An interesting analysis from Frank Graves on the reasons he thinks the numbers have shifted the way [...]]]> It’s only one poll, and some of the regional shifts/swings seem dramatic, which may be the signs of a very volatile electorate, but we now have a virtual tie in the newest Ekos poll released today.

An interesting analysis from Frank Graves on the reasons he thinks the numbers have shifted the way they have:

“It’s all because of the government’s decision to scrap the mandatory long-form census, pollster Frank Graves says. “The direct testing suggests that the census initiative has gone over with a massive thud,” he said. “It is receiving near universal …raspberries from a flummoxed electorate.”

How badly are they flummoxed? Kady:

..a good chunk of the population — or, to be precise, 56.3 versus 26.0 percent of the weighted representative sample thereof reached by the EKOSbots over the last seven days — remains unmoved by the government’s attempts to defend the decision to switch to a voluntary long-form census questionnaire, although 17.7 percent offered no response

Dare I say it, that Ignatieff’s ‘Liberal Express’ and the fact it garnered mostly positive headlines/reviews from non-SunMedia based scribes probably helped as well (tho, the Liberals are still below 30%, so they can’t be too content just yet).

Abousfian Abdelrazik, a Montreal man who was stranded in Sudan for six years, has been given the green light to sue the federal government and Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon. In a written ruling released on Monday, the Federal Court gave Abdelrazik [...]]]> Not to steal Galloping Beaver’s thunder, but I think this bears repeating:

Abousfian Abdelrazik, a Montreal man who was stranded in Sudan for six years, has been given the green light to sue the federal government and Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon. In a written ruling released on Monday, the Federal Court gave Abdelrazik the right to proceed with the lawsuit, which is seeking $27 million in damages…

and a bit more:

“The government was arguing that individuals could not sue for torture and they were also arguing that there was no legal duty on the Government of Canada to protect Canadians detained abroad..”

So apparently, the Conservative government was arguing that Canadians are on their own if they get into trouble abroad, whether they’re innocent or not of whatever they’re accused of. Real classy bunch in Ottawa we’ve got right now.

Steve’s main point that I’ll focus on [...]]]> This is a followup to my Liberal blogger colleague Steve, who did a blogpost on the weekend cautioning Liberals to “Beware The Spring Strategy” – a reference to some Liberal strategists “privately” telling media sources that they’d prefer to wait until the Spring before having an election.

Steve’s main point that I’ll focus on is where he says this:

One word comes to mind here- NIMBLE. I would argue that the Liberals abandon these long term plans, or more correctly, adapt to events and be pragmatic.

I’ll go a step further; I would like the Liberals to stop broadcasting their thoughts on elections -either private ones OR public – to the media. The media broadcast those thoughts/statements to the public, and part of the public that reads those statements are the Conservatives and their strategists. Why show your cards (or even give a hint as to what those cards are) to a government that will craft strategy around that as to how far they can go with their agenda?

Part of a statement I saw from the Liberals publicly was that the election timing would be up to Harper, not to them. Even that bothers me a bit, but I suppose one can craft it to mean that if Harper goes too far with a policy the Liberals feel are unacceptable, they will be forced to vote non-confidence.

What I would prefer the Liberals to say, if they need say anything, is similar to what Steve is suggesting; that they will go on an issue-by-issue basis in the Fall session and make their decisions on votes and such as events warrant (I would hope some of the strategists believe that to be the best way to go, as well).

Without actually having seen the committee (if its in progress), I’m presuming [...]]]> So I was reading over at BCL’s the witness list the Conservatives have brought forth for the Census committee meeting this morning includes(d) a couple of radio talkshow hosts – ones that aren’t exactly known for their liberal demeanour or liberal audience.

Without actually having seen the committee (if its in progress), I’m presuming that the strategy behind inviting these guys – above and beyond them ranting about how the mandatory longform census was tyranny in action, Soviet Russia style – was to get them to say, “all my callers support the government’s decision to scrap the mandatory longform census – in fact,they think the WHOLE census should be voluntary”.

Therefore, according to Conservative spin, the Canadian public – or at least those who are “regular people”, as represented by the audience on these radio stations – support the changes to the Census, or at minimum, don’t care.

I’ll be interested to see if my prediction on their strategy is/was correct.

UPDATE: I’m pleased by the way, to see the Liberals are going to officially table a Private Members Bill to re-introduce the Mandatory Longform Census. That’s one way of attempting to restore it. There is another way as well, which I hope will also be introduced in the Fall session.

Members of the national press gallery awoke this morning to find a “read-out” from Dimitri Soudas, the Prime Minister’s director of communications, in their e-mail in-boxes [...]]]> I hope the media doesn’t take these scaremongering press releases too seriously, and actually points out the obvious motive behind this, as the Globe’s Gloria Galloway is doing:

Members of the national press gallery awoke this morning to find a “read-out” from Dimitri Soudas, the Prime Minister’s director of communications, in their e-mail in-boxes that described what seemed to have been an aerial defence against the Russians. “On 24 August, two CF-18 Hornet fighter aircraft were launched and visually identified 2 Russian aircraft, the TU-95 Bear, approximately 120 nautical miles north of Inuvik, Northwest Territories. At their closest point, the Russian aircraft were 30 nautical miles from Canadian soil….

Mr. Soudas went on to explain: “Thanks to the rapid response of the Canadian Forces, at no time did the Russian aircraft enter sovereign Canadian airspace.” And we all learned earlier this summer when a similar incident occurred and the Sun Media chain broke the news to suggest that a Russian attack had narrowly been averted that, in fact, these types of sorties occur 12 to 18 times a year without incident.

Why would Mr. Soudas be sending out this kind of missive in the wee hours of the morning?

Well, the government did just buy 65 Lockheed-Martin F-35s stealth fighters through an untendered contract worth $9-billion plus maintenance that will the total cost up to $16-billion.And, as Daniel Leblanc reports in Wednesday’s Globe and Mail, not everyone is happy about it. Critics want the government to explain why it chose the F-35s and why the purchase has to be made without going to tenders.

A new report from analyst Kenneth Epps of Project Ploughshares said the Harper government has yet to state exactly which types of missions the F-35s would handle, and why other types of aircraft couldn’t do the same things. So Mr. Soudas is getting out ahead of those like Mr. Epps who would challenge the government’s purchase.

My prediction for the next stunt? Harper will personally fly shotgun in an F-18 on the next Russian bomber “intercept” to show everyone he’s helping to personally keep Canada safe – and he’ll make sure that in the 2nd jet, the co-pilot will actually be an official photographer from the PMO to record ‘Captain Canada’ in action. Heck, maybe it will be Soudas himself, so he can issue a breathless media release describing  his eyewitness account of Harper in action.

Also look for a big sign draped in front of a huge Canadian flag at the air force base where Harper lands. I would predict it will say “Stephen Harper: keeping the true North strong and free”.

Bottom Line: this is all just a propaganda scam in an attempt to vilify those who have questions about how this government went about the purchase of these jets, and to convince Canadians we’re “tough” on Arctic sovereignty – the same message and photo-op tour that he’s been doing for 5 years now without much action, but a lot of talk.

Tuesday, August 24, 2010

Today, the “Census War” reached another milestone, as the list of organizations opposing the Conservative plan to gut the long form census moved past the 300 mark. The continued growth of this list, comprising religious, professional, business, [...]]]> Re-quoted in full:

Census War Heats Up – Opponents hit the “300″ Mark

Tuesday, August 24, 2010

Today, the “Census War” reached another milestone, as the list of organizations opposing the Conservative plan to gut the long form census moved past the 300 mark. The continued growth of this list, comprising religious, professional, business, academic, government and medical organizations – virtually every sector of Canadian society – stands in stark contrast to the lack of support, outside the Conservative caucus, for the government’s position.

“It is revealing that the Conservative MPs found it necessary to force the postponement of the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology, (INDU).  The committee was preparing a witness list drawn from the over 300 organizations representing the vast majority of Canadians.  The Conservative members delayed so that they can scour the country to find some supposed ‘ordinary Canadians’ who will support their position,” said Peggy Taillon, President of the Canadian Council on Social Development.  “This is yet further proof that, lacking any scientific justification or popular support for their decision, the government is now just making this up as they go along.”

Opponents of the government decision point to the ongoing public and media interest in this issue as a clear indication that “ordinary Canadians” are, indeed, concerned about the damage to their health, prosperity, and safety that will result from the cancellation of the compulsory long form census.  “As people realize that this decision will hamper research into treatments for diseases like cancer and diabetes, will hurt the capacity of churches to do their charitable work, and means that jobs and investment may not come to their communities, the public outcry against it is growing stronger” said  Randy Hatfield, Executive Director of the Human Development Council in Saint John, New Brunswick.

The “Save the Census” campaign is vowing to continue to build pressure on the government to reverse this decision.  “There is a month until Parliament resumes on September 20th.  We anticipate that one of the first priorities of the new session will be ensuring that Canada continues to have the information we need to address current needs, and to plan for the future,” said Susan Morrissey, Executive Director of the Edmonton Social Planning Council.

“We are amazed at the way in which Canadians across the country have responded to the ‘sneak attack’ launched on the Census at the beginning of the summer, and have rallied to the defense of this critical Canadian institution.  The fight is not over yet!” said John Campey, Executive Director of Social Planning Toronto.

Opponents of scrapping the long form census are rallying behind the recommendations of the government’s own National Statistical Council, which has called on the government to:

-  Reinstate  mandatory long form census questionnaire for 2011 — we are too far down the road to change at this juncture and a process can be undertaken to make changes that would satisfy the government’s  goals in the 2016 Census. We are willing to work with the Government to find the best approach to achieve their goals and save this important tool

- Take the necessary time to study the impact of a voluntary survey

-  Adjust penalties for non compliance, removing the jail penalty

- Strengthen independence of the agency  ensuring a transparent appointment process for the new Chief Statistician.

For more information contact:

Peggy Taillon, CCSD (613)769-5499 taillon@ccsd.ca

John Campey, Social Planning Toronto, (416) 351-0095 x 260 or 647) 283-9657 jcampey@socialplanningtoronto.org.

The most comprehensive listing of organizations opposing and supporting the government’s decision is available at www.datalibre.ca.

- A regular private members bill does not get [...]]]> Just a note to Jack Layton and company in the NDP’s leadership circle over the upcoming vote(s?) on the “private members bill” to try and kill the long-gun registry (actually, the first vote will be a Liberal amendment motion to kill Bill C-391 off entirely):

- A regular private members bill does not get unprecedented advertising from the sitting government in key ridings of opposition members urging their constituents to tell them to vote to support the “private members bill”, as has happened here.

- Yes, a private member’s bill normally doesn’t get whipped by the party leadership, but as related over here in Impolitical’s update and according to London Liberal MP Glen Pearson, he’s been told privately by some Conservative MP’s that they’re being whipped to vote for this “private member’s bill” privately behind the scenes, which would be a good reason why you didn’t see any urban riding MP’s from the Conservatives – areas that are more likely to support the long-gun registry then against – break ranks last time to vote for this, and likely won’t again, if there’s a secret whip being done on them.

In short, this is what I’ll term a PMBINO – A Private Members Bill In Name Only – and Jack and the NDP are letting themselves get suckered into allowing a key piece of Harper’s agenda to pass via the Private Members Bill back-door – a move Harper and CO. did, because they calculated they could get this through, knowing the conventional government bill would fail on whipped party-line votes. The Liberal Party fell for this trick once, and smartened up, enforcing the Party whip this time.. but only after making key proposals/compromises to their cause to modify the current long-gun registry so that fines are not enforced on those who register, etc.

Rather then whining in the papers that the voters who support keeping the long-gun registry should not be blaming the NDP if the registry gets killed, Jack should stop being naive and realize the Harper government is playing the NDP for suckers. The NDP has always claimed it is the party that stands up the most against the Harper agenda in the House of Commons; well, here’s it’s chance to really walk the walk – a chance to make a difference, rather then a symbolic vote or putting forth a symbolic motion/amendment against.

As for electoral considerations, and if those are also what’s in play here over principles, the NDP should remember that for every rural riding the NDP fears it may lose because of that member voting to keep the gun registry, it’s going to be pummelled in its urban ridings and in its lone Quebec riding as failing to keep the registry. Rest assured that the Liberals will be reinforcing that message in every NDP held riding in Urban Canada and in Outremont, if the NDP fail to stop Bill C-391 from passing.

Do the right thing, Jack; put forth some compromises like the Liberals did to their members, and then whip your vote, to kill this farce of a Private Members Bill. Don’t allow a part of the Harperite agenda to be put in by back-door stealth.

UPDATE: A normally sympathetic blogger to the NDP who’s ticked with Jack’s hide in the sand manoeuvrer on this bill lists the NDP’s key members who need to be lobbied by the public. I’m not sure if that will work or not, since there are at least 2 or 3 NDP members who truly believe the registry should die, while others might be too scared to vote against the gun bill (without having a whip used), because of what more nasty things the Harper Conservatives might say in their ridings, but it can’t hurt to try.

IMO, writing a note or calling Jack Layton’s office to argue this is a sham private members bill (for the reasons listed above) and to urge him to whip the vote is the better tactic. Heck, maybe twittering him would work as well.

UPDATE 2 @ 3:53 pm: On a related note, Jeff takes a look at that Angus-Reid poll today, and finds the findings aren’t as discouraging for pro-gun registry advocates and pro-gun control advocates as some Conservatives would have you believe… in fact, those findings are purposely left out.. and for good reason:

When asked if they’d favour a complete ban on handguns in Canada, nearly half, 49 per cent, said yes it would be justified, while 39 per cent said it would be justified. Again, besides the near majority, the interesting thing here is the trends: support for a ban was up three points, and more strikingly opposition to a handgun ban was down by seven points.

Which brings us to the infamous gun registry. One question you’re seeing be latched-onto is if the registry has been successful or not fighting crime. Just 13 per cent said it was (up two) while 43 per cent said it wasn’t (down four) and 20 per cent said it had no effect (down three). Those are interesting results, particularly when compared to the complete ban results. Do they mean many want the government to go further because the registry hasn’t been effective enough, or scrap it all together because it’s ineffective? Probably both, but it’s impossible to say with the available data.

On support/oppose scrapping the long gun registry, the figure you’ll hear most is that 44 per cent support scrapping it, while 35 per cent oppose it. That those numbers aren’t more wide given the opinion on its effectiveness shows that some simply want a more effective registry. And again, here, the trend is telling. Support for scrapping the registry has dropped by seven points since last November, while opposition is up by one point. Which means some former registry opponents are on the fence, and support for scrapping the registry is on the decline.

Finally, going further than just a handgun ban, Angus Reid also asked if it should be legal or illegal for ordinary Canadians to own firearms all together. In a reversal from last year, a plurality of Canadian (45 per cent) said it should be illegal, and 40 per cent said it should stay legal. Illegal was up by six points, while keep it legal declined by seven.

So, look at the numbers and the trends in totality and what can we take away? Canadians are increasingly favouring stricter gun control, not looser. Support for scrapping the registry is declining, and support shouldn’t be taken as a condemnation of gun control.

UPDATE 3 @ 4:47pm: The Canadian Labour Congress – a key NDP ally over the years – has also got a page up with emails and phone #’s of the 12 specific NDP MP’s, urging folks to contact them and to tell them not to vote for the Conservative bill.