Category Archives: Politics

Rafe Mair on Trudeau’s surprise comeback, Mulcair’s continued strength

August 31, 2015Canada, PoliticsfeaturedRafe Mair

Justin Trudeau continues to defy expectation (Flickr/Canada 2020 CC licence)

Churchill once stated that the best time to predict events was after they had happened and I think he was probably right.

The current federal election is demonstrating that predictions at any time are pretty iffy but in a hugely long campaign like this one, they’re positively dangerous.

I find myself flying all over the place, which is hardly unusual considering my record on these matters. The benefit of this experience of incompetence is, of course, that you learn that changes always take place and often very rapidly. The question is whether or not this, like logarithms in high school, is quickly learned and just as quickly forgotten, as has hitherto been my case.

Trudeau’s surprising comeback

For example, I doubt very much that anybody would have disagreed with me a month or so ago that Justin Trudeau had badly soiled his copybook with his support of Bill C-51. He was supposed to be through by the opinions of many pundits and was given no hope up against the other three in the great debate. I probably said so too.

The fact of the matter is he did very well in the debate, particularly against the prime minister. C-51 has been called a black mark on Trudeau’s record, but that’s all it is, and everybody has those. To me, it is a very serious black mark, but to the voting public, as time passes, I suspect it will be forgotten in favour of whatever the latest hot issue is. He has already shown signs that rumours of his political death were much exaggerated.

The real issues of this election campaign will likely not emerge until the last month and, I would wager, not all of them are even thought about at this moment. At least that’s the way it usually works.

Harper’s negative ads backfire

I think, looking back, it was fortunate for Trudeau that the Tories did all those vicious attack ads early because the impact has faded and after the debates Trudeau at least looks as if he could be a leader if needs be. In other words, his task was to look better than presented by typical Tory attack ads – and he did.

I also believe those ads helped Mr. Mulcair. Those seeking another choice than Tory just might say, “OK, so Trudeau’s not ready, but Mulcair looks as if he is”. This is not quite bringing deserters back to the Tories as intended.

Mulcair looks strong – especially in BC

Tom Mulcair supporting NDP candidate Joe Cressy (Flickr/Joe Cressy/Tim Ehlich) — Mulcair with candidate Joe Cressy (Flickr/Joe Cressy/Tim Ehlich)

Thomas Mulcair has been seen as the knight in shining armour who has flashed out of nowhere to become the saviour of the nation. So far, he has weathered well and is certainly doing extremely well in British Columbia, according to the most recent polls.

I must say at this point that I hardly trust polls and I am ever mindful of Sir Humphrey in “Yes Minister” explaining to Bernard how by asking a different series of questions on the same subject, you can get two very separate answers.

Moreover, I believe that a lot of people lie because they consider it none of the pollster’s business or, like me, promptly hang the phone up with the international words for “go away” and go back to their dinner.

BC NDP opposition is non-existent

I think Mr. Mulcair has something else going for him in British Columbia. Past NDP national leaders have had to concern themselves with the policies of the provincial NDP and, there being none, there’s nothing for Mulcair to worry about.

If, for example, John Horgan and Co. took a strong stand against LNG, especially in Howe Sound and in Saanich Inlet, Mr. Mulcair might have a problem being wishy-washy and avoiding the subject. Fortunately for him, he finds the local NDP in the midst of what should be an impossible task – making Christy Clark look good.

afe--What's-the-NDP-thinking-jumping-on-Liberals'-sinking-LNG-ship — BCNDP Leader John Horgan talking LNG (Photo: BCNDP)

Horgan, in thrall to former premier Dan Miller, is a firm supporter of LNG and quite prepared to desert supporters and those who would be, in places where plants are proposed and people are upset.

You may remember that when Mr. Miller briefly became the premier of the province, he immediately grabbed John Horgan, who was in business in the private sector, and brought him in by his side. Those who know tell me that Mr. Miller is like an uncle or perhaps a godfather to Mr. Horgan, who adores the former premier and would never cross him. Since Dan Miller is a devoted supporter of bitumen pipelines and tanker traffic – not to mention Resource Works, the shills for Woodfibre LNG – it can be understood why Mr. Horgan has suddenly become a fossil fuel capitalist.

That he has been able to drag his caucus into taking this position shows that none of them understands how parliamentary democracy is supposed to work and the critical duty of Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition to oppose.

Having said that, I think that Mr. Mulcair has done well in British Columbia and this province is now his to lose.

Don’t count Harper out yet

I am not prepared to write off the prime minister at this stage, for the following reason:

Suppose, as I suspect, that Mr. Trudeau is making some inroads in BC and that he and Mulcair become extremely competitive one with the other – that may open the door for Mr. Harper to do much better here than anyone now predicts.

May shines

Elizabeth May being interviewed during Calgary Stampede (Flickr/ItzaFineDay CC licence)

The outstanding candidate in my view is clearly Elizabeth May. Those who watched the debate or have had the privilege of hearing her speak, or both, will know that she is a very substantial person indeed, steeped in the history and tradition of this, her adopted country, and with a far wider vision than just the environment – although that is pretty damned important.

She not only demands electoral and parliamentary reform, unlike others, she understands the subjects.

There is some hope that the Greens will do well in parts of Canada – at this point Vancouver Island looks like it’s in the hopeful section.(I make no secret of my support of the Greens.)

Trudeau has leg up with media

Let me get back to Mr. Trudeau. He has the advantage, if advantage it is, of support from the mainstream media – now that their beloved Tories seem to be heading for the ditch. They’re horrified at the thought of an NDP government and are turning their fond attention to the Grits in desperation. You may have noticed that the stories about Justin Trudeau and the pictures of him are far more jolly and upbeat in the last couple of weeks than they once were.

Although I am by nature one who would normally be a Liberal, they fell from my favour under Pierre Trudeau because of his attitude towards British Columbia, especially exemplified by him giving the finger to some protesters in Salmon Arm. Moreover, he, and the election gang surrounding him, like Keith Davey and Jim Coutts, worked out the obvious mathematics of concentrating all efforts on Ontario and Quebec and to hell with the rest of the country, especially British Columbia.

In his last speech in the debate, Trudeau, Jr. tried to say that his father had instilled in him an appreciation of the nation as a whole. Having been alive at that time and up close to Trudeau, Sr. during constitutional debates, I don’t believe that crap for a second.

When Mark Anthony gave as part of his oration on the death of Caesar “The evil that men do lives after them; The good is oft interred with their bones“, he certainly wasn’t foreseeing Pierre Elliot Trudeau, who’s now subject of a posthumous love-in, the evidence be damned!

Now, the sins of the father are not passed onto the son – neither are the good deeds for that matter – and Justin Trudeau will have to make his own way to the hearts of Lotuslanders. That he has family connections here, including a terrible tragedy, does not make him a British Columbian – something that one cannot easily acquire any more than one can easily become a Quebecer. It does, however, give him a leg up on Harper and Mulcair and that could prove to be important. For example, when Trudeau reads about the childish behaviour of UBC, at least he knows where it is, having once been a student.

For once, BC counts

I don’t remember the election where it wasn’t solemnly intoned that BC counted and I’m hard-pressed to think of one where it actually did. This year, with the strong possibility of a minority government, and with reform of the system in the wind, perhaps every MP will finally make a difference.

I am going to leave it at that without any predictions because, in my dotage, I think I have finally learned that October 19 is a hell of a long way away and a great deal not only can happen but probably will.

Why privacy matters in this Canadian election

August 28, 2015Canada, Energy and Resources, PoliticsfeaturedKevin Grandia

While you are out this weekend enjoying the last days of summer on the beach and the RCMP come by to check whether your cooler is full of (gasp) beer or wine, you have every right to tell them (I would suggest politely) that no, they cannot look in your cooler.

Now I am not a lawyer (although I did consult one to write this article), so don’t come looking for me if the whole exchange doesn’t go smoothly, but the law is very clear in Canada that the police only have a right to search your cooler if they have reason to suspect you have alcohol or something else illegal in inside.

And this extends to all sorts of other things, like driving your car, which reminds me of the old police shows where the local rebel is pulled over and when he asks the sheriff why he was pulled over the sheriff pulls out his baton, smashes a tail light and says, “broken tail light.”

Even the redneck sheriff knows that in order to pull a person over he has to have a reason for doing so.

In Canada, we have a reasonable expectation of privacy. We have the right to go about our lives without being bothered by the police, unless the police have a justifiable reason for doing so.

In fact this rule is so important that it is embedded in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms under section eight, which states that:

[quote]Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure.[/quote]

While section eight of the Charter protects all sorts of things, one of the biggies is our right to a reasonable expectation of privacy.

So unless you are acting like a drunk idiot at the beach this weekend, it is reasonable for you to expect your privacy and the RCMP cannot butt into that privacy by demanding (or even politely asking) to see the contents of your cooler, backpack or whatever other personal belongings you have with you.

National insecurity

If it is the case that the police, or any other form of law enforcement, are not allowed to search you or our belongings without reason, how could it be okay in Canada for law enforcement to search and seize our personal information and digital conversations without probable cause?

The RCMP might not have reasonable grounds to search your drink cooler while you lay on the beach, but under new laws rammed through with little debate by Stephen Harper and his Conservative government, law enforcement agencies like the RCMP and the Canadian Security and Intelligence Service (CSIS), will have more power than ever to monitor, collect and share the information you are transmitting on that fancy new iPhone 6 Plus of yours, or any other electronic device you have.

Your right to privacy is extended to online activities, which was confirmed in a 2013 Supreme Court of Canada case involving Telus, in which the court ruled that Canadians should have a reasonable expectation of privacy when it comes to electronic transmissions like text messaging and emails.

So what is the government to do if it has a burning desire to monitor more of its citizens’ activities – especially online – in the name of national security?

What the Harper government did with Bill C-51 is loosen the definition of what behaviours are considered an indication of potentially illegal activity. By broadening the definition of what activities are considered a possible threat to national security, the government now has more reasons to monitor your behaviour.

Loosening and broadening the definition of what is an indication of possible criminal activity is the key trick in Bill C-51 and harms your right under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to a reasonable expectation of privacy.

“Critical infrastructure”

Arrests begin on Burnaby Mountain in Kinder Morgan standoff — Burnaby Mountain/Kinder Morgan arrest (Photo: Brad Hornick/facebook)

It is in the definitions section of the final version of C-51 that was passed June 15, 2015 where we can see the introduction of very broad terms to define what is an “activity that undermines the security of Canada.”

For instance, one such activity that would undermine the security of Canada (according to C-51) is the “interference with critical infrastructure.” In the context of pipeline protests this is a cause for concern for those citizens who want to show up and voice their opposition to the construction of a pipeline.

In the definitions section of C-51 there is a statement that, on the surface, would seemingly protect pipeline protestors: “For greater certainty, it does not include advocacy, protest, dissent and artistic expression.”

But it is the broadness and vagueness of this text that is concerning, especially when Conservative party members have a history of labelling those speaking up on environmental issues as “eco-terrorists.”

Human rights, Canada’s reputation at risk

Again though, I am not a lawyer, but here’s what a group of prominent experts, including 106 law professors, had to say about C-51:

[quote]Protecting human rights and protecting public safety are complementary objectives, but experience has shown that serious human rights abuses can occur in the name of maintaining national security. Given the secrecy around national security activities, abuses can go undetected and without remedy. This results not only in devastating personal consequences for the individuals, but a profoundly negative impact on Canada’s reputation as a rights-respecting nation.[/quote]

Stephen Harper, the hypocrite

The kicker here is that while the Harper government wants to invent new reasons to watch what you do, the same does not go for Prime Minister Harper himself, who is so tight with his own information that he is rarely even willing to talk to the media!

Stephen Harper wants you to be willing to give up your privacy, but is not willing to make his activities and those of his government more transparent and open.

Glenn Greenwald, the journalist and constitutional lawyer who worked with whistleblower Edward Snowden to expose the massive intrusion of privacy by the US government against its own citizens and countries around the world, has a very well-thought-out opinion on why people should have a reasonable expectation of privacy and why if you are not doing anything wrong, you should still expect that privacy.

And on the hypocrisy of those, like Stephen Harper, who call for less privacy, but take steps to further protect their own privacy, Greenwald had this to say:

[quote]…the people that say that, that privacy isn’t really important, they don’t actually believe it. And the way that you know that they don’t actually believe it, is that while they say with their words ‘privacy doesn’t matter,’ with their actions they take all kinds of steps to safeguard their privacy. They put passwords on their email and their social media accounts, they put locks on their bedroom and bathroom doors. All steps designed to prevent other people from entering what they consider their private realm and knowing what it is that they don’t want other people to know.[/quote]

Watching over your back

In this election, like most elections in recent history, public safety is a hot issue, and every party wants you to think they have your back when it comes to protecting you, your family, friends and fellow citizens.

But there is an important line that needs to be drawn between watching your back and watching over your back.

Our right to a reasonable expectation of privacy is stated pretty clearly in our country’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It is a right that past generations fought and died for and not something to be taken lightly.

And our right to privacy is definitely not something that should be compromised by a new set of ham-fisted laws that were rammed into existence with little debate.

So vote smart in this election if privacy is something important to you, because it matters, and what is a law today can be changed by a new government tomorrow.

As a first step, go here to to see the official vote count and who voted for and against Bill C-51, and consider voting accordingly.

Or here’s the crib notes: the Conservatives and Liberals all voted in favour of C-51, while every other party voted against it.

The Harper Conservative economic disaster

August 28, 2015Canada, Economics, PoliticsfeaturedCommon Sense Canadian

Guest post by Doug Carrick

According to Stephen Harper, the coming election offers a choice between the certainty of Conservative economic expertise on the one hand…or the risk of Liberal or New Democrat inexperience. However, a closer examination reveals a different picture. It is the Conservatives who have the shaky economic record.

All his eggs in one basket

For example, instead of diversifying the economy, Harper has put all his eggs in one basket (the tar sands). Farmers on the prairies know all about diversification. To cover the possibilities of crop failure or an unexpected drop in market price, they plant a variety of crops – wheat, canola, legumes, oats, barley, flax, or some such mix. They know it would be disastrous to speculate on one crop…and be wrong! Harper has done just that with oil. An inexcusable risk that went wrong!

The Conservatives have tried to project the image of business expertise by showcasing a “balanced budget”. The Huffington Post examined this budget and listed “Seven Conservative Tricks to Faking a Balanced Budget”. It wasn’t balanced at all. In fact, the Conservatives hardly know what a balanced budget looks like. They have produced nothing but “deficit budgets” in each of the previous seven years. That is why our national debt has sky-rocketed in the Harper years.

Worst Canadian economic record since WWII

Harper warns us never to trust the spendthrift Liberals. Our memories are so short! It was during the Liberal years that the two “spendthrifts”, Chrétien and Paul Martin, reduced the national debt by an unprecedented $81 billion. Since then, Harper has increased the national debt by $176 billion – also unprecedented! Economic expertise?

His poor track record in economics has been confirmed by a recent study by two Canadian economists, Jim Stanford and Jordon Brennon. They conclude that:

[quote]Stephen Harper and his Conservatives are running the most poorly performing economy the country has seen since the Second World War.*[/quote]

Their study “examined the economic data from nine Canadian governments…using 16 indicators of economic progress, including job creation, Gross Domestic Product growth, export growth, household debt and real personal income.

“The Harper government ranked last or second last in 13 of the 16 indicators”, resulting in “a score of 8.05 out of 9, with 9 being the worst possible score.” Based on economic performance, the Harper government was rock bottom. And at the other end of the scale, “Lester Pearson has been the most successful prime minister, followed by Pierre Trudeau.” *

Child poverty, homelessness reach abysmal levels

But we hardly need such studies to prove their economic ineptitude. It is obvious. Under the Conservatives we have had more children living in poverty, more homeless people, more people depending on soup kitchens, and greater family indebtedness. Highly paid jobs have been replaced by low paid part-time jobs with no benefits. And young people despair of ever owning their own homes.

Most damning is their tax policy. They keep reducing taxation on the rich and on Corporations – forcing government agencies to reduce services to everyone else – thus creating more billionaires each year and more paupers. Good economics for the top 1%, but horrible for the rest.

Putting economy above planet

Even worse, is the Conservative policy of promoting the development of the Alberta tar sands at the cost of permanent damage to the world’s climate. The greenhouse gases created are causing droughts in the best farmland; are wiping out the glaciers and snow fields which are reservoirs for next summer’s water; are destroying forests (by diseases and fires); are destroying the oceans (by acidification and overheating); and are causing massive damage to islands, coastlines and port cities (by rising oceans and extreme storms). The harm done to people around the world is much greater than the paltry economic benefit to Alberta. Is this good economics?

Harper’s request for us to “stay the course” with the Conservatives is like staying the course with the Titanic. Contrary to Harper’s propaganda, Conservative economics is a disaster.

* Jeremy J. Nuttall, The Tyee.com, July 31 2015

Doug Carrick writes regular articles for the Hornby Island “First Edition”, the Denman Island “Flagstone” and occasionally for the “Island Tides” and other publications.

Rafe Mair’s ‘State of the Union’ on Canadian environmental politics

August 24, 2015Canada, Energy and Resources, LNG, PoliticsfeaturedRafe Mair

Before I get onto the federal election, let me say I have never been more depressed about governance in this country.

A recent note from a reader pointed out the atrocious record of the Christy Clark government in erasing emails, losing emails, redacting emails (that’s bureaucratese for blacking out anything that might possibly embarrass the government), throwing sand in the gears for anyone who wants public information and on it goes. What struck me is that this egregiously evil behaviour is buried in scandals in the Health Ministry and the Ministry of Children and Families, the skyrocketing provincial debt since Christy Clark took over, not to mention her look of teenage adoration when dealing with out and out crooks in her LNG giveaways; all while utterly neglecting her duty to protect our homes, coastlines and waters from the inevitable consequences of her LNG pipe dreams.

The extent of her reckless negligence is that it’s hard to concentrate on individual outrages like censorship of public information. Moreover, she is never mildly challenged by the “poodle press” which bury her shenanigans in the recesses of their rags, if they mention them at all, while giving “Position ‘A'” to the Fraser Institute and the Canadian Taxpayers’ Federation.

Too bad May couldn’t be PM…

The Federal election is a bankruptcy of real choices. The outstanding candidate by far, and I apologize for damning her with faint praise, is Elizabeth May. It’s a shame that she won’t be prime minister. Far from being just an environmentalist, she has a firm understanding of the history of this country, the geographical distortions and demographic differences, and the sad state of our parliamentary system. She also has a deep love and understanding of our province.

Ms. May has profited from her experience in Parliament and knows that it doesn’t work because of the deliberate maneuverings of Stephen Harper. She recognizes that MPs must have their power and dignity restored and will, win or lose, do her best to do something about it. Any who have heard Elizabeth May speak (indeed just watched the debates where, despite Harper’s constant interruptions, she impressed all) know that she’s an outstanding person who’ll serve us well in whatever role she’s called upon to play.

The Canadian Gestapo

Rafe: Critics of Burnaby Mountain citizens are out of touch with public will for change — Pipeline protesters are criminalized under the Harper regime (Burnaby Mountain Updates/facebook)

Little need be said about Harper since so much already has been. Surely, the hearing to find out whether or not CSIS and the RCMP illegally tapped the telephones of and spied on environmentalists tells all about Harper and the C-51 mentality of present-day Tories. That this could happen in Canada is horrible enough; that the prime minister approves of this behaviour assures all Canadians that it’s unsafe in Canada to dissent from the establishment opinion without being spied upon by the Canadian Gestapo, and tells us all we need know about Harper. Another four years of his progress towards absolute power is too frightening to contemplate.

Lest you think I exaggerate, remember this – no Conservative MP has any power whatsoever to do anything or say anything on his or her own. The PMO tells them what to say, when to say it, what questions to ask, what speeches to make, what press releases to issue and, of course, how to vote. Any independence is subject to political capital punishment.

Harper: LNG too dangerous for East coast, OK for BC

Tory MPs no longer represent their constituencies and only care about those within them that “vote right”. My MP, John Weston, refuses to deal with uncomfortable questions such as:

[quote]Why does the Harper government forbid all LNG traffic on the Atlantic coast and enthusiastically support it on our coast?[/quote]

This though he was asked by mail and publicly. Just one of many examples.

On our most significant issue, the proposed LNG plant in Squamish, Weston, on orders from Harper, pressured the West Vancouver Council to rescind its opposition, rather than listen to them and take their concerns back to government. They told him to get stuffed.

Harper doesn’t give a damn about Howe Sound, so neither, then, does Weston – even though all municipal councils in this huge riding have opposed it!

Politicizing the Supreme Court

We are badly handicapped by the absence of a Free Press, including true investigating journalists and dedicated critics as we once had. Let me give you a case in point.

Stephen Harper is stacking The Supreme Court of Canada with right-wingers so that the conservative agenda, which includes violating the Charter of Rights and Freedoms whenever necessary, will prevail. This has been largely ignored but independence of the judiciary from political bias goes to the very root of our system.

In 1937, Franklin Roosevelt tried to pack the US Supreme Court and all hell broke loose. The issue is still raised when US Supreme Court judges are appointed.

Why was there such a big fuss?

For the same reason there should be one here.

The Court has been set up to be “independent” of the executive and legislative branches – and for a good reason. If most members of the Court are just toadies of the Prime Minister who appointed them, then he can violate the Constitution to his heart’s content, comfortable that his Court won’t interfere.

The entire process of appointing Supreme Court of Canada judges is badly flawed and it’s a cinch for an unscrupulous PM to manoeuvre to enhance his own political agenda. Harper certainly has no desire to change this and, instead, given another four years to appoint more right wingers, he’ll unblushingly do so.

The question is, where are Mr. Trudeau and Mr. Mulcair on this issue? It is a deadly serious one, even though you would never know that reading the Postmedia press or, indeed, the Toronto Globe and Mail.

House of ill repute

What about the disgraceful state of the House of Commons? Does any leader truly intend to give power and dignity back to the MP and thus weaken their own influence? If so, they haven’t shown much inclination thus far.

Justin Trudeau talks a good game and speaks of easing party discipline but that’s partly because he’s running scared of Mr. Mulcair. His record is less than the glittering. For example, he suspended two MPs for alleged misconduct with two female NDP MPs. Given no opportunity to publicly defend themselves, they stand convicted in the public mind and their political careers destroyed without recourse. Does that sound like open government to you?

In Mulcair’s time as leader, not one NDP MP has taken an independent line, such is his ironclad discipline. Does that sound like a man who favours freedom for his MPs?

Grits, NDP weak on pipelines

Could-Tom-Mulcair-actually-become-Prime-Minister — Mulcair could be clearer – and tougher – on pipelines

I am, frankly, more concerned about the leaders in terms of their policies towards British Columbia.

I need hardly say, then, one of the critical issues to British Columbia is the environment and, in particular, pipelines, LNG plants and the fossil fuel issue in general.

A swath of key seats in the Greater Vancouver region is wrapped up in the Kinder Morgan expansion controversy. I oppose this expansion, as do a great many citizens in those constituencies.

Here is what Mr. Trudeau has to say – and one is reminded of Mackenzie King, when during World War II, he famously said “conscription if necessary but not necessarily conscription”.

Trudeau, for his part, has stated his support for pipelines done the “right way that is sustainable, that has community support and buy-in, and that fits into a long-term strategy of not just a sustainable environment but a sustainable economy.”

Now don’t you feel better?

Mulcair isn’t a hell of a lot better. He doesn’t condemn the Kinder Morgan expansion but has denounced the National Energy Board review process, saying an NDP government would “start a new Kinder Morgan assessment based on tougher environmental legislation and a more open public consultation process”. That’s political double talk for “we’ll get rid of the present, obviously fixed process and bring in more subtle, fixed process of our own before approving the pipeline”.

Time to take a stand against LNG in Howe Sound

Photo: Future of Howe Sound Society — Citizens fight to protect Howe Sound (Future of Howe Sound Society)

On LNG, I say without hesitation that Howe Sound belongs to all British Columbia, not just those of us who live on it. I spent much of my boyhood there. I learned about the outdoors there. I have never lost my love for this beautiful fjord – the southernmost in our province – and, like so many of my neighbours from North Vancouver to Sechelt and beyond, know how fragile it is.

We’ve seen it restored over the last few decades after industry and a mine closed. I look out and see Orcas back and migratory fish have returned to their old spawning routes. Thanks to a lot of hard work by not just locals but British Columbians all over the province, Howe Sound is Howe Sound again, yet both governments are bent on destroying it for a few pieces of silver.

Everyone knows about the proposed LNG plant for Squamish – everybody, evidently, except Messrs Trudeau and Mulcair. If they do know about it, they’re keeping it to themselves. Harper doesn’t know about it either, but then he he’s always in favour of anything a fossil fuel company does anywhere, no matter how they do it. John Weston, our Tory MP, is as useless as tits on a bull – a glowing example of a Harper Tory who does precisely what he’s told and whose mantra is “the environment is the economy”. God help us!

This issue should to bother the hell out of all of us. Woodfibe LNG is owned by a big time tax-evader and an environmental rapist. Moreover, as readers of this column will know, Howe Sound is demonstrably too narrow for LNG tankers. And both governments support the crook.

Harper has BC on short leash

Christy Clark and Stephen Harper meet with firefighters in Kelowna (BC Govt/Flickr) — Christy Clark and Stephen Harper meet with firefighters (BC Govt/Flickr)

I have a theory that I will try out on you.

Remember the HST debacle? As I recall, at the end of that exercise, British Columbia owed Ottawa some billion and a half dollars, more or less.

My suspicion simply is this: Harper and Clark have an understanding that if Christy cooperates with him like a good little girl on fossil fuel issues, especially pipelines and LNG, no one will push for the HST money. That’s why there’s no opposition from her and she hasn’t complained about the phoney National Energy Board. In my theory, these two are hand-in-hand political lovers and will be as long as Christy behaves herself. (Granted, there was some mention back in 2012 of a 5-year plan to repay the HST monies without interest, but we’ve heard nothing of it since, so it does beg the question of what happened on that file).

If I am wrong, and Christy has repaid or is repaying this money, The Common Sense Canadian will say so promptly and prominently and I will withdraw my suspicion.

Whether this theory is correct or not, we British Columbians will have to fight this Woodfibre LNG outrage on our own, for we’ll clearly get no help from any prime minister to come unless by a blessed miracle it’s Elizabeth May.

Thus it would seem that the only thing British Columbians can hope for is a nicer person at Sussex Drive.

Pretty slim pickings.

BC is key in federal election: UBC prof

August 3, 2015Canada, PoliticsfeaturedRoy Hales

Leaders like the NDP's Tom Mulcair are looking West (Laurel L. Russwurm / Flickr) — Leaders like the NDP’s Tom Mulcair are looking West (Laurel L. Russwurm / Flickr)

Republished from the ECOreport

The race is on. Prime Minister Stephen Harper has asked the Governor General to dissolve Parliament early, to launch what is expected to be the most expensive election in Canadian history. “Upwards of $700 million” could be spent on this campaign and a large chunk of the contributions to all parties will be claimed as tax deductions. According to Dr. Maxwell Cameron, from UBC’s Department of Political Science, BC may determine the outcome.

Battleground BC

“There are many battleground ridings in British Columbia. We have 42 seats, due to the redistricting, and many of those seats are in play. I don’t think the NDP or the Conservatives can hope to put together any sort of majority without substantial support in BC,” said Cameron.

Polls can be deceptive, “as they do not reflect how support is distributed across ridings,” but Cameron believes both the NDP and Liberals are picking up support. The NDP could win between 22 and 25 seats. The Liberals will probably do better than in 2011 (when they won 2 seats). The Greens “might pick up one (additional) seat, but I will be a bit surprised if they get more than that.”

Pipelines could swing votes

Botched English Bay oil spill confirms BC 'woefully unprepared' for more pipelines, tankers- Open letter — The recent bunker diesel spill in Vancouver’s English Bay was a wake-up call for citizens (Vancouver Aquarium)

“The pipeline issue is potentially a significant one, as there is a lot of opposition along the Coast and the Lower Mainland as well. Fears of tankers and spills have been very much at the front of voters minds,” said Cameron.

There are “flash points of opposition” in the Lower Mainland, where communities like Vancouver and Burnaby are resisting the imposition of Kinder Morgan’s pipeline.

“It can be very disempowering (for communities) to be told this is what is going to happen and you don’t really have any say in the matter. I think the procedures we have in place, for doing the consultation, the stakeholder negotiations, environmental assessments etc are flawed. ”

[quote]The recent bunker fuel spill in Vancouver drew attention to the weakness of our response. Frankly when you close the Coast Guard station off Kitsilano (as the Conservative government did) and then you can’t respond to a spill, it looks like there is a responsibility for that.

On the other hand, this is a resource-dependent province, big parts of the province depend on timber, mining, oil and gas. There are going to be people who argue we need growth through exploitation of natural resources and those voters are more likely to go to the Conservatives.[/quote]

Slow economy hurts Harper

Canada appears to be heading into a recession, and the Conservatives are expected to campaign on their “record of sound fiscal management.” Expect Harper to say, “now is not the time to change.”

In reality, under the Conservatives economic “growth has been slow, slower than under any PM of recent memory. This is not all Harper’s fault, but he hasn’t made (the necessary) improvements to foster productivity and innovation.”

Even during times of prosperity, the benefits have primarily gone to the wealthy. Wages “have flatlined” for most Canadians, and unemployment has increased.

This is a trend that goes back to the 1980’s, with the adoption of international agreements like the North American Free Trade Agreement and cutbacks to public spending. It has continued under Harper.

Minority government a real possibility

Cameron added it is possible that neither the NDP or Conservatives will get a majority. “All of the current projections have us going into a minority government.” In that case, we could be going back to the polls again in 18 months.

Third Party Advertising 101 for the Canadian Federal Election

July 30, 2015Canada, PoliticsfeaturedKevin Grandia

Third Party Advertising laws during a federal election can be a challenge to navigate

Given that we could be going into a federal election here in Canada as early as this weekend (sigh) and I have a lot of folks asking me about the rules and regulations around election advertising by third parties, I thought I would share the most important points for those interested in knowing more about the regulations.

To be clear, I am not a lawyer, just a guy who can’t help but stick his nose in elections. I actually hope this summary sparks a few more people to get involved as third parties in this election.

You can read the entire section provided by Elections Canada here: Election advertising handbook for Third Parties, Financial Agents and Auditors (EC 20227) – July 2015.

What I am doing in this post is pulling verbatim the most important points, to provide an overview and a general understanding. If you are planning on advertising as a third party during the election, I would suggest reading the entire Elections Canada handbook on the rules and regulations and also consult a lawyer familiar with the area.

Do social media and websites count?

Off the top and before we get into too many details, the one big question I am asked is whether a website or posting content on Twitter and Facebook is considered election advertising and the answer to that question is clearly NO.

The election handbook states clearly that:

The following are not election advertising:

Messages sent or posted for free on social media platforms such as Twitter and Facebook
Messages sent by e-mail or through other messaging services (including texts sent through a cellular or mobile network)
Content posted on the third party’s website

Elections Canada does provide a clear scenario that is related to many of the questions I am getting about online election advertising – the following is not considered an election advertising expense:

[quote]During the election, the third party sets up a website to promote a registered party. Even though there are costs to produce and host websites, these are not election advertising expenses.[/quote]

Elections Canada defines (and quite clearly in my opinion) what counts as an online advertising expense:

[quote]Election messages communicated over the Internet are election advertising only if they have, or would normally have, a placement cost (and meet all the other requirements for election advertising).[/quote]

Again though, if you’re unsure, consult your friendly neighbourhood elections lawyer. Further down in this post are a few more details on what is considered an eligible advertising expense.

What’s a “third party”?

Here’s the barebones that you need to know about third party election advertising taken directly from the Elections Canada Third Party Advertising Handbook:

[click on any of the headers to go to the pertinent section of the Third Party Advertising Handbook]

1. Definition of a “third party”:

“For the purposes of election advertising, third party means a person or a group other than a candidate, registered party, or electoral district association of a registered party.”

And:

[quote]A third party may incur election advertising expenses totalling $500 or more in relation to a general election or a by-election if the third party is:

an individual who is a Canadian citizen, a permanent resident, or resides in Canada
a corporation, if it carries on business in Canada
a group, if the person responsible for the group is a Canadian citizen, a permanent resident, or resides in Canada[/quote]

2. Registration requirements:

“A person or group must register as a third party immediately after incurring election advertising expenses totalling $500 or more.”

And, “Registration cannot take place before the election is called. The person or group must apply for registration by submitting the completed and signed General Form – Third Party to Elections Canada.”

Here is the PDF form you need to fill out and send back to Elections Canada: General Form-Third Party.

[On a personal note, this is a free and easy process to do early in the election cycle and a pain once you get going and want to advertise.]

3. Appointing a financial agent:

“A third party must appoint a financial agent before applying for registration. In addition, a third party has to appoint an auditor if it incurs election advertising expenses totalling $5,000 or more.”

And:

[quote]Who can become a financial agent of a third party?

an individual who is a Canadian citizen or a permanent resident of Canada

Who is not eligible to act as a financial agent?

a candidate or official agent of a candidate
a chief agent or registered agent of a registered party
an election officer or a member of the staff of a returning officer
an individual who is not a Canadian citizen or permanent resident of Canada[/quote]

4. Appointing an auditor:

“The third party must appoint an auditor if it incurs election advertising expenses totalling $5,000 or more. This may become necessary before or after registration.”

And:

[quote]Who can become an auditor of a third party?

a person who is a member in good standing of a corporation, an association or an institute of provincially incorporated professional accountants
a partnership of which every partner is a member in good standing of a corporation, an association or an institute of provincially incorporated professional accountants
provincially incorporated professional accounting designations include: Chartered Professional Accountant (CPA), Chartered Accountant (CA), Certified General Accountant (CGA) or Certified Management Accountant (CMA).

Who is not eligible to be an auditor?

the third party’s financial agent
a person who signed the third party’s application for registration
an election officer
a candidate or official agent of a candidate
the chief agent of a registered party or an eligible party
a registered agent of a registered party[/quote]

5. Definition of a contribution:

“A contribution is donated money (monetary contribution) or donated property or services (non-monetary contribution).”

6. Who can contribute to your third party group:

“Individuals who are Canadian citizens or permanent residents of Canada, and businesses or other organizations that operate in Canada, can make contributions to a third party for election advertising purposes.”

7. Who CANNOT contribute to your third party group:

[quote]The third party is prohibited from using a contribution made for election advertising purposes if it does not know the name and address of the contributor, or if it is unable to determine to which contributor class the contributor belongs.

The third party cannot use a contribution made for election advertising purposes if the contribution is from:

a person who is not a Canadian citizen or a permanent resident of Canada
a corporation or association that does not carry on business in Canada
a trade union that does not hold bargaining rights for employees in Canada
a foreign political party
a foreign government or an agent of one[/quote]

8. Definition of election advertising:

“Election advertising is the transmission to the public by any means during an election period of an advertising message that promotes or opposes a registered party or the election of a candidate, including one that takes a position on an issue with which a registered party or candidate is associated.”

[Personal note: I find this definition vague and would recommend you get clarity from a lawyer if you are unsure whether your activities qualify as election advertising]

9. What is NOT considered election advertising:

the transmission to the public of an editorial, a debate, a speech, an interview, a column, a letter, a commentary, or news
the distribution of a book, or the promotion of the sale of a book, for no less than its commercial value, if the book was planned to be made available to the public regardless of whether there was to be an election
the transmission of a document directly by a person or a group to their members, employees or shareholders, as the case may be
the transmission by an individual, on a non-commercial basis on the Internet, of that individual’s personal political views

10. Declare authorization on your ad copy:

“The Canada Elections Act requires that a third party identify itself in any election advertising and indicate that it has authorized the advertising. This authorization has to be in or on the message. Failure to do so is an offence.

The following wording is suggested: “Authorized by the <name of the third party>.”

11. Election advertising categories:

There are three categories defined in the handbook and I would recommend reading them thoroughly as they will help clarify whether your activities qualify as election advertising. The three categories are: traditional advertising, advertising on the internet and fundraising activities and advertisement.

12. Election spending caps for third parties:

“The third party election advertising expenses limit for a 37-day general election period called between April 1, 2015 and March 31, 2016 is:

$205,800.00 in total
$4,116.00 in total in a given electoral district”

Note though that if the election is called earlier, there is some math to do, because you will be able to spend more money:

“If an election period is longer than 37 days, the election advertising expenses limit at the national and electoral district level increases as follows:

the initial limit is divided by 37
the result is multiplied by (number of days in the election period–37)”

13. Contributions:

“For contributions over $200 made for election advertising purposes in the period beginning six months before the election was called and ending on election day, the contributor’s name, address and class, and the amount and date of the contribution, have to be reported.”

And:

[quote]For reporting purposes, the Canada Elections Act identifies the following classes of contributors:

individuals
businesses
commercial organizations
governments
trade unions
corporations without share capital other than trade unions
unincorporated organizations or associations other than trade unions[/quote]

14. Deadlines for reporting:

There are three deadlines you need to know about and you can go to the section on reporting here, in general though they are (summed up in my own words):

when you think you’re going to spend more than $500 you need to register right away
if any of the info on your original registration changes then you need to submit a new form right away
within four months after election day you need to submit a final Third Party Election Advertising Report

Here’s all the contact information you need for Elections Canada and also below (because I am just so darn helpful) is another link to the PDF document you need to fill out if you’re going to register as a third party in the 2015 Canadian federal election:

Mail:

Elections Canada

30 Victoria Street

Gatineau, Quebec K1A 0M6

E-mail:

efr-rfe@elections.ca

Fax:

Political Financing

1-888-523-9333 (toll-free)

1-819-939-1803

Click here to download a PDF version of the Election Canada General Form-Third Party.

So you have no excuse now! No matter what party you’re supporting this election – New Democratic Party of Canada, Liberal Party of Canada, the Conservative Party of Canada, the Green Party of Canada – or whatever issue you want to get out there in front of voters, get out there and make your voice heard above the noise!

Rafe: Trudeau’s misstep on C-51 will help the NDP in federal election

July 16, 2015Canada, PoliticsfeaturedRafe Mair

We’ve reached the summer doldrums and perhaps that’s a good time to sit back and look at the coming Federal election, if only in general terms.

Amazingly, the main issue is exemplified in the story of the “Paddle for the Peace” organization and the ever ham-handed right wing placing all their organizers on the Terrorist Watch List.

C-51 is an election issue

This issue (C – 51) has legs. Anytime a government proposes legislation that will adversely affect citizens’ rights, it better be done quickly – it’s not the kind of issue you want the public to think about. This is what’s happening, much abetted by Justin Trudeau’s amazing lack of backbone and political inexperience. His support of C-51 showed that he doesn’t understand the fickleness of the crowds’ first reaction, as demonstrated on the eve of WWI, when huge crowds in European capitals were delirious with joy. A little time and unpleasantness can change a massively favourable public opinion into quite the opposite.

The Liberals have, in my view, all but killed their chances with their support of C-51. To compromise on a bill on citizens’ rights carries with it a pretty strong inference of weakness. He has done very little, if anything, since to change that impression. An interesting sidebar issue comes from the Tory campaign, where they’ve been portraying Trudeau as “too young”. They may be right but what they’re also telling people, “if you think it’s time for a change, as many Canadians do, why the answer is Mr. Mulcair.” Be careful what you ask for.

Mulcair continues to surprise

The NDP and Tom Mulcair continue to do much better than traditional prognosticators would have thought, for a number of reasons. Mulcair has done a very good job, stick-handling out of issues such as once having been a Liberal and is now seen as attractive, if not quite yet charismatic.

Mulcair has been helped by the NDP in Alberta who, to the surprise of many, have made it look perfectly natural for an NDP government in the bluest of all provinces. Premier Notley has not only proved that the world doesn’t end if the Tories are out in Alberta but shown a deft political hand at dealing with problems that any new government would have in Alberta, particularly one of the left. There has not been an obvious surge of stagecoaches with panicked refugees flocking into British Columbia and, indeed, after the usual flurry of predicted catastrophe, the business community are mollified, if not satisfied.

Quebec the Wildcard

Politicians hate uncertainties and one has sprung up for Mulcair in Quebec with the return of Gilles Duceppe as the Bloc Quebecois leader. The separatists have always had a spot at Quebec’s political table and it’s difficult to assess just how much influence Duceppe will have, remembering that BQ lost it’s power to the NDP. In addition to usual politics, there is a “revenge” factor here.

The Green party has not maintained the upswing they were on last spring. Elizabeth May has remained very popular, still drawing huge crowds. I don’t believe her little private cocktail party at the Ottawa press banquet left any problems, although who knows about that sort of thing.

What did happen is that the Greens finally ran into some opposition over territory they felt that they had successfully staked out. This was largely because Mr.Mulcair, having moved his party much to the centre, became able to make his pitch for environmental matters and things of that nature which hitherto was seen as the private preserve of the Greens.

Tories still in it

In summary, the Tories are slightly improved mostly because of the slippage of the Liberals. The Liberals have lost considerable ground, mostly picked up by the NDP. The NDP, usually a flash in the pan at best in federal elections, is a very real prospect and has the advantage of a leader gaining in popularity just as most are losing theirs.

The Greens remain the Greens. I thought a couple of months ago that they were rolling towards a big-time upset, but events have caused me to pull back at least for the moment.

Back to the trenches.

British Columbians reject premiers’ “Canadian Energy Strategy” – designed to push pipelines

July 15, 2015Canada, Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and Supertankers, Politics, Western CanadafeaturedRoy Hales

Citizens on Burnaby Mountain the day Kinder Morgan's injunction was read out (Mark Klotz/Flickr) — Citizens on Burnaby Mountain the day Kinder Morgan’s injunction was read out (Mark Klotz/Flickr)

Republished from the ECOreport.

According to the Globe and Mail, Canadian Premiers are about to sign an agreement that would fast track pipeline projects. The 34-page-report describes how to deal with the opposition Energy East, Kinder Morgan, Northern Gateway and Keystone XL faced from environmental groups and First Nations. It suggests that red tape be cut down so decisions can be quicker. If the initial responses from community leaders are an indication, BC says NO to “Canadian Energy Strategy”.

Business as usual not good enough

“I was rather surprised to read the article and I question the urgency and rush. If there is a rush, it is that we diversify our economy instead of doubling down on an industry that is oversupplied globally,” said Green MLA Andrew Weaver.

“A document prepared for a premier’s meeting doesn’t come close to developing a national energy strategy,” says Burnaby Mayor Derek Corrigan.

[quote]If they want social license to move fossil fuel products, they will have to be much more inclusive and listen to the citizens of their provinces and territories. Business as usual just isn’t good enough.[/quote]

Former BC Hydro CEO Marc Eliesen says, “The draft report appears to be outdated and out of step with both current oil market realities, and the strong opposition by most Canadians to building oil pipelines and expanding oil sands extraction without a view to adding value in Canada. Canadians are also clear about their unwillingness to put up with anything short of meaningful limitations on GHG emissions.”

“If what is being reported in the Globe and Mail is accurate, it is extremely short-sighted. We need a genuine shift in our approach to climate change, not some closed-door deal that is going to help the companies and not help the public,” said Bob Peart, Executive Director of Sierra Club BC.

Governing vs. Ruling

Erin Flanagan, of the Pembina Institute, pointed out that because “a very significant number of Canadians” were opposed to both the proposed Kinder Morgan and Northern Gateway pipelines, these projects have been delayed and may never be built.

She added that when constituents raise questions about pipelines or Climate Change, they should be adequately considered.

Bob Peart found the way in which the premiers are trying to cut the voice of the Canadian public out of decision making process disturbing.

“Someone said to me the other day, historically we elected governments to govern and now all they do is rule. There is a difference between ruling and governing. Governments today rule and doesn’t give much room for citizen’s concerns to be put on the table.

“That means you have to yell and scream and build up a public wall of noise. Sometimes they listen to that, but they usually don’t, so you end up having to go to the courts or be like Burnaby Mountain and have people marching,” he said.

Federal election will test pipeline policies

Canada appears to be approaching a crossroads. It is not certain that corporations will continue to exercise the same degree of control as they have in recent years. Peart stressed the need for people to vote in the upcoming election.

“The studies are pretty clear – if voter turn-out is low it favors the right. Generally it is the progressive people who are discouraged and don’t vote,” he added.

“Canadians want and expect to have more say, and I think we will witness that voice during the federal election in October,” said Marc Eliesen.

Premiers could pay political price for pushing pipelines

Flanagan said the “Canadian Energy Strategy” originated with Albertan concerns about access to markets. It is important for premiers negotiating an energy strategy to hear that they “must also consider Canada’s contribution to the fight against Climate Change.” They have to realize “it is not politically advantageous for a premier to sign on to an agreement like this.”

Peaceful Paddle lands Site C opponents on terrorist watch list

July 7, 2015Canada, Hydropower, Politics, WATERfeaturedCommon Sense Canadian

2012 Paddle for the Peace (Damien Gillis)

The following letter was written by the Paddle for the Peace Planning Committee in response to an article in the Toronto Star which stated that events like the upcoming Paddle for the Peace (July 11th) were on terrorist watch lists.

Dear Editor,

According to the Toronto Star (March 30, 2015), the Federal government has included the Paddle for the Peace on a terrorist watch list. And here we thought we weren’t getting any attention. We are in good company, though. Also on the list is a physicians’ group opposed to child poverty, Mother Theresa, and a senior’s quilting group from Bugtussle, Saskatchewan. In an effort to save our government security agencies time, not to mention the Canadian taxpayers a great deal of money, we’d like to present a brief resume of some of the key players on the Paddle for the Peace planning committee. It is a rogues gallery indeed.

Retired primary school teacher Ruth Ann Darnell is the Chair of the Peace Valley Environment Association. She has been working to save the Peace Valley from Site C since the 1970s. Back then, Ruth Ann’s subversive activities were hampered by the fact the Internet was decades away from being created. After a long day of teaching five year olds to read, she just never had the time or energy to trudge down to the Fort St. John library to research DIY incendiary devices.

After teaching her sixteen year old son to drive, local children’s clothing retailer Danielle Yeoman knew she was one of those rare talents every ISIS recruiting officer dreams of discovering. She desired to really put her nerves of steel to the test. But her terrorist career was over before it was started when she learned those torso belts packed with explosives add at least six inches to your waistline. I mean really, there are limits to what a girl will do to support a violent fanatical cause.

When she was a little girl, Diane Culling dreamed of becoming a pot-smoking tree-spiker fighting to save the rain forests of the Sudan. Unfortunately she found the required cannabis consumption affected her fine motor skills. She kept hitting her own thumb with the hammer. In the end, she was forced to limit her mind-numbing activities to sitting through endless BC Hydro consultation meetings.

Local business owner Wendy Crossland’s membership application was regretfully declined when the Al-Qaeda executive realized she never stops smiling and laughing. They might be a blood-thirsty terrorist organization, but they do have some standards.

And then there’s Tony Atkins. He was in from the start and in it until his untimely death from cancer a few weeks ago. Educator, tireless community volunteer, virtual saint, and all-round asset to Fort St. John. He won’t be there in the flesh at this year’s Paddle, but believe me, he will be there in our hearts.

So, that’s just a few members of the notorious PPPC (Paddle for the Peace Planning Committee). There are others, but they’re like Voldemort – we don’t even say their names out loud.

To our friends at Canada’s spy agencies – I hope this helps. If you want mug shots and finger-prints please meet us at our rendezvous site on the west side of the Halfway River bridge on Highway 29 on July 11th. Bring a spare shirt in case you drip pancake syrup. And don’t forget your life jacket; because, after all, at the Paddle for the Peace we are all about public safety.

Cordially,

Paddle for the Peace Planning Committee

Rafe: What Tom Mulcair must do to become Prime Minister

June 2, 2015Canada, Politics, Species At RiskfeaturedRafe Mair

Can Tom Mulcair become the next prime minister of Canada?

Barely 6 months ago that question would have brought loud guffaws but the Alberta election and recent polls showing the NDP slightly ahead of its two main rivals have reduced the guffaws to nervous coughs.

I think Mulcair can do it but he needs BC to do it.

A mug’s game

Let’s back up a bit. If one had all of the up-to-date polls from every constituency in Canada with expert analysis on each, it would still be a mug’s game to pick the winner of the next election. One can only really go on a “tummy feel” from information gained from a media which is none too bright and considerably less than politically independent.

The polls aren’t always helpful for the obvious reason that they are only snapshots of the moment the poll is taken, along with the fact that people may not always tell the truth.

Having completed my advance excuses, let me say why I think that Greater Vancouver may decide this issue.

Truman defeats Dewey

Often elections are simply a rehash of the previous one with the same players, similar issues, and similar outcomes. Every once in a while, though, a big change takes place and it seems to catch us all by surprise, even though a tiny bit of 20/20 hindsight tells us we should have known.

The two classics one thinks of are the British election of 1945 and the US presidential election of 1948 – both long ago but still apropos to today.

In 1945, Clement Attlee and the Labour Party threw out the great war hero, Churchill. It was considered a huge upset but when one looks at the result it’s obvious that the polls had the election much closer than the Conservatives and mainly Tory pundits did.

Moreover everyone forgot that the Tories had been in power since 1935, that there had been huge changes and a world war. There were substantial social issues to be dealt with, something the Tories weren’t noted for being enthusiastic about.

The second was 1948 in the United States. The odds-on favourite was Thomas Dewey, Governor of New York, who had run against Roosevelt in 1944 and lost. The largely Republican press tried to convince the people that Truman was a combination of incompetence and crookedness and played up Dewey, a famous crime-busting District Attorney, as a knight in shining armour. Truman went to the people by train, with speeches at every whistle stop, where a plant would holler “give ’em hell, Harry!”. When he eventually beat Dewey, he had the pleasure of holding up a headline from The Chicago Tribune saying “Dewey Defeats Truman” – one of the more famous 20th Century photographs.

Again, with 20/20 hindsight it becomes clear that the polls were much closer than reported and that the win by Truman wasn’t nearly as much an upset as everyone thought.

In both of the above cases, there was a public mood that transcended the stated issues.

In the former, the British people, while grateful indeed to Churchill for his war efforts, saw the “boys” coming home and wondered where their jobs were, where their homes would be and how they were going to exist in a society that was still very much run by the elite. Ennui dominated and an overriding mood for some new brooms to begin sweeping.

In the second case, the people of the US suddenly saw Dewey as Alice Longworth Roosevelt saw him, “the little man on the wedding cake”; at the same time they saw Truman as their kind of guy who would stand up and fight for them. There was a mood that the status quo, dominated by the establishment, was out of date and it was a new era where the “little guy” needed an ordinary guy as champion.

Trudeau’s C-51 mistake

I think our election in October is going to be a “mood” election more than one of issues. Canadians from coast-to-coast are fed up with Harper and the right wing who have marginalized themselves with Bill C-51.

Trudeau, has not only failed to catch on, he has shot himself in both feet over Bill C-51. In spite of the 1970 War Measures Act, the public sees the Liberals as usually strong on civil liberties and remember that Trudeau’s father brought in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I don’t think I’m alone in being put off by Justin Trudeau suddenly deciding to support C-51, then loftily promising to change it “when” he’s elected.

Mulcair has been the consistent one on this file, along with Elizabeth May. The public has swung from being about 80% in favour of the bill to being very much opposed, catching Trudeau with his backside exposed.

Harper the chicken

Harper, whose unpopularity increases by the moment, has not done himself any good by ducking the debates. He looks like a “chicken” and that’s exactly what he is. There is no substantial reason for him not to face his opponents and the public doesn’t like cowardice in a leader one bit, nor should they.

Mulcair has benefited from the fact that Elizabeth May must take votes from him in order to have a substantial result. Not long ago it seemed pretty clear that Ms. May would do just that, but as happens so often in politics, things changed – suddenly she’s no longer the only option for environmentalists. The best perhaps, but not the only.

Kinder Morgan is key to Vancouver votes

Mulcair, far from being a sure thing, will need the Greater Vancouver seats and, unless he hustles his ass on the Kinder Morgan pipeline issue, he risks abandoning that area to the Greens.

We know that Mulcair supports a West-East Tar Sands pipeline and that he is dead against the Northern Gateway line, however the votes in Greater Vancouver are not about the West-East pipeline or Northern Gateway but Kinder Morgan.

Mulcair is partway there with his criticism of the National Energy Board and a pledge to do something about it. But that’s not specific enough to gain votes.

As it sits right now – and remember, as Harold Wilson said, in politics six weeks is an eternity – Mr. Mulcair can win or lose the election based what he decides on Kinder Morgan. He’s in a good position to take a strong stand against it in light of recent studies and information. If he does that, he could join Attlee and Truman.

If, however, Mulcair continues to waffle, the people of Greater Vancouver will not support him and that could cost him the big banana.