coming weeks will tell us whether the rising Conservative fortunes are stable or based on continued public umbrage at the thought of being summoned to the polls yet again, and where those gains are being carved out.

In other words, Bob Rae’s seat is probably safe … for now. (Do the Conservatives have a candidate in that riding yet? I swear, if there’s one out of town all-candidate meeting that ITQ would gladly make the trek to cover, that would be the one.

UPDATE – Now that’s pollster service that goes above and beyond the call of duty: In response to a question that arose in the comments over the Ottawa/Gatineau numbers, Frank Graves checked with the researchers, and confirmed that the results refer only to the Ottawa side of the CMA.

UPDATED: EKOS Weekly (with bonus Nanos): WATCH OUT! It's a runaway train!

By kadyomalley - Thursday, September 24, 2009 at 9:24 AM - 92 Comments

Seven point lead! Seven point lead! Seven point one lead, even, if you want to get all decimal about it! Watch out, semi-mythical majority, the vote-seeking missile that is the Big Blue Machine is locked, loaded and ready to — inch ahead from last week by less than a full percentage point.

Not that they shouldn’t feel good about it, mind you — as any number of commenters will soon be along to point out, it’s the trend that counts, not the actual numbers, and that trend shows slow but steady growth by the Conservatives, while the Liberals remain frozen in amber. (Seriously, you guys, are you playing dead to lull the Tories into a false sense of security? Because at the moment, it’s just a little bit too convincing. Maybe twitch a finger or something, just so the audience knows there’s still a twist in the plot to come.)

And then there’s the NDP. Oh, NDP. After the last few polls showed no post-post-convention plunge despite your leader’s dithering, it was like a mantra: “Look! We’re not slumping! You all predicted slumpage, but hah! No slumpers we! Take that, corporate media! Today, Nova Scotia, tomorrow, the world!”  And then your party lost nine points in a week in Atlantic Canada. The End. On the plus side, look at where all that extra media fussin’ got Elizabeth May and the Greens in British Columbia — into the high teens, that’s where!  Start packing up that ministerial office, Gary Lunn!

Numbers first, followed by more caffeine and toasted pita-powered armchair analysis from ITQ — not to mention that extra dose of substance-fortified Nanos goodness teasered in the headline:

National voter intention (MoE 2.1)
Conservatives: 37 (+0.9)
Liberals: 29.9 (-)
NDP: 13.8 (-2.7)
Green: 10.2 (+1.2)
Bloc Quebecois (in Quebec): 36.4 (-2.5)
Undecided:  15.6 (+2.3)

… and the regional breakdowns:

Continue…

UPDATED! Whose website is it, anyway? ITQ investigates … in realtime (for now).

By kadyomalley - Wednesday, September 23, 2009 at 1:53 PM - 71 Comments

SCROLL DOWN FOR UPDATE!

Unless you’ve spent the last few days on a self (or otherwise) imposed political news fast, most of y’all have likely been following, with varying degrees of interest, the kerfuffle over the mysteriously disappearing — or, if you buy the official PCO line, the simply-no-longer-appearing — pictures of the prime minister from the Canada Action Plan website.

It all started late last week, when the ever-inquisitive Canadian Press started pestering the government with questions about the millions of dollars being spent to advertise the Action Plan, compared to the millions that weren’t being spent to keep the public informed on swine flu, and why that advertising — and the Action Plan website itself — seemed to be coming perilously close to skirting Treasury Board rules that forbid using taxpayer dollars for partisan campaigns.

Continue…

UPDATED: PrenticeWatch: Ten feet from the podium? Canada's back again!

By kadyomalley - Tuesday, September 22, 2009 at 2:07 PM - 52 Comments

The Toronto Star’s Mitch Potter managed to catch up with Canada’s curiously elusive environment minister as he went about his full-message-heft-absorbing duties:

Prime Minister Stephen Harper is in New York today but did not attend the morning sessions. Harper was scheduled to lunch with Mayor Michael Bloomberg and will join up with 25 world leaders tonight for a private dinner at the UN at the behest of Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon.

Instead, Environment Minister Jim Prentice took Canada’s seat, where he absorbed the full heft of the messages of Obama, Hu, Sarkozy and the other keynote speakers.

“Canada was seated about 10 feet from the speaker’s podium so it came through very clearly,” Prentice told the Star. “I thought the President of the Maldives made a very compelling speech, with a crisp analysis of the challenge we all face.”

Prentice assessed the UN gathering as a “day where the United States and China are under the microscope,” with smaller nations looking for leadership from the two flagship economies.

On the momentum for a meaningful agreement at Copenhagen, Prentice said: “It’s too early to make categorical predctions. We do have 80 days left … we’re in the thick of this and I remain hopeful.”

Behind closed doors, Prentice said Canada is expressing a willingness to take on “economy-wide reduction targets.” But he said that any major deal at Copenhagen will depend on the willingness of the major emerging economies to assume “binding” targets.

“The lion’s share of future emissions will come from China, India and Brazil. We do need to see binding targets” from those countries if a breakthrough is to be achieved, he said.

ITQ wasn’t aware that the impact of a given speaker was so dependent on the proximity of one’s chair to the podium, but on the plus side, at least now we know that Prentice is present and accounted for at today’s session. Who knows — maybe later today, he’ll have some crisp analysis of his own to share with Canadians.

HE’S HERE BUT HE’S NOT IMPRESSED UPDATE:

Continue…

UPDATED: Whatever you do, don't look around the corner! – Not liveblogging Jim Prentice at the UN climate change conference

By kadyomalley - Tuesday, September 22, 2009 at 11:49 AM - 34 Comments

Huh. Well, that was odd.

ITQ was all ready to liveblog Jim Prentice’s conference call from New York City to discuss ” his participation at the United Nations Secretary General Leaders Summit on climate change.” But when she called in to register — less than five minutes before the call was scheduled to get underway — the apologetic, if slightly frazzled-sounding voice on the other end of the phone informed her that it had just –like seconds before — been cancelled without explanation.

Now, to be fair, the call might have been called off due to some sort of last minute timing conflict — maybe the minister is running late, or perhaps he wasn’t able to get to a phone since he was so busy explaining to everyone in earshot that Canada will have “bold and forward-looking climate change policies with respect to all sources of carbon emissions” by the end of the year.  Still, it’s hard to see it as a terribly auspicious omen as far as the prime minister’s dinner plans this evening.

UPDATE: Found him — or, at least, where he may, in theory, be later today. According to the official programme, this afternoon, Canada will take part in a roundtable co-chaired by Mongolia and the European Commission.

Also, you guys? I don’t want to needlessly alarm anyone, but a quick poke around the summit website reveals that Canada isn’t exactly taking on what you might call a major role at this event.

Not only is the prime minister not scheduled to speak at the conference itself, but he hasn’t even provided a video statement instead (insert Stephane Dion cameraman joke here). Instead, he’s apparently heading off for a meet ‘n’ greet with Mayor Bloomberg before the post-summit leaders’ dinner, where he once again won’t be speaking.

Which seems a little unlike him — I mean, ordinarily, this is a guy who relishes the opportunity to look all statesmanly on the world stage. Canada’s still back, right? Then again, this is one venue where the “stay the course” mantra that his government has adopted as its motto wouldn’t exactly fit with the overall theme.

Anyway, ITQ will keep you posted on further events — or non-events — as they happen. Or don’t happen. Man, this would be so much easier if she was in New York.

Ignatieff's HST stance unmurkified? ITQ wouldn't go that far, but it's a start.

By kadyomalley - Monday, September 21, 2009 at 4:07 PM - 66 Comments

Well, in marked contrast to his reaction to being questioned about his HST stance last week, Michael Ignatieff at least now seems willing to admit that he has, in fact, taken a position on the harmonization plan, and even clarifies — albeit in rather vague terms — how his position differs from that of the current Conservative government.

He also confirms that, as “a party of government”, it would be irresponsible of the Liberals to say that they’d “rip up an agreement that has been duly negotiated between a federal … and a provincial government.” That doesn’t, however, mean that, as prime minister, he wouldn’t sit down with those provincial governments to discuss any “problems in the application” of the existing agreement in order to make it “fairer and more equitable for Canadians.”

On the other hand, he still didn’t have an explanation for the Three’s Company-calibre communication meltdown that apparently occurred between OLO and Queen’s Park over where, exactly, his party stood on the HST deal with Ontario, although in his defence, nobody asked him for one.

Anyway, here’s a quick and dirty transcript — and note that the first question is from none other than Colleague Rich Madan of CityTV: 

Question: Last week the premier said he would ask you to clarify your position on the harmonized sales tax. I’m wondering, we have you here in Toronto today — could you clarify whether you support or don’t support the introduction of an HST in Ontario and British Columbia?

Michael Ignatieff: Look, the HST harmonized sales taxing arrangement was initiated by the Harper government. They have sought the cooperation of two provinces. There are a couple of problems. The first problem is, there is no national plan. So Mr. Harper as usual is playing one province against the other. The BC plan looks this way. The Ontario plan is different. We would have done that differently. We think this is one country. And if you’re going to do harmonized sales tax, you ought to have a national plan that has consistent national sense, so that’s the first problem.

The second problem is that if this is a deal done by the Harper government and the McGuinty government and the Campbell government and we come into office, we’re a party of government. We’re serious, professional people. We are not going to rip up an agreement that has been duly negotiated in — between a federal government and a provincial government but — and this would be my third and final remark — in those cases where there is still unfairness, there is still problems in its application, we would listen carefully to the provincial government’s concern, and see what we could do to make it fairer and more equitable for the Canadians and the provinces concerned.

Question: I’m going to ask a follow-up to Mr. Madan’s question. We know what you were saying what would you do but where do you personally stand on this agreement between Prime Minister Harper and the governments of British Columbia and Ontario? Where do you stand on this issue?

Michael Ignatieff: My view of this is — look, Mr. Harper decided to push sales tax harmonization in the middle of a recession. He got two provinces to agree. The right way to do this is to get a national plan with a harmonized sales tax proposal that makes sense for all the provinces. Instead, he’s playing one province against the other. That’s problem number one.

Problem number 2 is, were we in government and this sales tax is in place and the harmonization has occurred, it’s just not responsible for a party of government to say, well, we’ll tear it up and go back to ground zero. What we can do and what we can say to Ontarians and British Columbians is if there is unfairness, if there are problems, if there are things that are really hurting the local economy, of course we’re going to sit down with the province and say, can we correct this? Can we help? Can we make this fairer for Canadians. That, I’m prepared to do.

Canadians on Afghanistan: Turns out they may have been right all along.

By kadyomalley - Monday, September 21, 2009 at 11:28 AM - 52 Comments

When, in the course of her usual morning newsblitz, ITQ finds herself confronted with headlines like this, and this, and this — and especially this (that last one, the latest dispatch from Esprit de Corps’ Scott Taylor, provides a must-read counterpoint to the nearly universally fawning coverage of a certain Conservative star candidate in waiting that surfaced last week) — she can’t help but recall that April 2007 day that the NDP teamed up with the Conservatives to defeat a Liberal motion — introduced by Denis Coderre, and seconded by one Michael Ignatieff —  that would have seen Canada’s military role end, as originally scheduled, in February 2009.

At the time, the NDP argued that two more years was too years too long — a position that was, to be fair, consistent with the party’s longstanding position on Afghanistan. But how, one can’t help but wonder, might subsequent events have unfolded had they decided to vote with the other opposition parties, and the motion was passed by the House?

Continue…

Compromising positions: Ignatieff and the HST

By kadyomalley - Sunday, September 20, 2009 at 1:54 PM - 106 Comments

It came at the tail end of the scrum, which is probably why it garnered relatively little media coverage. But even in mid-liveblog mode, an ITQ eyebrow went up when Michael Ignatieff was asked about his party’s seemingly contradictory position on the GST/PST harmonization plans in British Columbia and Ontario.

Instead of simply answering the question, he reminded reporters that he’s the leader of the opposition, not the government, and, as such, “doesn’t have to have a position” — which, as far as he is concerned, meant that he didn’t have to clarify it.

Which, of course, is true: No one held a gun to his head and forced him to pick a side in the Great HST Debate of 2009.  Unfortunately for Ignatieff, however, not only did he take a position, but for a while, there, he seems to been have holding both of them — at the same time. Continue…

Hey, Hill denizens! Got a few minutes to spare this afternoon?

By kadyomalley - Friday, September 18, 2009 at 2:27 PM - 22 Comments

If so, you should totally pop out for a few minutes and do the jellybean test. It’s for science — and democracy! When ITQ crossed paths with them earlier this afternoon, the pair of budding political sociologists were camped out by the Flame, but they may have relocated since then. Keep your eyes peeled for a girl carrying a big jar of jellybeans.

Attention NDP: In case y'all didn't catch the end of Jim Flaherty's scrum …

By kadyomalley - Friday, September 18, 2009 at 11:33 AM - 32 Comments

From today’s Globe and Mail:

NDP MP Joe Comartin, whose Windsor, Ont., area riding includes many unemployed auto workers, said the government’s bill – and the NDP’s support – will be short lived unless the government agrees to NDP amendments.

“Unfortunately for communities like mine, the auto sector generally as well as forestry are going to be pretty extensively, if not completely excluded from being able to access the extended benefits under this bill,” he said.

Mr. Comartin said the bill applies only to people who first applied for EI in 2009, leaving out those who lost their jobs at the start of the recession.

Peggy Nash, the president of the NDP who also works for the Canadian Auto Workers, agreed the bill must be changed.

“Is it enough? Absolutely not,” she said in an interview.

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty’s response, when asked whether the government would be open to amending the bill earlier today:

“We don’t plan to amend the bill.”

Over to you, NDP.