For a fiscal conservative there was a lot not to like in the budget. But whatever else one may say about the budget, one cannot say it was bad politics. Micro-targeted incentives certainly are capable of swinging some votes:
It’s the first time Ipsos-Reid reported the Conservatives, who scored a minority victory 14 months ago, could win a majority.
Grit support plunged to 29% from 34% in a survey conducted a week earlier.
Moreover, the poll indicates the Conservatives have opened up a 10-point lead (43% to 33%) over the Liberals in Ontario…
The sound of Andrew Coyne sobbing in the background….
The sound of Jason Cherniak sobbing in his cheerios
The sound of Stephane Dion learning to say “its not fair” in 7 different multi-culti languages.
Uhhh correction that’s “centrists” 40% and transnational corporate progressives 29%.
“Conservatives” is now a culture group in western Canada and really hhve no federal party that represents their interests or ideology.
I wouldn’t trust ontario to be any part of a conservative majority. I feel, as much as it rankles me, that this is the reason Quebec is getting the we love you treatment this past while. He realizes Quebec will drop its electoral pants for anyone with money and promises where central ontario is just simply to stupid to be trusted. Could it be?
Actually, Andrew Coyne does make a few good points. This budget (from a spending point of view) is worse than all but two of the Liberal budgets from their long haul in power. And, most importantly, there were no across-the-board cuts. It was very liberal in nature…jump through this hoop and you get a cookie. Be a regular person and you get nothing.
Yes, yes, it was politically effective and may go a long way towards securing them a majority next time. But, I thought that the principle of doing anything to get into power (even if it goes against your core values) is a liberal concept.
And there are no indications that the Conservatives will start acting more conservative if and when they do get that majority. Mulroney had two majorities and per capita spending was even higher than Trudeau’s.
I was a Reform-backer because I always felt that there was little difference between the Progressive Conservatives and the Liberals…that the PC were “conservative” only in name.
I thought that Harper and the gang would be more principled and true to the conservative ideal.
I have been disappointed thus far.
I hope the Conservatives earn a majority the next time around just so we can see how they’ll handle themselves without the fear of causing another election. It would be interesting to see to say the least.
Stephen Harper knows the axiom in Canadian politics of which WLM King, Liberal, was the master.
Jimmy Gardiner knew the ropes and used the budget $$$$$$ to rule the West for 25 years.
King’s Law: Walk softly and carry a big Quebec stick.
Here is the result to date:
Conservatives 40% – Liberals 29%
I would like lower taxes and find a lot of the crap in the budget distasteful, too. I especially wanted to see some adult supervision in the Ministry of the Environment – but we got idiotic EcoCar rebates instead.
But this shows that railing at the party is the wrong target. You need to persuade your neighbours why small government and lower taxes would be beneficial rather than big spending and targeted handouts. Stephen Harper already knows, but he can see that the public would rather buy something else.
WL Exactly. It always comes back to the numbers and under this confederation, always will. Western values only last as long as it takes to gain a majority, always will.
The West is on the same old numbers merry go round, pay now, Quebec, or pay later, ontario. The ride never ends, until we jump off.
I have sympathy for AC’s points…..I just dont buy the line that acting like a full blown conservative in a mnority situation will get you the majority you want.
The solutions that Andrew suggests, and we all have our favourites, take a majority to implement so you have the time for the poulace to see
1) The world dosnt end
2) There is actually some medium and long term good to it.
Re the Quebec stuff….well, the “fiscal imblance” seems to be taken of for the moment….goes away as a political issue. If Charest can implement his tax cuts then maybe Quebec can retool its economy so it isnt a perpetual drain.
Re Ontario Conservative….reality is that that Ontario has almost 12 million people so a homogeneous political culture got left behind a long time ago
Ontario has its issues, Harris got some fixed but there will be a time when it will be required again. Finally a surplus but definitely means time for tax adjustments again, downward along with tightening of spenidng.
I fear Kinsella is correct and McGuinty will win, there is no target right now.
Ah, but can the CanWest, Global Ipsos-Reid poll be relied upon?
If accurate, at the very least Harper could force the Senate to pass the Senate reform as well as the law and order legislation that the opposition has been stalling,
or else call the election on those issues.
But even if the conservatives remain in the minority and continue to govern, as long as Dion with his dual citizenship remains the Lib leader,
Harper will more and more be recognized as a true world leader, head and shoulders above ” make easy Alberta money” Dion.
The longer Canadians watch Dion the lower the Libs will sink.
bryceman and WLMR – I think you need to consider that with a minority gov’t, there is no possibility of putting through any genuine conservative ideas in the House. None whatsoever. I repeat – no possibility.
Harper is faced with a leftist majority in the House, made up of the Liberals, NDP and Bloc. He is faced with a leftist majority in the Senate, filled with Liberal patronage appointments. He is faced with a Liberal activist Supreme Court. He is faced with an active MSM brainwashed into socialism.
So, your view that whatever he proposes – which would most certainly be defeated – must be genuinely conservative in tone and temper – is pure romanticism. It would be defeated.
Perhaps you think that a romantic idealism, offering motion after motion of ideologically driven concepts – which would all be defeated in the House and Senate – is a constructive way to govern. It’s brave, it’s the stuff of films, and the hero is most certainly slaughtered on the battlefield. How does that help?
I think differently. The model can be see in Machiavelli’s The Prince, chapter on The Civic Principality. No, Machiavelli wasn’t a cynical evil manipulator but pragmatic. How does a civic (elected) Prince govern? With the use of ‘cunning assisted by fortune’. What’s cunning about the budget? It acknowledges the working family, the middle class, a group quite neglected by the Nobles, ie, the Socialist Natural Ruling Party, the Liberals/NDP.
The Nobles in Canada have governed by appealing to the special interest groups, lifting them to power by patronage – and dependent on Liberal largesse.
The nobles – which includes Mulroney’s pseudo-conservative gov’t – have ruled Canada for over a generation. It’s time to change, but ideas without legislative power are puffs in the wind.
Harper has to get a majority. There is no choice. He has never wavered from his idea of decentralization, less gov’t, etc, etc. But with the currnt House, all his motions are defeated. When Bill Graham was interim leader, it was possible to get Harper’s main points through (GST cut, child care family funds, military etc). But, now with Dion and his constant whipping of his MPs, it’s a dead legislature.
Consider what the Nobles/left are pushing through parl’t. Religious utopianism – idealistic utopian and economically devasting Kyotoism. Refusal to acknowledge the reality of terrorism. And there’s the Senate – holding up the Accountability Act of 10 months, watering it down to near nothing. Refusing to pass the motion limiting terms to 8 years rather than 45 years. On and on –
Harper has to get a majority. That’s what this budget is about – and it is short-sighted to claim that he has ‘lost his ideals’ because he is attempting to achieve this required infrastructure so that he can put those ideas in place.
Not to mention he needs to get a majority soon if only to stop the wasteful and hurtful innudation of bills from the left like ‘Implement Kyoto’, ‘Save the Kelowna Accord’ and the coming-soon ‘Save the Gun Resistry’, ‘Tomorrow is Che Day’ and the ‘Tell the Americans to leave Iraq Act’.
Platform 2006 was about reforming government and restoring social values. It wasn’t a call to fiscal conservatism. I am trustful it’s coming. Harper is not Mulroney although seeing him pal around with him after the election gave me more willies than this budget.
Western Canadian: I was refering to an “ideology” gap between grass roots conservatives and federal parties…this also has existed as long as the political inequity in confederation.
The ideological compromise we have seen in first an amalgamated (Reform+PC=CPC)federal party and now a CPC minority amounts to one thing…the SYSTEM creates the inequity and forces central Canadian policy making on ANY government.
Harper was sent to Ottawa by the west…our numbers are only enough to do this…but it is the east (specifically the socialist states of Ontario and Quebec) which dictate policy to the government…and it makes NO difference if it is a Minority or not….in a minority government a western conservative party is run by the opposition which represents the socialist east….in a majority, the west based conservative party must compromise values and ideology to be elected as a majority in the east.Once elected they have a promised defacto lib-left agenda to produce.
In any event, the key to shifting the political “center” from it’s current perilous position next to socialist statism, is for the general masses of the east to have a political/ideological catharsis and realize small unintrusive government makes them more empowered and wealthier…
…but this is a generational task and will take TRUE consservative governments to provide roll models for them to judge conservative ethics and policy( no I don’t consider Harris’s regime to be conservative…he was just a fiscal conservative running a socialist system)
I think regardless of who is ruling federally the west, and specifically Alberta, should forge ahead in developing their own economic and governing systems locally under the protection of a constitutional firewall….if the east wants to impoverish itself with ridiculous soft soviet regimes and insane socialist economics…be my guest, but there has to be one resistant region of the country that does not drink the Koolaid. One region has to stand as the “control” model in this dark socialist experiment the feds are engaed with.
Alberta has proven small unintrusive government, low taxation and healthy laissez-faire capitalism produce vibrant economies that spread wealth and economic empowerment widely…yet this model is ridiculed in Ottawa’s political elite circles…Wen the status quo Ottawa/Montreal political-media intelligentsia look west, the only thing they see in Alberta are “rednecks”, Fundamentalist Christians”, “Hicks” a honey pot of wealth for greedy socialists to steal and exploit….they miss the point of HOW the wealth got there…Alberta was gifted with resources yes…but not any more than any other province, the difference is in the ownership and management of those resources and the hands-off attitude of government. Alberta is today the model for small conservative goverment, low taxes and laizzes faire capitalism.
Perhaps Alberta will have to be the conservative model while the fedral government contiues to compromise itself down the rabbit hole of socialist economic and public policy stagnation.
WLM and others…Is your dissappointed based on your idealogues? Harper has done what he said he would do. I’m fiscally conservative, always frustrated with the Lib handouts for silly social programs, instead of infrastructure(Why pay them to work when you can hand them cash to stay home.)
Harpers tax credits help families, provincial money is tagged for health, education and infrastructure. That is conservative, and politically strategic.
And those numbers represent approval…looks like 40% of Canadians don’t categorize their lives by political ideals…they are thankful for the way their taxes will be used.Being in tune with Canadians is good Conservative approach, as opposed to the out of touch Libs.
I’ll go along with what ET pointed out above (10:04)……for now.
The conservative revival in the US came with a concerted effort in education. Brain power appllied to issues of the day and pressed in op ed pieces with vigorous populist radio jocks interpreting for the rest of us. To catch the wave that has already begun we need Kate, the western standard, National Post etc. etc. cfra ottawa and speakers, debaters, powerful news analysts, (think fox)
it can be done, is happening, will happen!
This from an Ontario Conservative of early 20th century vintage(remember The Mail and Empire, now there was a paper!)
ET said: “I think you need to consider that with a minority gov’t, there is no possibility of putting through any genuine conservative ideas in the House. None whatsoever. I repeat – no possibility.”
I have heard this apology so long I have to address it definitively ( no disrespect ET this is just how things lay out)
If you read my post you will note that I cite the system and the populous regions of Ontario and Quebec as the culpret….with the easten media as an entrenched political “fixer”.
Now once again: If Harper must turn into a liberal to appease the opposition ( which is primarily Quebec and Ontraio socialists) what will he have to do to pull votes from the opposition to get a majority?
I mean Harper was a man of principle who put his name on the Alberta firewall letter but now spends a gread deal of PR in playing this down. When I saw him come forward to support that constitutional tradition, I had hope for the nation….but that has faded with Harper’s reticence to discuss his western conservative roots with eastern media.
As a minority he is crafting Liberal budgets and policies….to get a majority he will craft liberal election promises and become defacto “Liberal”( or more precisely socialist-statist) in delivering them. Posibly with less of a heavy hand and stalling on implimenting full socialst bureaucratic tyranny, but basically running a Kleptocratic socialist-statist system set up by PET and the Charter.
The other alternative is for Harper to ACT like a Liberal at election and make vague hints at liberal policy then get a majority and gut the system of socialist excess and democratize parliament and the senate…and be hated by the media and defamed and hissed at by every crypto commie in the political landscape untill he is turfed in 4 years. We have never seen this in a government yet.
Harper is using the Mulroney governing model…and that wussi-socialist-pro Quebec patronage-eastern controlled -top-down model is why I left the PCs for Reform 18 years ago.
Minority or Majority you will no longer recognize CPC as “conservative” and certainly not western conservatives. To appease the Ontraio-Quebec voting block, which elects our federal governments, one must offer them the falvour de jour and today that falvor is the one propagated by their degenerate media: a socialist patronage big central government system…it’s what the majority want.
Detoxifying the eastern voting block is a generational task….and they need to see a true conservative government in action to judge the value of conservative policy…they have this now with Alberta but the liberal media smear its success and denegrade western conservatism…but they squabble over the wealth it creates.
As I watch Harper go through his transformations from Jim Hawkes secretary to a Reform MP to a conservative think tank speaker to a CPC leader of an amalgamted party to the PM of a defacto liberal government I have seen his personal values remain intact but his political values have been compromised to the point I can’t tell his administration from a liberal one….just less scandal and theft.
Conservatives have come full circle from Mulroney to reform to Mulroney act II.
WLMR:
I sympathise with a lot (most) of what you are saying. But the problem is that there is a real difference between idealism and the world of real politics. Idealism works best when starting a grassroots organisation like Reform, less well once you get into opposition, as Preston Manning found out, and not very well at all when you are actually trying to govern.
Having said this however, idealism is important. But not as a way to govern in the here and now. The Liberal welfare state idealism took all of the Pearson and Trudeau years to entrench into Canada’s political system. Believe it or not Mulroney started the process of change by bringing government operations into the black during his years in power. Under Trudeau the deficit was used to fund program spending. By the time Mulroney left, the deficit was just the interest on the accumulated debt. Paul Martin slew the deficit dragon simply by: 1) devaluing the Canadian dollar, thus devaluing the debt, 2) Lowering interest rates, thus lowering the actual interest on a significant portion of the debt, and 3) Downloading to the Provinces by cutting transfers, which really are just taxes plundered from the provinces anyway.
No, Mulroney was not an advocate of real change, but he took a few tentative steps in that direction, because by the time he took office the edifice of the Pearson/Trudeau was obviously top-heavy, and beginning to sway in the wind. Manning is the real father of the new Canada that may yet come. I believe Harper will bring about change, but it won’t happen overnight. And until he has a majority, the best he can do is the best he can do within the Pearson/Trudeau system that, like it or not, is Canada’s current system of govenment.
Coming in with a truly conservative “small government, low taxes” budget would only be window dressing at this point, not real change. But with a sizeable majority Harper can:
1) Redraw electoral boundaries.
2) Reform the Senate
3) Democratise the process for choosing Supreme Court Justices.
4) Curb the power of the Supreme Court to change laws.
5) Introduce referendums on major social issues.
6) Begin enacting policies which mitigate against ethnic ghetto multi-culturalism.
7) Begin enacting more free market principles in Canada.
etc, etc, etc….
In short, have patience grasshopper! 😉 One budget is not the real change you are looking for anyway. It would be a band-aid on a gaping ideological wound.
VF said: “WLM and others…Is your dissappointed based on your idealogues?”
Yes, this among other things but primarily the promises Harper made at the leadership and policy conventions to party members and supporters.
Tax REFORM (not didling with numbers) is on stall
Senate/confederal eqity reform
The west is STILL waiting to get “in” to the policy making process in Ottawa.
He has abandoned grass roots party politics and engages in closed door policy “restructuring” aside from the policy mandates given from the party membership.
I see democratic ideals compromised, populist ideals gone out the window…a distancing from western conservative roots/ideals/party memebrs.
I realize as PM he must represent the whole nation but when one part of the nation has been ripping-off and dictating to another part of the nation for decades maybe its time to do what’s right rather than what is politically expedient…..
…..particularly when this part of the nation made you leader and put you in Ottawa.
The west put Harper in Ottawa , not to carve us a larger chunk of the socialist pie like Quebec or Ontario….we just wanted an equal place at the table…that agenda is not only on hold but deeply covered over with a new found pseudo liberal image ( they pass it off as “centrist”)
When we elect a conservative govrnment we want conservative policies…I am on wait and see mode but not optomistic.
Harper seems to be on track to deliver what I mainly want out of his term(s) in power and that is a rebalanced Federation with Ottawa legally required to stay out of Alberta’s (and Quebec’s) turf.
I am on optimistic wait and see mode.
wlmkr – I like your 10:28 analysis – very succinct outline.
Exactly right – the SYSTEM forces any Canadian gov’t to be centralist. But you are ignoring the context. Why are Ontario and Quebec socialist statist centralists? And why is there now a need for change?
I think it’s demographics and economics. Not just the leftists minds of those who live in Ontario and Quebec.
Canada is centralist because, demographically, its population and economy began and were focused in Ontario and Quebec. Around 1940, Canada had a population of about 11 million with 8 million of that divided evenly between Ontario and Quebec. The gov’t was not merely centralist in the sense of being run out of Ottawa but centralist in being focused only on Ontario and Quebec.
Then, the second factor in Canada is the cocooned nature of our economy. We are cocooned within the American economy. Over 85% of our exports go to only one country – a situation unheard of in the rest of the world. Indeed, we get very upset if the US doesn’t purchase our products; we consider it our ‘right’ that they do so. Canada takes no risks; it is non-competitive in the world market. But this limits our economic capacity; we produce only as much as the US will purchase.
Intellectually, we are ‘centralists’. No risks, we rely on others to do the financially costly and time consuming innovations; we simply copy the results and market ‘low price drugs’.
As such, with this focus on non-independence of mind and money,- we’ve chosen a socialist welfare state where ‘all are the same’. This requires heavy taxes, and the loss of an investor class. Canadians don’t invest in Canadian industries and research; we rely on foreign investment and foreign research.
But our population base has changed; the West has opened up. Our population is now 33 million. And it’s no longer focused in Ontario-Quebec. Indeed, Quebec has stalled at 7 million, Ontario is 12 million, but, the West now is larger and more economically dynamic than the Old Couple of Ontario and Quebec. Indeed, the current Quebec election is a belated recognition that they have to move out of welfare statism and become more individualistic and entrepreneurial.
Canada’s ‘tectonic plates’ are shifting and the Old Guard in Ottawa, the Liberal Noble class, is realizing it; they are fighting back – and hard – to retain their control. That’s why Harper has to get a majority.
At any rate – WLMR – I like your outline, but I think a context has to be added.
WL, I do would of like to see more small C things done in the budget but I also am more of a realistic that the PM had no much of a choice in this one. He is slowly moving the populace to the center and I think he is on the right path, I would love to see an election and a CPC majority but only if the Opps bring it down and the budget was not the right place, now law and order,, bring it on.
Joe, I couldn’t agree with you more. Watching Dion in the HoC is pathetic! Sometimes it looks like he is going to break into tears. The West wants in, absolutely! How long is the West going to continue to pay to Quebec “the have not” province? Quebec wants nothing from the rest of Canada but it money!
I too, am unsure that even with a majority, the West will be treated equally with Quebec and Ontario.
WLMR, you are unrelenting. But it sounds more like a pout than a political position. Posturing isn’t limited to the left and discouraged conservatives need to shake their heads a little.
The TORY government has no mandate to push its agenda at all. You are a victim of expectations and regional conceit.
The statement that the West put Harper in is a fatuous falsehood. Sure the budget sucked, at least in terms of a new strategic direction for fiscal policy but the PM simply considered how the majority of Canadians voted in the last election.
Liberalism is the disease, Harper is the cure. It will take years for the medicine to work.
Step one is a majority
you will appreciate this . . .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaE98w1KZ-c
The question is how does the CPC and Stephen Harper make Canada more conservative.
Some wish the CPC to stake out its position, not move at all while expecting the Canadian electorate to come join them. This is as silly as the NDP spinning their wheels, screaming and hollering while never moving from their core voters. Have the NDP achieved anything on the federal scene?
I hear commentators talking about the center being where the Canadian vote is. And that is true. What Harpers sees is the center being a relative definition. Just as a Canadian conservative is much different than an American one, the center in Canada can be redefined. After all, Harper has been confounding his opponents by redefining the issues and co-opting them; Quebec nationhood, the environment etc.
In a short year, the CPC is not vilified as scarey, seen as having a secret agenda, be called inexperienced and undisciplened except by the radicals on the left. He has sidelined the effectiveness of the press at doing this too.
Harper will slowly move the country rightward. Rather than demand the center listen, he will draw them to the Conservatives. The Conservatives will get the center vote but it will be a center defined on his terms not the lefts terms.
enough
WLMR – I think, with all due respect, that you are naive.
You expect Harper to get conservative results while operating within a gigantic governing infrastructure that is, majority, hostile to such a program. Precisely how do you expect this to happen?
You mention Senate reform. Harper’s Accountability Act, which moved the Senate Ethics committee out of Senate control – took 10 months for them to rewrite – and the esteemed Senators removed this clause, insisting on retaining control over their own ethical reviews.
Limiting Senator’s terms to 8 years from 45? It’s a two paragraph motion; the Senate has been reviewing it now for several months – and refusing to pass it.
How about Dion’s leftist ideology? He’s not PM, but since the socialist left is in the majority in parliament, then, he’s been able to get Kyotoism passed, the Kelowna Accord passed, the rejection of Security measures – and so on. All socialist utopian measures – and despite Harper’s rejection of them – our parliament passed them.
So, please inform us. Exactly how do you expect Harper to get anything conservative done, within such an infrastructure?
Further, as it took years for the Left to dissipate, and it isn’t yet complete, it will take more than a couple of years to repair the mess.
The Left is done! The new era will/should be built slowly and securely and I plan to hold my nose as PMSH crafts a mandate for a reformed confederation and a “post modern” Canada punching above its weight again.
Karl: I have had the pleasure of having one of Mulroney’s key regional “generals” as an election planing mentor…I have picked his brains for more than election advice…I have been told many stories of the Mulroney regime that confirmed my suspicions…I was an active PC until I became a Reform activist…Mulroney’s compromised lib-left Quebec-centric status quo socialism regime was my motivator.
Believe me Mulroney COULD have turned the ship of state in his second term if he wanted to…Pearson and Truedough did it with much more precarious majorities….Mulroney had two of the largest majority mandates ever given a conservative PM ( or any PM)…the Libs were down to 2 seats I believe…he had the senate stacked…he was the KING.
He could have set about deconstructing the socialist welfare state and down sizing and removing Ottawa’s unconstitutional incursions into Provincial revenue generators…
Instead, he allowed his Quebec generals and cabinate to run government ( in a status quo way) while he went on 2 personal hobby horses he did not have a mandate for:
One was a pay off to his political/fical backers (CFR cartel)by ramming NAFTA through.
The other was a bid at a legacy piece which entrenched socialist-styled central control in the constitution( Meech and Charlottetown)… the direction-text and structure of which showed me he was a “ideological progressive” who wanted to blur the traditional constitutional division of power between the provinces and Ottawa, centralize power ( like Trudeau socialism) and to entrench Quebec electors as the central controlling parliamentary power.
Fortunately we had Elijah Harper and Preston Manning who saw through this ruse to devolve the provinces powers…and fortunately we had a referendum (that’s the last time the elite will ever let the west have a say in constitutional matters) The tip off to us was the way the corporate Liberals and Dippers were all thrilled with the Mulroney constitutional changes…when you see tri-partisanship between corrupt cartel Liberals and degenerate socilaist greed heads in alignment with a “conservative?” constitutional rewrite, you KNOW your ass is about to be pan-fried by centralized progrssivist elitism.
We turfed their attempt to make Canada a centrailzed kleptocratic state with an entreched unequal politcal advatage for Quebec.
Some conservative!
Now we seem poised for Mulroney actII.
Andrew Coyne either doesn’t get it or he’s off the rails for some other reason. It’s not Conservative enough for some but we are in a minority situation and have to cover all bases.
It’s the perfect budget for the present time and calculated to appeal and appease as their mandate has dictated.
The recent polling is proof the masses are awakening. The big puzzle is why the conservatives aren’t higher with the crap coming down from the Liberals.
Dion looks like he’d like to go home to Mommy, he’s so offended and dejected. He just isn’t ready to play in the big league.
The Liberals are begging for an election, let’s arrange one for them, put them out of their misery. They called elections when it suited them, recall Chretien and Martins elections of convenience.
ET said: “Why are Ontario and Quebec socialist statist centralists? And why is there now a need for change?”
A) Because it benefits them fiscally and politically at the expense of the less populous but more productive regions.
B) Change is needed to stop the alienation of the regions most effected by the rob-Peter-to-pay Paul centraized collectivism that operational confederalism has devolved to.
JRB: Me pit? Pouting is for the disempowered and fools…I never piut I say what I mean and act on those convictions.
That aside, you are a walking talking example of WHY the CPC coalition will eventially fall apart into east and west warring camps ( as it is now to a certain degree)…regional politics are important…they have to be addresed…particularly when different regions have different needs and expectaions for any central government.
I have always said that Canada is too vast in mass and regional political differences to effectively govern from the center or to have any single party represent the diversity of opposing regional politics.
Your attitude and mindset proves the point.
The libs are going to have to continue to squeeze left until the dippers fall off the end of the bench.
ET:
With regard to your post at 10:04am…
…Yes, and cows go “moo.”
Of course any decidedly conservative motions would be soundly defeated. I never suggested that Harper should reverse the country’s course full-throttle. Besides, changing the country’s attitude towards self-reliance can’t be forced with policy…you have to start making people feel good about themselves first…which is a slow and indirect process.
BUT, that doesn’t mean that the Conservatives have to be MORE liberal than the Liberals. You can’t make baby steps towards the right by moving towards the left. And you alienate your base if you try. Policies like those that the Conservative minority are putting forth now only reinforce the notion that there really are no differences between the Liberals and Conservatives when it comes to what they actually do. Only the rhetoric comes across as different.
ET and redux seem to be on opposite, waring sides. I think they are, in a way both correct.
If PHSH is to govern with a majority he has to have support, more or less, across Canada. Some are going to be ticked-off, no matter what. But one thing is for sure. There is no party to the right of the CPC, if it is conservatism not socialism, that you want.
On the other hand, if the centre, especially Quebec, is bent on their Dionistic ways, such as throwing out what so many would call, good gov’t, then we may have a problem. We may soon see if Canada’s cultural differences are just too “diverse”.
It is worth a try though, as Canada is still one of the best places on earth. If it doesn’t work out, well, neither do some weddings.
Politics = compromise.
What would you prefer W.L? No Conservative government, and therefore no chance at a majority and change?
Take the Liberal charter for example. It will need to be amended and the ambiguities clarified, so that it cannot be so recklessly interpreted.
Individual rights must replace much of the collective mumbo jumbo. We don’t even have basic rights such as property rights, that even China is now legislating.
There’s a lot of work to be done. But it certainly cannot be done without a Conservative government attaining a majority. And as distasteful as it may seem, that majority can only come from occupying the middle by pushing Dion’s Liberals further to the left.
That’s reality.
Harper poised for majority; yet what do I read on this thread – budget not “conservative” enough. Tell me, when has any political party been ideologically pure? Even if there has been, have they ever had power? No they haven’t. Very few people vote for ideology. Get over it, conservatives aren’t conservatives. Liberals aren’t Liberals. NDP are maybe, and at 13% in polls.
Ideological (conservative) purity is just another way of saying LPC hegemony.
Am I the only one who is so skeptical of so-called, “poll-numbers” ??
Has anyone ever seen a list of those polled ?? Or the results in raw form ??
Dion’s numbers may NEVER have been over 30%. What is stopping the polling firms,(mostly MSM or firms relying on MSM business), from skewing the #s ?? It is easily done. Just ask those that give the answer they are seeking.
We know the media is hell bent for socialistic gov’t. They even support nut-jobs like Kyoto. What is stopping the polling firms from trying to stampede us into thinking Dion will be next PM, so we had better get on-board. Especially civil servants and those relying on gov’t contracts. Voters also like voting for the winner. Self perpetuating.
And yes, the polling firms have to ‘align’ their numbers with the real ones before a vote. An election could happen any minute, hence the admiting the 40% CPC today.
Remember Dec 05 ?? During Xmas holidays the poll #s majically ‘changed’ and PMSH over took PMPM.
Ya, right. I suggest the media was hanging on to ‘hyping’ a Martin victory as long as they could.
Until polling data is in the public domain I will remain skeptical.
WLMR:
Please don’t misunderstand me. I know that Mulroney was not a true conservative. I was making the point that even he could see that the Pearson/Trudeau edifice was near collapse, and so too tentative half steps to stick a bandaid on a cancer.
I also agree that with his massive majority he could have made real change in his second term, but that he did not. This is not surprising however, because he was not idealogically a true conservative.
So then, what’s the difference between now and then? Then we were in deficit, now we are in surplus. Then real change would have meant real pain. Now, it might actually mean real gain. Then the time was not yet ripe, now it is, almost. All we lack is a majority, and a guaruntee of 4 years of being able to actually govern.
I understand your fear that we are heading for Mulroney part 2. Perhaps I am naive, but I have hope that this is not the case. I sincerely hope that you are reading too much in the way of idealogical change into one budget.
However, having said that, given a choice between Mulroney act 2 and Trudeau act 4, I will take Mulroney any day of the week!
I agree with ET.
Stephen Harper has a whole nation of ‘nanny state baby boomer babies’ to move along. He also has a nest of liberano sponsored immigrants to deal with who were promised and got a welfare lifestyle. They vote.
We are at a crossroads right now, a re-election of a Liberano/Dipper majority would be the end of this nation – the “me,Me” generation would suck every cent out of the country and leave it crippled and worthless for at least a century – if it could even survive.
The msm is blubbering and flaying in their own filth of bolshevism but the ‘me me’s are waking up er..growing up. The thirties generation built and defended this country and left their spoiled children a prosperous future. In our stupidity we squandered our treasure – including our values. We can blame only ourselves for not building this country with children of our own and tax cuts instead of welfare. The country, as a whole, voted to be ‘kept people’ for an entire generation. We must all be thankful that the Western Canadians were always short changed and treated as scapegoats by the eastern Canadians and the Feds – it enabled the west to sustain strength of character and to retain some solid values. Sask., BC, and Man. planted their own implosion bombs by electing Dipper governments; to Alberta, we owe everything. This bothers Andrew Coyne, IMO. Stephen Harper is an Albertan. The Red Tories in the east have a problem with this – the people of Canada do not.
I presently live in the Yukon territory – a luxury welfare plot in Canada – along with ‘none of it’ and NWT. The Liberanos shoveled billions into the territories to populate the north with thousands of overpaid government workers and they shut out entrepreneurs of every ilk. In the 1970s and early 1980s the Yukon was the BEST place in Canada to live if you had energy and adventure in your spirit. The Dippers drove the entrepreneurs to Alberta in the 1980s and replaced that group of people with Dipper type ‘silly servants’; these people have inflated wages and perks but they still do not call the Yukon home. One of the perks is two round trip tickets for themselves and their families per year; to whereever they call home!!!
It is not the people of Quebec and the Merrytimes or Ontario who were showered with $$$, it was the bureaucrats – the people got crumbs from the gigantic economic engine fueled by the province of Alta.
The Liberanos had money because they stole ideas from the Reform Party. The brain-dead members of the Liberano controlled outfit were chosen for their malleable characters. No one with an idea to rattle would sink to the low level of blankness demanded by the Power Corps outfit to even qualify to be a Liberano candidate. Ditto for the Dippers. It was the fine men and women in Stephen Harper’s caucus that kept this country afloat – and now Stephen Harper is Prime Minister.
Stephen Harper has built so many bridges with common sense that he should qualify for and get an honorary Engineer degree.
Canadians are getting restless in their velvet chains – they are starting to resent their ‘slave status’ in all regions of the country. Pablum has lost its flavour – they see their own sizzling steaks in the future and only those of us who feel our own self betrayal for the lost years of our lives will resent Stephen Harper and the New Conservative government. Perhaps Andrew Coyne is one of those – he has some past printed words that he is likely not very proud of, to eat.
Great discussion thread here. Thanks WLM, ET, molar, enough, Karl, irwin, Fred and others.
The Heritage Foundation video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaE98w1KZ-c
looks great. I had just enough time now to view the first ten minutes, but have bookmarked. This one line alone is enough to make it worthwhile: “If liberals’ problem was just stupidity, they would be right more often”
I love the Conservative strategy: “We must spend like Liberals in order to trick Canadians into voting for us so that we can get a majority. Then we can do what we always palnned on doing.”
Someone please explain why this isn’t a hidden agenda.
“planned”
Because it won’t be hidden.
Just as you and all Canadians got to see the hidden agenda in Platform 2006, you’ll get to see the next steps in Platform 2007.
Next election, read the platform. It’ll be like having a crystal ball instead of no balls at all.
And the liberal news rags still say conservatives went erong how rediclous are they?
felis corpulentis : Thanks for the Heritage Foundation link. Watching it now and enjoying it.
jema54 – perfect description. Many thanks.
LBeria- it isn’t hidden because Harper has articulated it in many papers, presentations, speeches. What is ‘it’? Decentralization – which means less federal gov’t and powers and more provincial and municipal powers. More power to individuals, privatization, accountability, family responsibility – all of these have been openly stated, etc.
But WLMR and others of his ilk (Coyne) are completely naive if they think that this agenda can move beyond articulation into actuality simply on the ‘breath of one’s word’.
Again, ad infinitum, you cannot legislate a motion unless it is approved by that blessed House. And Senate. A decentralist motion will not be approved by a legislature that has a socialist majority. The Liberals, NDP and Bloc are socialists; they are a majority. Got it? So, Harper can talk to the wind, and the Socialist Nobles in the House will defeat his motions, and promote their motions. That’s exactly what has happened in the last three months in particular, with the advent of Dion the Socialist Utopian Idiot.
So- Harper can choose to have the Conservatives become utterly irrelevant and reduced to pure ideological rhetoric, as are the NDP and Bloc. These two parties will never govern the country and cannot do anything as or by themselves.
Or, Harper can move to the electorate and ask them for a majority. A brainwashed electorate has to be shown the problems of their socialist welfare slumber – gently, and shown that they can be in charge, they can run their own businesses, can innovate, can be entrepreneurs..etc.
That’s what Harper is doing. He has to get a majority. His options are simple.
Option one would be that he puts forth motions that are only part of his decentralist agenda. Pure conservative motions. Result? Exactly what is happening – the Senate has refused to be accountable, has refused to pass the limited term motion. The House has passed the cult of Kyotoism, the welfare socialism of Kelowna, etc.
Now- how does that help decentralization and conservativism???
Option two – he can do the above, having all his motions flung to the dustbin and having the Socialist NON-GOVERNMENT ruling de facto, and, ‘attempt to educate the public’ by simply talking, talking, about ‘decentralization, small gov’t etc….while the De Facto Government continues to pass these insane Socialist Motions.
Option three – he can try to get a majority, so that he can govern not merely ‘de jure’ but also ‘de facto’.
How is he trying for a majority? Even this, is a conservative focus. He isn’t focusing on identity politics; he’s rejecting multiculturalism and the politics of alienation and group privileges. He’s speaking to working families. They may be ‘ethnics’, they may be members of ‘group identities’ but that’s irrelevant. He’s speaking to all Canadians – as working families. Not, not as members of any culture, ethnicity, colour, language, etc. All Canadians as members of working families. That’s his electorate. That’s where he hopes to get his majority.
Now, WLMR – you still haven’t answered my question. How the heck to you expect Harper to put through the motions we would all like to see put through – within the current House, and Senate at a minimum?
Lets keep pouring the grease of this Liberal slide till their at about the 10% level. Let the knowledge of their crimes dipped in the sin of pride, be carried far & wide.
Dion seems to do the most heavy work in their deconstruction. The Conservatives best offense in fact.
I would like to se an equally fast fall from grace in the leftist political arena.
Taliban Jack may not be as effective as French citizen Dion as a clown, but hey as a martinet no one beats him for pure asininities.
Lets get that majority & see if this Nation can change towards a responsible mature Country. From one run by criminal, dogmatic, contemptuous, thieving, chameleons.
Just my opinion
ET:
“How is he trying for a majority?”
Well, despite all of your sophistry, he is being deceptive if he is going for “option three.” For example, first, he cuts the programs that he disagrees with idealogically. Then, when it is apparent that the public doesn’t approve, he reinstates them, proclaiming “look at the initiatives we’re taking.” The environment is but one example.
Second, he is bribing voters with their own money, a clever trick borrowed from the Liberals and especially useful if it means buying the Quebec vote. Don’t be disingenuous and claim he’s not doing that.
Third, he is ignoring his own claims of superior ethics. The Conservatives are behaving like Liberal governments in the past. You think that this is fine…the end justifies the means, eh? I would question your ethics as well.
In my opinion, one of two scenarios will emerge if the Conservatives win a majority in the next election: They will either make a hard turn to the right and never get elected again, or they will stay the present course and behave like rebadged Liberal in order to stay in power.