Tuesday, 27 November 2012

Mayor Rob Ford Countdown Clock

Instead of checking the news to see when the exact time and date of Rob Ford's removal from office is, just bookmark the Mayor Rob Ford Countdown Clock page!

Stock up and champagne and party horns as the time is fast approaching.

Start the betting pool on whether he will have to be forcibly removed from office or not when the time comes.

Monday, 19 November 2012

Israel-Gaza conflict - Summary of Cease Fire Demands


Summary of demands:
Which seem more reasonable?

By Israel:
- No fighting (well, you can't attack us, but we can attack you)
- We continue to cut off all your trade and travel by water and land with Israel and the rest of the world (except for through Egypt) (but we can continue to trade with and travel to and from the rest of the world)
- You are allowed to get no more weapons (but we can continue to increase our military might)
- We will continue to assassinate your members of parliament (which may include deaths of other civilians in the area)


By Gaza/Hamas:
- Allow us to trade
- Stop assassination bombings
- stop continual raids
- stop attacking our fishermen
See:

Friday, 28 September 2012

Ontario NDP virtually tied with PCs

A new Forum Research  Ontario tracking poll is out. The results show the NDP and PCs in a virtual tie, with the Liberal support continuing to plummet.
Horwath's and Hudak's popularity remains about the same with Horwath way in the lead, but McGuinty's popularity has dropped significantly.

Results of the Sept. 25th poll compared to level of support at the election in Oct. 2011:
PC: 37% (+2%)
NDP: 35% (+12%)
LIb: 20% (-18%)

The NDP has been steadily rising overall since the election, while the PCs have remained about the same. The Liberal support has steadily dropped since the election with an increased drop since last month.

Leader Popularity compared to level of support Jan. 2012:
Andrea Horwath (NDP): 48% (+8%)
Tim Hudak (PC): 26% (no change)
Dalton McGuinty (Lib): 20% (-13%)

If the trends continue, we could be looking at a minority NDP government by the time an election rolls around.

Also of note:
Supporter Enthusiasm:
Very Enthusiastic:
NDP 53%
PC: 48%
Lib: 38%

Regional support:
The NDP and PCs are running about neck and neck in all regions of the province with the PCs having the upper hand in the 905 region and in Eastern Ontario. Liberal support in all regions is a distant 3rd, except in Eastern Ontario, where they are doing a bit better.


Methodology


Tuesday, 18 September 2012

Conservatives and Their Media

Earlier today a friend and I were discussing how the Conservatives get away with telling lies all the time. My answer was this:

The Conservatives have confidence in the mainstream media and their ability to help pull the wool over the eyes of so many Canadians. The fact that we have a majority Conservative government right now is proof of that. So yes, the Cons have confidence that with the help of the majority of the news media in Canada, they can con enough Canadians on a regular basis. Most unfortunate. The difficult task we face is convincing those who have been fooled that they have been fooled.

Wednesday, 5 September 2012

Poll Predicts A Comfortable Win For The NDP's Catherine Fife In Kitchener-Waterloo

In a Forum Research poll, conducted Tues. Sept. 4, 2012, support for the NDP was at 42%, while the Liberal and Conservative support had dropped to 26% each. In their previous poll early in August, the NDP and Liberals were at 30% and the Conservatives were at 34%.

Story from The Record.

This is good news as it keeps the Liberals from getting a majority (Which would allow them free-reign to bring in even worse Harper-Government-esque policies), sends a message to the PCs that their recent track record and ideals have failed with the people of Ontario, and that Andrea Horwath's NDP are on the right track.

UPDATE
Results of the election:
NDP 40%
Con 32%
Lib 24% 

Saturday, 25 August 2012

A BBQ That Rob Ford Won't Enjoy

Mayor Rob Ford to face public Clayton Ruby cross-examination in conflict case

"Mayor Rob Ford has been forced to testify in open court, and face cross-examination from prominent lawyer Clayton Ruby, in a high-stakes conflict of interest lawsuit that could push him out of office.

The lawsuit accuses Ford of breaking provincial law by voting in February on the issue of whether he should have to pay back a total of $3,150 to lobbyists, clients of lobbyists, and a corporation whose donations to his football foundation he improperly accepted.

Ottawa judge Charles Hackland’s Friday decision to make him take the stand means he will face an unusual public grilling from one of the country’s top legal minds.

...

The Municipal Conflict of Interest Act says members of council are to recuse themselves from the debate and the vote on any issue in which they have a financial interest.

The penalties are severe. If a member of council takes part in a debate or vote despite a conflict, the law says the judge “shall” force him out of office and “may” bar him from rejoining council for up to seven years" 


Grill away Clayton!

UPDATE
More details in this Globe & Mail article 

Key segment of testimony so far, from the linked G&M article:
Ruby: You deliberately chose to make the speech you did and vote the way you did?
Ford: Absolutely.
Ruby: And you don’t regret for a moment having done that?
Ford: Absolutely not.

Tuesday, 14 August 2012

Mayor Rob Ford caught reading while driving

Mayor Rob Ford caught reading while driving

Listen (click the link) to Toronto Mayor Rob Ford admit to reading while driving.
This morning, a photo was taken of him reading while he was driving (at a speed of about 70km/hr) on the Gardener Expressway (see photo at bottom of this post).
This appeared on Facebook later in the day
Okay, yes, some people will be upset about how the person who snapped the shot was also doing something they should not have been doing while driving. But the elephant in the room cannot be ignored. Rob Ford admitted to reading while driving - not just in this instance, but - in general. It is something he does regularly. And, he sees no problem in doing this. Doing this, especially in crowded fast-moving traffic, is a danger not only to himself, but to many people in the other cars around him. Lives are at stake here.

The other issue here is the fact that here we have the mayor of Toronto setting a horrible example (again) and just shrugging it off (again) as if it is no big deal. 

I won't go into details about all the other similarly foolish things he has said and done as they are so numerous that you have probably read all about them (unless you live in a cave).

More details here and here.
Photo by Twitter user @ryanghaughton.


Thursday, 12 July 2012

The Oil Industry and Pipelines - What the NDP has been saying all along

Calgary Herald: NDP Leader Mulcair says oilsands access should be opened up, but not with new pipeline

Yes. A better/cleaner/safer plan all around would be to process this stuff in Canada (preferably closer to the source IMHO) and then ship out the refined material.

Also, collect more royalties from the companies that are extracting the oil (the royalty levels are insanely low right now) and use those to help the manufacturing industry across Canada. And make the extractors pay for the clean-up of the waste products and the pollution they create. Makes sense. 

This is more or less what the NDP has been saying all along (although the corporate media and the Conservatives across Canada have been doing a great job of making you think that the NDP is not for this but is instead against the oil industry and "The West". - These  are bare-faced lies about the NDP policy and anyone with more than 2 brain cells can see that these are lies. Observe the polls showing the NDP support continually increasing/staying high, while the Con support keeps dropping. Most Canadians are not dummies).

But the corporate Harper government (a.k.a. looters in suits) doesn't want this - they just want to keep things going as is and damn the consequences (as the corporations will make more money if they don't have to be responsible for the consequences).

And, can we get rid of the subsidies the Canadian government pays to the companies extracting oil from the Tarsands who are making $ billions in profit?!!! These made sense in the beginning to entice companies to begin extracting - but they don't make any sense now that the processes are established already and these companies no longer need the subsidies.

Sunday, 17 June 2012

NDP Rise To 37%, Conservatives Drop To 30%

Since Tom Mulcair was chosen to lead the party back in March, the NDP has maintained a strong support across Canada, which has continued to grow. The opposite is true for the Conservatives. Their support has been steadily dropping. Canadians are becoming more aware of the scandals plaguing them. And the exposure of the omnibus budget bill has not helped the Conservatives either. The Liberals are maintaining their support in the low 20s.

Of Significant Note:
Some things of significant note about the latest poll numbers from Forum Research are that the NDP are now ahead of the Conservatives in the Prairies (43% to 33%), and are tied in Ontario at 34% each.

Previously, the Conservatives led in Alberta, Ontario and the Prairies, while the NDP led in Quebec, BC and in the Atlantic provinces. Now the Conservatives only lead in Alberta, are tied in Ontario, and the NDP leads everywhere else.

Also, Bob Rae's decision to bow out of the Liberal leadership race boosted his approval rating to 40% nationally.

Poll Standings
CANADA
NDP 37%
Con 30%
Lib 22%
Green 5%
Bloc 6%

ONTARIO
NDP 34%
Con 34%
Lib 28%
Green 3%

QUEBEC
NDP 41%
Con 15%
Lib 18%
Green 4%
Bloc 22%

BC
NDP 45%
Con 30%
Lib 17%
Green 7%

ALBERTA
NDP 13%
Con 60%
Lib 18%
Green 7%

PRAIRIES
NDP 43%
Con 33%
Lib 19%
Green 5%

ATLANTIC
NDP 44%
Con 28%
Lib 22%
Green 4%

This poll had a sample size of 1529, which has a margin of error of 2.51%, 19 times out of 20.

Other poll findings:
Favourable support of party leaders:
Tom Mulcair 39%
Stephen Harper 31%
Bob Rae 40%

Net Approval (approve minus disapprove)
Tom Mulcair +8%
Stephen Harper -30%
Bob Rae +8%

Forum Research:
In a sign that Canadians appreciate a clean exit, Bob Rae's approval rating has
increased from one third last month (33%) to 4-in-10 now (40%), and he has a
net approval (approve minus disapprove) of +8. This compares very favourably
with Tom Mulcair's approval of 4-in-10 (39%), and net approval of +8. Both these
scores easily outdistance those for Stephen Harper (31% approval, net approval
-30).


Majority expects government to be defeated in next election
In a measure of perception rather than voting intention, more than one half of
Canadians expect the current government to be defeated in the next election
(53%), while one third expect it to be re-elected (34%). While this is very similar
to levels of Conservative support, it should be noted that just 8-in-10
Conservative voters expect their party to be re-elected (79%), while one tenth do
not expect this to happen (11%). In an exact reversal of opinion, 8-in-10 NDP
supporters do not think the government will be re-elected (79%), and one tenth
think it will be (11%).
 

Trudeau as leader improves Liberal fortunes
If Justin Trudeau were leader of the Liberal party and the election were held
today, while the reduced plurality (32%) would still support the NDP, the Liberals
and the Conservatives would draw even in second place, with just more than a
quarter of the electorate each (28% each). The Bloc would claim the support of
5% and the Green Party of 4%. It is clear that Trudeau draws support (about 5%)
from the NDP.


Justin Trudeau leads all other contenders
When asked to select from a list of contenders for the Liberal leadership, one
quarter of Canadians in general (23%) and one third of Liberal supporters (33%)
pick Justin Trudeau, and no one else comes close. Close to one half of Canadians
(44%) and one quarter of Liberal supporters (26%) don't know who to select.
John Manley (7%) was more popular among Conservative supporters (13%) and
residents of Manitoba / Saskatchewan and Alberta (14% each). Like Trudeau,
Dominic Leblanc (4%) had highest support from residents of the Atlantic (11%)
and Quebec (6%). Gerard Kennedy (5%) was more likely to be selected by
Ontarians and British Columbians (8% each) than those of other provinces. Martha Hall-Findlay was more popular among Albertans (6%). In addition, Marc
Garneau had the support of close to a tenth of Quebeckers (8%).
 

Majority of Liberals approve of Trudeau as leader
When asked directly if they approved or disapproved of Justin Trudeau as leader
of the Liberals, the majority of party supporters (58%) approve, while just one
fifth disapprove (21%). Among the general populace, there is a split in opinion,
and just less than 4-in-10 approve (39%) and just more than a third disapprove
(34%).
Quebeckers had the highest approval for Trudeau as the leader of the Liberal
Party (49%; compared to 40% Atlantic, 39% Ontario, 36% Manitoba /
Saskatchewan, 31% British Columbia, 25% Alberta).


More Analysis:

Dave Akin's On The Hill: Has It Ever Been So Good To Be A New Democrat?
One thing that people are debating in the comments to Dave's post is that Ed Broadbent had 40% support in between polls back in 1986, but that dropped significantly when it came to election time and the NDP remained in 3rd place. The major differences here are that there was a huge rise in support for the NDP before the most recent election, at which time the NDP became the official opposition with a large number of seats, and that support for the party has pretty much maintained since that time.

Saturday, 16 June 2012

Andrea Horwath Asks McGuinty And Hudak To Meet To Work On The Budget This Weekend

You would think that the premier would do this if he was really interested in making things work and doing his job. This shows that Andrea is serious about making parliament work for Ontarians.

NDP Leader Andrea Horwath is asking both Dalton McGuinty and Tim Hudak to meet this weekend to ensure passage of Ontario’s Budget.
 
“The people who sent us here last fall want us to focused on their jobs, their health and the economy, not another campaign. We can spend the next four days getting real results here and avoid four weeks on the campaign trail,” said Horwath. ”Every party Leader has said they don’t want a needless election. I know I don’t. I know we can make this work.”

It has been less than 10 months since Ontarians sent a minority government to Queen’s Park. In that time, New Democrats have been working hard for real results that protect local hospitals, create new childcare spaces and ensure fairness by stopping corporate tax giveaways and enacting the NDP Fairness Tax on high income earners.


Horwath noted that all parties are seeking changes to the government omnibus bill and a total of 214 amendments have been proposed by all three parties.

“We all agree this Bill can be improved. We all agree we don’t want to hit the campaign trail. 

There’s too many important challenges facing families to waste time on a needless election,” said Horwath.

http://ontariondp.com/en/andrea-horwath-hopes-to-meet-with-mcguinty-and-hudak-to-get-budget-passed

Dean Del Mastro - The Hits Keep On Coming

Dean Del Mastro is Harper's Parliamentary Secretary. He is also the point man for the Cons in dealing with the election fraud scandal. He is currently being investigated for cheating on election expenses (if found guilty he could face 5 years in jail).

Now, it has been discovered that there appears to have been some illegal contribution activity towards Del Mastro's campaign.

So far, the guilt here points to Dean's cousin, David Del Mastro, and the people who were paid to make additional contributions for David. But, there is no evidence (yet) that Dean knew of this contribution plan.
 
Excerpts from The Ottawa Citizen: Employees linked to cousin’s company each gave $1,000 to Del Mastro campaign:

The Elections Act prohibits donors colluding with others to “circumvent” the prohibition against an individual donor giving more than that amount to a candidate in an election.

Elections Canada records show that the Peterborough Conservative Electoral District Association received 12 donations in the amount of $1,000 each, dated Sept. 19, 2008, from people with links to the company, as described in the former employee’s statement.

Then, on Sept. 26, Del Mastro’s campaign received another seven donations of $1,000, also from people who were friends of Deltro employees, or friends or family, according to the former employee. Another friend of a Deltro employee donated $1,000 on Sept. 25.

Most of these donors are listed with addresses in Brampton or Toronto — nowhere near Dean Del Mastro’s Eastern Ontario riding of Peterborough.
...
 
... three donors to Del Mastro’s campaign or riding association, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, say they were asked to make $1,000 donations and were reimbursed by Deltro for the full amount plus a $50 bonus.

“It was put, ‘We need to find some people to make $1,000 donations,’” said one former Deltro employee.

Numerous sections of the Elections Act forbid donors from exceeding the individual limit on donations by concealing their donations and forbid others from helping to conceal the real source of a donation.

In a statutory declaration produced at the request of the Citizen and Postmedia, the former employee said David Del Mastro approached the then-employee and said he wanted him to make a large monetary donation to his cousin’s campaign.

The former employee signed the declaration before an Ontario Commissioner of Oaths.

The former employee was asked to make a donation of $1,000 of personal funds and was assured the company would provide reimbursement for the same amount with a “$50 bonus,” the declaration says. The donors could also claim the donation as a deduction on their tax returns.

Employees were also asked to enlist friends or family to make similar donations, the former employee said.
...
He [David Del Mastro] said it was reasonable to believe that his employees volunteered to each give $1,000 to a candidate running for election in a riding three hours away.


Amazing. 

Ontario Budget Attempts to Privatize Public Transit and other Public Services

From TTC Riders site:

Just as we savour our victory in winning back four Light Rail Transit lines for Toronto, an even greater threat is presenting itself—two provincial government initiatives that may foster privatization of our public transit systems. They are:

1) Schedule 28 (The Government Services and Service Providers Act, 2012), which is a section of the provincial government’s Budget Bill 55 that goes for a final vote at the Legislature this Wednesday, June 20th.

There is still opportunity for an amendment to eliminate Schedule 28 this Monday, during the meeting of the Standing Committee on Financial and Economic Affairs. We can call or email an MPP today and Monday morning and ask them to oppose Schedule 28. Here is why:

Section 28 will give a new Cabinet Minister sweeping power to authorize contracting out or privatization of any and all Ontario Government Services, with no requirement for transparency or accountability—even if this contradicts the mandates and regulations of other ministries. These measures will also apply to local municipal services and agencies. Concerns are compounded by Ontario’s obligations under international agreements, such as GATS, CETA, and NAFTA, which may prohibit favouring local contractors over international bidders. In addition, once a service is contracted out, restoring public ownership may be prohibited. (Here is a legal opinion on the Provincial budget bill that expresses many of these same concerns.)

 WHAT YOU CAN DO TODAY:

  • Call or email your MPP. Here is a link which will give you their name and contact information when you enter your postal code. 
  • Contact members of the Standing Committee on Financial and Economic Affairs and ask them to vote for an amendment to eliminate Schedule 28. Here is a list of the members of the Committee and the Committee Clerk's contact info:
                         
    Chair                Bob Delaney                Liberal              Mississauga - Streetsville
    Vice Chair        Teresa Piruzza            Liberal               Windsor West
    Members         Victor Fedeli                 PC                    Nipissing
                            Cindy Forster               NDP                  Welland
                            Monte McNaughton     PC                    Lambton-Kent-Middlesex
                            Yasir Naqui                  Liberal              Ottawa Centre
                            Michael Prue              NDP                 Beaches – East York
                            Peter Shurmen             PC                   Thornhill
                            Soo Wong                   Liberal             Scarborough - Agincourt
                          
    The Committee Clerk is Valerie Quioc Lim. She can be reached at
    416-325-7352 and can be sent messages for distribution to the Committee at her email: Valerie_quioc@ontla.ola.org. (I've bolded the Toronto MPPs.)

2) The Province and Metrolinx's handling of the four approved Light Rail projects opens the door to privatization of financing, project management, and potentially ownership and operation of these new transit lines. Privatized transit has been a disaster around the globe. We need to remind our MPPs of this to ensure we don't repeat the mistakes other cities have made privatizing their public transit systems. (Here is a short youtube video on the dangers of privatizing public transit created by the Public Transit Coalition in 2010.)

At it’s April 25th meeting, Metrolinx decided to take project management away from the TTC and implement work in the context of a public-private partnership with one large company. TTC staff voiced their concerns with this approach at their May 30th meeting, while the Commission quietly endorsed Metrolinx's approach.

In addition, here is what acclaimed author Taras Grescoe reports about Vancouver's Canada Line in Straphangers, his comprehensive new book about transit systems in 12 cities of the world:
  • The Canada Line to the [Vancouver] airport … was the first major piece of transit infrastructure in North America to be built with a public-private partnership, an initiative many commentators say was plagued by corner-cutting. Three stations had to be eliminated from the planned route, and the station platforms … were too short to allow future expansions. Thanks to cost overruns, the provincial government will be compensating the private company that operates the line with payments up to $21 million a year until 2025.
Finally, an opinion piece in the June 5th Toronto Star by TTCrider Joell Vanderwagon, titled, Premier should tame Metrolinx beast sets out the details and dangers of the situation.

There is still time to stop this takeover. Stay tuned for actions that can be taken to address our concerns with this approach to building the desparately needed LRT network.

For More and Better Public Transit,

Jamie Kirkpatrick, Public Transit Campaigner
Toronto Environmental Alliance

Andrea Horwath's Message To The Premier - Video

Watch the video here:
http://ontariondp.com/en/horwath-to-premier-stop-election-threats-and-pass-budget

Queen’s Park - New Democrat Leader Andrea Horwath called on the Premier to stop the election threats and work with all parties to pass the Budget.

“I want to spend the next four days working to pass the Budget. It’s disappointing that the Premier wants to spend the next four weeks trying to win back a majority,” said Horwath. “I want to keep working here to pass this Budget so parents can get the childcare they need and Ontario’s richest will pay their fair share. I plan to keep my word and pass the Budget, and I hope the Premier will keep his word and do the same.”

“Making minority government work is hard work. It won’t happen if we threaten to hit the campaign trail every time we hit a bump in the road,” she added.

Yesterday, Premier McGuinty threatened to call an election because a government committee had passed amendments to a 300 page omnibus bill connected to the Budget. New Democrats have committed to passing the Bill but are addressing serious concerns raised by the public. For example, Ontario’s Ombudsman says parts of the Bill will lead to “erosion oversight”. Dr. David Suzuki says other sections, “reduce the level of protection and undermine public management of cherished forests, lakes, and rivers and the immeasurable benefits they provide.”

“Nobody said making the Legislature work is easy.  But that is the job that Ontario gave us,” said Horwath. “My door is always open to discuss issues with the Premier and to work with all parties to tackle Ontario’s challenges. I hope the Premier sees reason and doesn’t call an election no one wants.”

Friday, 15 June 2012

Fact Check On The Ontario Budget Agreements Between The NDP and the Liberals

Premier Dalton McGuinty has been saying that Andrea Horwath and the NDP have reneged on a deal. This is completely false.

QUEEN’S PARK — Andrea Horwath and the Ontario NDP have been clear that Bill 55 has serious problems. From the day following the introduction of the budget New Democrats have said they would make amendments to the budget.

“Horwath left the door open to her party offering additional tweaks to the budget in future readings and amendments in committee.”  CBC.ca, 23 May, 2012

“But Horwath said the New Democrats only “were committed to allowing the process to go forward,” so that it could be further scrutinized and amended…

“I’ve been clear from Day One that I want to see some scrutiny of that budget bill — it’s 330 pages long, it’s a significant piece of legislation that has some serious consequences and our job as opposition is to scrutinize that bill,” she said.  CBC.ca, 24 May, 2012

“’This budget has very little to offer,’ NDP Leader Andrea Horwath said, adding it ‘falls short on key fronts’… her finance critic Michael Prue suggested the party may try to recraft bill more to their liking through amendments.”  Timmins Daily Press, 28 March, 2012

“[T]he government has been forced to make this Liberal budget a little more fair for everyday Ontarians, but New Democrats know very well that this budget still falls very short for the people of this province.”  Andrea Horwath, Hansard, 24 April, 2012

“All bets are off though for votes on the actual budget legislation, which Horwath said her party may well try to amend further.”  The Barrie Examiner, 25 April, 2012

“The people who elected us want us to keep working on the challenges that they’re facing… Basically, they want us to do our jobs, not rubber-stamp a 300-page omnibus bill before people have a chance even to look at it.”  Andrea Horwath, Hansard, 28 May, 2012

“She [Horwath] said she made it clear during a meeting with Premier Dalton McGuinty and their chiefs of staff that she intended to call for public hearings on the budget bill and propose amendments.”  Globe and Mail, 24 May, 2012

http://ontariondp.com/en/fact-check-ndp-problems-with-bill-55-are-old-news

Thursday, 14 June 2012

Olivia Chow's Budget Speech


The Conservatives are pushing their Trojan Horse budget bill through Parliament in a reckless manner. But worse than mocking our democracy is the devastating effect this bill will have on families, Olivia Chow points out in her speech.

Olivia on the Conservative Budget:


What does a job mean to the average Canadian? It means earning a salary where food can be placed on tables. It means the rent can be paid, it means the mortgage can be met on time.

It means that families can earn enough to provide subsistence to their children.

When a person loses a job, it can be devastating. For some people, a loss of self confidence, self esteem. A loss of friends, a community of working colleagues.

In the Conservative budget we are debating tonight, we are really talking about the lives of the 43,000 Canadians who will lose their jobs because of this budget.

43,000 Canadians, workers, who will no longer have money to contribute to the economy. They will suffer the humiliation of being laid off. Some will lose their houses, other will suffer depression. A few may not recover from being unemployed, or ever be able to find a job again.

Some lives will be destroyed.

43,000 Canadians are the causalities of this terrible budget.

43,000 is the number quoted by the parliamentary budget officer in his analysis of this budget. On April 26th, the parliamentary budget office confirmed that this budget will slow Canada’s economic recovery. He confirmed that when combined with prior cuts there will be a total of 103,000 jobs lost. About a third from this number are from the public sector, the rest from the private sector.

The PBO’s numbers point to the fact that this budget will create a significant drag on our economy.

We are talking about the lives of over one hundred thousand workers.

This budget will induce an overwhelming increase in unemployment doing little to create jobs

What are the implications of this budget?

It is a job cutting budget.

It is a job reduction budget.

It is a job loss budget.

In addition, the employment insurance clauses in this budget will make matters worse.

The poor soul who lost his job will get a few e-mails a day, in fields that are not related to his experience, for job offers that are nowhere near his community. To add on to the stress of not being guaranteed a job, the job that he may have previously been doing could easily be offered to one of the 200,000 temporary workers coming into this country every year.

These temporary workers will be paid 15 percent less than the community rate. So instead of 10 dollars an hour, the temporary worker will get paid 8.5, depressing the wages for everyone else.

This budget also repeals the Fair wages and Hours of Labour act, which will allow employers to undercut good wages for construction workers engaged in projects funded by the federal government. An act created in the 1930s to set minimum standards for wages and hours of labour. That is now gone.

There are 1. 4 million Canadians out of work. The number is much worse for young people. At this time, on this day, thousands of young Canadians are looking in vain for summer jobs, for any jobs, but there aren’t just enough jobs out there.

The jobless rate for young Canadians are at a high of 14 percent. This means that one or two out of every ten individuals looking for a job will not be able to find one.

Then there are those who have given up hope of finding a job.

If you are a woman, who may have raised a family and wanting to come back to the employment market, good luck. Or if you are a new immigrant trying to find your first job in Canada in your own field. Good luck. Or you have a slight disability, you are going to have a tough time in today’s poor labour market.

The result to this budget that has just amended the employment equity act so that it will no longer apply to federal contractors, is a direct attack on the four designated groups in Canada that includes Aboriginal peoples, women, visible minorities and persons with disabilities.

We know that the 100,000 Canadians who will lose their jobs are the losers of this budget. This means that there are 1.4 million of unemployed workers who will continued to struggle looking for a job.

Who then are the winners of this budget?

Certainly the CEO of all the oil and gas companies are big winners.

Like the CEO of Suncor, Richard George, who earned $9.1 million last year, on top of his $ 3 million of bonuses and shares of his company.

And when he retires, he gets… wait for it, how many millions for his pension?! $26.6 million.
So average seniors who have to wait two more years for their pension, losing thousands of their tax dollars when they need them the most, but not the top 1 percent. The top CEOs salary when up 6 percent in 2011, and 13 percent in 2010. An average of over $5 million increase in salary alone.

They will earn even more because this budget gives them even more – more profit and shares as they don’t have to worry about the environmental degradation they inflict.

These multinational companies don’t even have to do any environmental assessments. They don’t have to go to the national energy board and submit reports and facts and data, because the conservative cabinet will just give them card blanche to develop as much as they want.

In fact one third of this so called budget bill is dedicated to environmental deregulation. It repeals the Environmental Assessment Act, it gives minister discretion over major pipelines. It will certainly help the Enbridge CEO Patrick Daniels who racked up $8 million last year.

The environmental degradation caused by this budget is going to be so bad, that the government doesn’t even want the public to find out. That’s why the Environment Round Table is eliminated. That’s why the Kyoto Implementation Act is repealed so Canada is no longer required to report on its emission.

With all that has been said, the Budget Bill C-38 is a bad bill all around. It is a bill that will kill jobs, ruin the environment, punish the unemployed and senior citizens while all mean while making those who are rich even richer.

Statement by NDP Leader Andrea Horwath on the 2012 Budget

http://ontariondp.com/en/statement-by-ndp-leader-andrea-horwath-on-the-2012-budget

“Every day since the election, I’ve worked hard to make minority government work. I’m proud of what we’ve been able to achieve.


When discussing the Ontario’s Budget with the Premier, I made it clear that I would not rubberstamp the government’s 300 page omnibus bill.


I made a commitment to ensure passage of the Budget and I will keep my word.  I also made a commitment to the people of Ontario, and the Premier, to make that Bill better at the committee stage.


Now the Premier is threatening an election. I am disappointed: I expect the Premier to keep his word.

People don’t want an election at this time. I don’t want an election at this time.


New Democrats have worked hard to make minority work. I want to keep working hard to ensure that funding flows to daycare centres that need it, that key health investments are made and that the new Fairness Tax on high income earners provides the province with much needed revenue.


My door is always open to discuss issues with the Premier and to work with all parties to tackle Ontario’s challenges. I hope the Premier sees reason and doesn’t call an election no one wants.”


......................................................................

McGuinty is going back on his word and is threatening to call an election over the budget. He seems to have forgotten that he has a minority government.  He needs to work with the other parties to come up with something agreeable enough to pass the budget. If he wants to try to bulldoze through a bad budget it's just not going to work. Grow up McGuinty.

Andrea Horwath never agreed to rubber stamp the proposed Ontario budget. She agreed to not block the motion for the budget if the Liberals would agree to some terms. They agreed. But McGuinty assumed that this meant that the NDP would support the budget vote. No, that is another stage of negotiations. Liberals, you need to come back to the table in good faith with a better budget, or be willing to work with the NDP to make a better budget.

The PCs have flat out said they will not try to work with the Liberals to get a budget they like. They have turned their backs on parliament and the people of Ontario. The only ones left at the table are the Liberals and the NDP. Now the Liberals are turning their back on the NDP, parliament, and the people of Ontario.

What a lot of people think of Stephen Harper right now

This picture from the This Is Not My Government Facebook Page, is currently going viral on Facebook (at least).



Considering the history of his Conservative government, and the current destruction of Canada he is pushing through parliament with his omni-mess budget bill, it is no wonder that this picture is popular.


Monday, 11 June 2012

Opposition Reacts To Speaker's Ruling On Budget Bill



Earlier today from Nathan Cullen, NDP House Leader:
(from MaCleans.ca: C-38: 'Mr. Speaker, let us do the right thing')

Earlier today, NDP House leader Nathan Cullen stood in the House to respond to Elizabeth May’s point of order. Marc Garneau, for the Liberals, and Peter Van Loan, for the Conservatives, responded yesterday. The Speaker says he will get back to the House in “due course.”
Below, the text of Mr. Cullen’s remarks.
Nathan Cullen: Mr. Speaker, I rise today with respect to the point of order that was raised by the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands a number of days ago. We have now heard from the Liberal Party and the government and New Democrats want to add our voice to the conversation in, hopefully, a timely and somewhat brief manner.
I rise in support of the motion by the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands with respect to her concerns and the concerns shared by many of us in this place about the manner in which the government as moved Bill C-38, the omnibus budget implementation act. There are a number of points that my friend made, some of them, we would suggest, stronger than others for your purview, Mr. Speaker, but on the central theme we find ourselves in agreement.
On many of the concerns that were raised, you have heard from the official opposition New Democrats in many forms throughout question period, public commentary and in conversations in the House with you, Mr. Speaker, on the nature and form of the bill and the concerns we have and that we share with Canadians of its effect on members of Parliament to do our jobs. This is why I appeal to you directly, Mr. Speaker, in the decision that you have to make because, ultimately, it is your choice in the way we conduct ourselves as members of Parliament and the House conducts itself.
Let me take care of one point right away that the government has raised as a measure of defence of the process that we are engaged in with this more than 400-page budget implementation act, extending over more than 700 clauses, affecting as many as 70 acts of Parliament, either revoking them entirely or modifying them significantly. We have never seen the scale and scope of a bill like this before in parliamentary history, from our purview and the purview of experts who have watched this place over many years. Therefore, let us do away with the idea that the government believes that having a number of hours of debate either here or in committee has somehow satisfied the test that Canadians and parliamentarians understand what is in this act. That is, frankly, not the case. It is also the case that it is almost impossible to understand all of the implications that have been brought in this act because the government is withholding certain pieces of information, which we will bring to your attention in days to come.
The first point that the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands raised was around the fact that there is no central theme to the bill, thereby making it admissible or detrimental to Parliament and parliamentary democracy. The second point raised was that there was little or no link between the budget itself and what the government has called the budget implementation act. In passing conversation with somebody not as familiar with this place as members are, a Canadian would assume that a budget implementation act would be explicitly linked to the budget by its name and form and yet we find within the budget implementation act many pieces of government policy that are never mentioned at all. One example is the removal of Canada from the Kyoto protocol. There is no mention of this in the budget whatsoever, no mention of any aspects of climate change policy or anything to do with that particular act of Parliament, and yet in the budget implementation act there are a couple of lines that remove Canada from that international treaty.
Aside from concerns about whether one agrees or disagrees with the government’s intentions with respect to climate change and its lack of actions, the point has to be made that if a government is introducing a budget implementation act with all sorts of measures that have nothing to do with the budget itself, it becomes a budget act in name only, but in the actual function, the government is piling in a number of initiatives, policies and new directions for the government that should, in their proper stand, be alone and independent for discussion for MPs and the Canadian public.
The intervention by my friend in the corner is to simply suggest that for members of Parliament to be able to do our jobs, we need to be able, in good conscience, to hold government to account. Her third point was that the bill is not ready and imperfect and she made a number of interventions on that, which I will not touch on too much.
To your role in this, Mr. Speaker, ultimately you are the arbitrator of this place and the defender of our privileges and efforts as members of Parliament to do what Canadians send us to Parliament to do, which is to hold government to account. That is not simply the role of opposition members. So too is it the role of government members in this place. They too are encumbered with the effort to hold government to account at all times.
If we remember parliamentary history, there was a time in this country that when an MP was elected and then needed to be placed in cabinet, they actually had to run in a byelection because their role had fundamentally changed from one in which they were defending the government’s policy, that is in cabinet, as opposed to sitting as a member of Parliament regardless of party affiliation. That role is fundamentally different.
The concern that we have is twofold. We have seen a trending of increasing cynicism from Canadians towards politics in general and towards this—
Bob Zimmer: NDP not Conservatives.
Nathan Cullen: —place in particular. I thank my friend from Prince George—Peace River for his intervention, but it was most unhelpful.
In the growing cynicism that Canadians feel towards our politics, it is—
Bob Zimmer: You are welcome. You are welcome.
The Speaker: Order. I will just ask the member for Prince George—Peace River to let the opposition House leader make his point, and then we can move on orders of the day.
Nathan Cullen: Mr. Speaker, I think confirming my concerns about the cynicism growing towards politics is that when attempting to make a point in Parliament that is both sound and reasoned, it is difficult to do it without being heckled from the government side.
My point is this, that all members of Parliament have a duty to the people we seek to represent as well as we can to hold the government of the day to account. This bill encumbers that ability. It makes it difficult, if not outright impossible, for members to do our job.
This, Mr. Speaker, is your role. I do not for a moment suggest that this is an easy role for you to perform on a daily basis, not just in question period as we attempt to have some sort of civility and decorum, but also throughout Parliament’s deliberations over important pieces of legislation.
It cannot be understated how critical this legislation is, how wide-sweeping and profoundly impactful this bill will be on the lives of Canadians, from taking $12,000 away from seniors as they attempt to retire after long service to this country and building our economy, to removing and fundamentally altering environmental legislation and gutting the protections, taking environmental assessments of major industrial projects from between 4,000 and 6,000 assessments a year to perhaps as few as 20 and 30 a year.
The role of MPs is to hold the government to account. The role of the Speaker is to defend this place and defend this institution.
Our point is that if there is no, or little, link between the budget and the budget implementation act, we continue and actually aid that cynical trend Canadians feel towards their politics and their politicians, that the break between who we represent and their hopes and visions for the future is more profound when governments enact bills like this.
What signal do we send to them if we say that an omnibus bill of this wide a scope and scale is permissible, acceptable and even favoured? Can we not imagine a day, and I think of Speaker Lamoureux’s point in 1971, if we want to go back, where there is no point of return, when governments now seek, through omnibus bills, through Trojan horse bills, to move one, two acts of Parliament a year and put absolutely everything into those acts, that Parliament can sit for 20 days, get through 2 bills and that is it. Accountability is impossible under such a scenario, reforms to immigration, reforms to the oversight of the Auditor General, transparency and accountability.
For a Parliament to sit through two omnibus bills a year is perhaps what the government may be seeking, but is fundamentally against the spirit and nature of this place in which we come together to discuss bills before the House and try to seek to improve them, amend them.
Know this, the government is suggesting that in those 400-plus pages the bill is perfect incarnate and not a comma, not a period needs to be altered. At three various times, just in this Parliament, the government has had to modify or completely scrap their own legislation when it faced evidence and pressure from Canadians. So three times on separate stand-alone bills, the government has had to fundamentally alter themselves.
Last night we had our 25th vote on closure in this place since the government was elected to its majority. We now have the largest and most complex omnibus bill in Canadian history, and the lack of accountability in this is breathtaking.
We believe that there is a pattern of language in this and a very dangerous one. We believe that from the beginning of this process, the official opposition has attempted to work with the government to break this bill into its component parts to allow Canadians to see the aspects of the bill and understand what the implications would be, because that is our job.
From the beginning we have reached out to government and said “Do the right thing. Split this into bills.” We have quoted, and you have heard me, Mr. Speaker, quote back to the Conservative Party their own principles with respect to omnibus bills, to closure motions, to Trojan horse legislation, that when they held the seats of opposition, they strongly stood for the principle that this place should be accountable to Canadians, that governments should be accountable to Canadians.
We have used their own arguments and words, not our own. We do not expect the government to be swayed by what I say here today, but we thought, we assumed that the words and principles of the Prime Minister, the Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism and the Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages would mean something powerful enough to them that they would actually pause and be swayed by their own arguments and principles.
What happened to those principles? There is a certain seeking of convenience from the government, that it finds this whole process difficult or annoying.
This process that we engage in as parliamentarians is critical and essential, not an inconvenience.
We feel no remorse for the government, that it will now face as many as 500 to 1,000 amendments on this piece of legislation in the days to come. It built a piece of legislation that now allows this to take place. We warned the government of this from day one and gave it an alternative.
We now see the motion from the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands that says this bill has serious flaws and contentions and in, fact, undermines what this place is about. We find that she has sound reasoning in this and that as Speaker and in your role as an impartial observer and arbitrator of this place that we must have pause. We must send signals to the government from time to time that, yes, while it has the votes to do this, it does not have the moral superiority and the grounds on which to stand on because Canadians did not give the current government, or any government, a mandate to do this kind of thing. Canadians never vote a government in to say that, “You will govern by fiat. You will disregard the democratic process and the open and transparent need for conversation.” Because, ultimately, that is what Canadians are about: seeking consensus; seeking the middle ground; seeking some sort of way to live together as we have, harmoniously, for so many years.
Mr. Speaker, let us do the right thing. Let us make this thing a proper piece of legislation.

Sunday, 10 June 2012

Doug Ford + foot + mouth - brain =

Today on the Rob and Doug show. Doug Ford (speaking to Rob):

“They’re so many great teams, I wouldn’t want to pick one over the other. I guess (in the) Euro, you go back to the ancestors — boy, we go back quite a ways, but I’m not too sure — is there any WASPy teams on there? We’re just Canadian,” he said with a laugh. “Anyways — well, you’re married to the Polack, so you gotta cheer for the Polish team.”
....
Here's the best part (in reference to his Polish comment):
Doug Ford: “I didn’t realize it was derogatory."

Then, later in the show:
Doug Ford joked that homeless people should be given plastic bags to sell outside stores after Toronto’s bag ban comes into effect

From
Toronto Star: Councillor Doug Ford apologizes for using ‘Polack’ to describe Mayor Rob Ford’s wife

More Doug + foot + mouth - brains quotes here - from the same day on the show. Listener Mel has a good point that the mayor and Doug did zero preparation going into council to try to get the 5 cent bag tax stopped, so much of the blame of how things turned out must lie with them. Doug still has no clue and proceeds to put his foot in his mouth with his response to listener Mel.

Conservatives Opening A Door To The Spreading of Hatred In Canada

Bill C-304: Hate Speech Clause's Repeal Gives White Supremacists Rare Moment Of Glee

White Supremacists might be happy about this, but the purpose of removing this clause was to allow the Christian Right to further spread hatred against the the gay community, same sex marriage and a woman's right to choose to have an abortion. The Christian Right has been pushing for changes like this (removing this clause of the Human Rights Act) for years in order to spread their hatred.

From Marci McDonald's The Armageddon Factor: (2010, p. 276 hardcover edition): Indeed, as Christian nationalists ... vent their views in the unregulated ether of the Internet, their chief worry is  a complaint filed against them with one of the country's assorted human rights commissions, which have become the religious right's new bete noirs - the latest gatekeepers of balance and secular humanism forcing Bible believers to measure their words.

The Christian Right has been part of the Harper Conservative government for years now and are a core supporter of this government. To maintain this support, Harper has to continue to open doors for them. In an effort to make it look to the rest of the public like his government is not pushing for draconian measures, he is getting his MPs to introduce controversial legislation as private members bills. He and his ministers may also claim that they are not interested in supporting them. But make no mistake, his government is 100% behind these private members bills.

From the CBC article Should The Human Rights Act Forbid Online Hate Speech?:
The Canadian Bar Association says that promotion of hatred is a "social evil" that has increased with the proliferation of the internet, and that the standard for wilful promotion of hatred in the Criminal Code is very difficult to prove. The CBA supported "retaining section 13 as a useful tool," but had reservations about the punitive fines. (PDF file)

Monday, 28 May 2012

Federal NDP Continue To Edge Towards A Majority Government

The latest Forum Research poll (Forum Research results, National Post story) shows the NDP in the lead nationally, in Quebec, Atlantic and BC, and almost tied with the Conservatives in Ontario and the Prairies. 
The only province that the Conservatives hold a strong lead in is Alberta.

Poll standings:
Canada
NDP 36%
Con 32%
Lib 20%
Green 6%
Bloc 5%

Ontario
NDP 34%
Con 35%
Lib 25%
Green 5%

Quebec
NDP 40%
Con 18%
Lib 14%
Green 5%
Bloc 21%

BC
NDP 40%
Con 31%
Lib 18%
Green 10%

Alberta
NDP 16%
Con 61%
Lib 15%
Green 6%

Prairies
NDP 37%
Con 38%
Lib 17%
Green 7%

Atlantic
NDP 51%
Con 22%
Lib 24%
Green 3%

This poll had a sample size of 1836, which has a margin of error of 2.29%, 19 times out of 20.

Other poll findings:
Favourable support of party leaders:
Tom Mulcair 41%
Stephen Harper 33%
Bob Rae 33%

Net Approval (approve minus disapprove)
Tom Mulcair +10%
Stephen Harper -26%
Bob Rae -5%

Forum Research: "One third approve of the job Stephen Harper is doing as Prime Minister (33%), stable from last month (34%), while one third also approve of the job Bob Rae is
doing (33%) and this is down slightly since last month (35%). NDP leader Tom
Mulcair's favourables are at 41% and this hasn't changed. In terms of 'net
approval' (approve minus disapprove), Mulcair is at +10, while Harper and Rae
languish in the negative numbers (-26 and -5, respectively). Harper's low net
approval rating is due to high levels of disapproval not applied to the other two
leaders."

Canada suffers from income gap
77% agree that the rich are getting too rich and the poor are getting too poor 

Lower dollar preferred
Forum Research: "Close to one half of those polled said a low dollar supporting manufacturing was better for Canada than a high dollar bolstered by resource exports (45%), while about one third disagreed (35%)."

Majority want to deny Conrad Black Canadian citizenship
Forum Research: "More than six-in-ten say they disagree convicted media tycoon Conrad Black should be given back the Canadian citizenship he renounced (61%). Just one fifth
(21%) think he deserves this second chance.
Supporters of either the federal Conservatives or Liberals (28%, 26%; compared
to 18% Green, 15% NDP, and 7% BQ), and Canadians residing outside of Quebec
(28% Alberta, 24% British Columbia, 24% Ontario, 24% Atlantic, 22% Prairies, and
9% Quebec) were more likely to agree that Black should be given back his
Canadian citizenship.
"Canadians are proud of their country, and value its citizenship. It is clear they do
not think Conrad Black deserves the benefits of being a Canadian anymore," said
Forum Research President, Dr. Lorne Bozinoff."

Sunday, 27 May 2012

Facebook Blocks Blogspot.ca

Facebook has blocked blogspot.ca. This means anyone with a blog on Blogger in Canada can't post their links to Facebook. I've written them about it this morning. Hopefully they will unblock it soon.

Here is the message that comes up if you try to post a blogspot.ca link:

Sorry, this post contains a blocked URL

The content you're trying to share includes a link that's been blocked for being spammy or unsafe:

blogspot.ca

For more information, visit the Help Center. If you think you're seeing this by mistake, please let us know.
Write to them ("let us know" above) and let them know that blogspot.ca is okay.

UPDATE
As of June 1, 2012, it seems that Facebook is no longer blocking the core blogspot.ca site. Thank you to all those who wrote to Facebook about this.  

Friday, 11 May 2012

Going To The Wall In Defense Of Mulcair

Great post by Erin Weir - The Progressive Economics Forum:
"Mulcair has articulated a balanced approach to resource development that would generate more public revenue, a more competitive exchange rate, and more manufacturing jobs. Saskatchewan is well positioned to help implement and benefit from this approach by raising provincial resource royalties."

So much of the MSM are focusing only on the Conservative party talking points - oh, Mulcair and the NDP are against the West and against developing oil and resources. This is so much hogwash. Mulcair and the NDP are FOR development and FOR the West. What they would like to see is a more balanced approach that would improve the environmental situation around extracting resources, as well as a more balanced approach regarding royalties which would bring in more money for Canada. All of this would help Canadian manufacturing across Canada, as well as create a lot more Canadian jobs.

Conservative Support Among Older Canadians Plummets. NDP Leads Now By A Wide Margin

CARP, (Canadian Association of Retired Persons), has released their latest poll regarding federal politics. For the first time in years, a party other than the Conservatives leads. The NDP now has an 8 point lead over the Conservatives.

This poll definitely spells trouble for the Conservatives as their core support is from older Canadians. Three main issues that have changed seniors minds regarding the Conservatives have been 1) the changes to OAS, 2)The F-35 Scandal, and 3)C-38 the current omnibus-budget bill. This third issue seems to have been the turning point where support for the Conservatives has plummeted, while support for the NDP has jumped. 

Previous to this year, support for the Conservatives in the CARP polls has been fairly stable, around 50%, and the NDP support has been about 16%. But with the Conservatives finally flexing their muscle with their majority government, seniors across Canada are reacting with displeasure as this government's true nature/plan is exposed.

Here is a comparison of CARP poll results between Oct. 2011 and May, 2012:


Party - Oct. 2011 - May 2012


NDP    16%    39% (+23%)
Cons    51%   31% (-20%)
Libs      28%   29% (+1%)
Green   4%     4%   (no change)

From the latest CARP Poll report:
Key Findings
The vast majority of CARP members disagree with bundling so many controversial pieces of legislation in one Omnibus Budget Bill.


Fully one half do not expect the government to survive the next election, and those who do are fewer than those who say they support the government.


The clear majority, or five times as many, say they will vote against the government if it proceeds with Bill C-38 as say they will vote for the government in the next election, and the government stands to lose a significant tranche of itʼs core support because of this issue.


For the first time in four years of CARP member polling, a party other than the Conservatives leads in electoral preference, and the NDPʼs lead is substantial, not marginal


These polls were responded to by 1900 panel members (Oct 2011), and 2500 panel members (May 2012).

UPDATE
Although the CARP poll is not a normal poll of people across the country, (it is just among its own members), it is an important indicator of support among seniors in Canada. CARP members have shown that they normally are more supportive of the Conservatives than the average seniors across Canada. The fact that Conservative support among this group has dramatically declined while the NDP support has likewise increased is an important indicator of changes of support that are happening or soon to be happening in the general senior population of Canada. Any way you slice it, it spells bad news for the Conservatives and good news for the NDP.

Thursday, 10 May 2012

Oh Noes! The Grope & Fail To Become A Pay Site

Over the past few years the news reporting and columns in the G&M have really gone down hill, IMHO. I used to read a lot of the G&M as part of my daily news reads. But lately, I read maybe a few articles per month now. So, for me, no big loss.

The Globe and Mail announced today that they will limit free on-line reading beginning in the Fall.


Toronto Star article.
The metered paywall will allow site visitors to read a certain number of stories per month for free, starting in the fall. The number of free clicks hasn’t been decided yet, Crawley said. The paywall will be for the entire site, not just the Report On Business, as previously anticipated.

See also:
David Climenhaga's Alberta Diary blog: A leaky paywall won't keep the Globe and Mail afloat
If the Globe is so desperate it has to stop paying staff to survive, a leaky paywall to protect uninspired copy produced by overwhelmed journos isn’t going to save it.

NDP Lead Over The Conservatives Growing

The last 3 federal polls show the NDP consistently in the lead, ahead of the Conservatives (1 Forum and 2 Harris-Decima polls). The latest Harris-Decima poll has the NDP lead increasing. 

In Ontario, where the NDP will have to have major growth in order to form the next government, we see the NDP holding above 30%, while the Conservative support continues to erode - much of it going over to Liberal and Green.

The Conservatives maintain a strong lead in Alberta, but in the Prairies, the NDP are gaining on them and are now in a close 2nd.

Poll standings:
Canada
NDP 34%
Con 30%
Lib 20%
Green 8%
Bloc 7%

Ontario
NDP 31%
Con 32%
Lib 28%
Green 7%

Quebec
NDP 38%
Con 12%
Lib 14%
Green 7%
Bloc 27%

BC
NDP 39%
Con 32%
Lib 14%
Green 13%

Alberta
NDP 17%
Con 55%
Lib 14%
Green 12%

Prairies
NDP 39%
Con 43%
Lib 11%
Green 6%

Atlantic
NDP 44%
Con 23%
Lib 30%
Green 3%

This poll had a sample size of 2018, which has a margin of error of 2.2%, 19 times out of 20.

See also:
Toronto Star: NDP gaining support in traditional Tory areas, poll shows

Wednesday, 2 May 2012

NDP MP Bruce Hyer Quits and Then Wants Back In

Okay, wouldn't it have made sense for Hyer to discuss his concerns with Mulcair BEFORE taking an extreme action that he now obviously regrets? All of this only shows poor judgment on Hyer's part.

Hyer was really just sore because he wasn't picked for a shadow cabinet position. Of course he wasn't - because he voted against the party on a key issue, more than once.

And, regarding that key issue - the Long Gun Registry. The NDP's aim was and is not to support it as-is (was), but to improve it so that it both serves the purpose of improved safety and as a useful tool for law enforcement regarding crimes, AND so that the licensing costs and procedures are not so annoying to legitimate gun owners, especially those in rural Canada where gun ownership is often a necessity.

I say, either cut him loose and find a more responsible NDP candidate for that riding, or, bring him back and put him to work on helping to improve the gun registry procedures to make it more reasonable for rural Canadians.



CBC: MP Bruce Hyer open to rejoining NDP caucus, if invited.

Saturday, 28 April 2012

Rob Ford Could Be Removed From Office In Early September

Mark Sept. 5, 6 and 7 on your calendars. That is when Toronto Mayor Rob Ford will be in court regarding his breach of a conflict of interest law. If the judge finds against him, he will be removed from office and banned from running for public office for 7 years.

Toronto Star
Mayor Rob Ford will be in court in early September refuting a conflict of interest allegation that, if proven, would force him from office.
Lawyer Clayton Ruby, representing a Toronto resident who filed the complaint, announced Friday that Superior Court Justice Charles Hackland will hear the case Sept. 5, 6 and 7.


Friday, 27 April 2012

Tom Mulcair And NDP In The Lead, Confidence In Harper Plummets

Two polls were released today: Forum (April 25 - sample of 1744), and Nanos (April 18 - sample of 1200). The Forum poll, having a much larger sample, is the more accurate of the two. It is also more recent, so it will give us a better picture regarding recent events in Parliament.

Forum poll findings
The findings here are that the NDP is now in the lead, and Tom Mulcair's popularity has shot up.
Comparison between March 30 and April 25 Forum Polls:

Party - March 30 - April 25 - change

NDP - 34% - 36% - +2%
Con - 36% - 33% - -3%
Lib  - 19% - 22% - +3%
Green - 5% - 2% - -3%
Bloc - 5% - 6% - +1%


Leader Popularity - March 30 - April 25 - change
Mulcair - 32% - 41% - +9%
Harper - 34% - 34% - no change
Rae     - 36% - 35% - -1%

The significant finding here in the Forum results is that Mulcair's popularity has surged ahead of the other leaders. Also, this is the first poll showing the NDP to take the lead with more than a 2 point spread. (From March 18 to April 18, 7 polls (Environics, Forum, Harris-Decima, Leger, Ipsos-Reid, and Nanos) all had the NDP and Conservatives either tied or within 2 points of each other (except the Nanos poll, which has the Conservatives ahead by 3)).

This Forum poll also shows the NDP moving into a minority government position:
Seat projections from this poll compared to seats won at election time:

Party - Election - April 25, 2012
NDP - 103 - 133 (forming a minority government)
Con - 166 - 118
Lib  - 34 - 54
Bloc - 4 - 2
Green - 1 - 1


Nanos poll findings
The previous Nanos poll was at the end of Feb - a time when the NDP had their interim leader Nycole Turmel. During this period the Liberals were more popular than the NDP. The findings here show that the NDP are on the rise, the Liberals have dropped back closer to their election-level popularity and that the Conservatives support remains about the same (although down from their election level of 40%). The significant findings in the Nanos poll are the drops in ratings for Stephen Harper in trustworthiness, competency and vision for Canada.

Party - Feb. 29 - April 18 - change
NDP - 25% - 32% - +7%
Con  - 36% - 35% - -1%
Lib   - 30% - 23% - -7%
Green - 3% - 4% - +1%
Bloc   - 5% - 4% - -1%

Leader - Feb 29 - April 18 - change

Leader Trustworthiness
Turmel - 7% - Mulcair - 20% - +13%
Harper - 32% - 20% - -12%
Rae - 20% - 14% - -6%

Leader Competence
Turmel - 6% - Mulcair - 17% - +11%
Harper - 38% - 24% - -14%
Rae - 19% - 12% - -7%

Leader Vision for Canada
Turmel - 8% - Mulcair - 17% - +9%
Harper - 33% - 22% - -11%
Rae - 16% - 11% - -5%

In these specific Nanos leadership ratings we can see that Canadians' confidence in Harper has plummeted, dropped significantly for Rae, and people have much more confidence in Mulcair than Turmel as leader of the NDP.

Forum Research latest poll results
Nanos latest poll results
News articles on these results from The Toronto Star, CBC, The National Post, The Globe & Mail.

Thursday, 26 April 2012

Federal NDP On The Rise In Vote-Rich Ontario

ThreeHundredEight.com: Massive NDP leads in Quebec, Ontario competitive: Two federal polls conducted recently in Quebec by Forum Research and CROP indicate that the New Democrats have not only taken the lead, th...

The Federal NDP are doing well in Quebec and improving in Ontario.
The big story here is not how well they are doing in Quebec as that has been known since the end of March (there have been a number of polls showing that they are, by far, back on top in Quebec since the convention March 24th), but how well they are doing in Ontario compared to election time.

Here is a comparison of how the parties are faring in Ontario

Party - Election - April 18, 2012
Con - 44% - 36% (down 8%)
NDP - 26% - 32% (up 6%)
Lib - 25% - 24% (down 1%)

(Source: Forum Research poll April 23, 2012 - sample size 980)

The general trend here is that the Conservatives are steadily dropping, the Liberals have stayed about the same, while the NDP has continued the trend of increasing support that started just before the election. This is huge for the NDP as Ontario has so many seats, and for the NDP to become the next government, they will need to significantly increase their seats here. If they can continue this trend of increasing support in Ontario over the next 3 years, we will see an NDP government in 2015.

Thursday, 19 April 2012

Ontario NDP Overtake Liberals, Horwath Riding High

The latest Forum Research poll has the Ontario NDP overtaking the Liberals in support and Andrea Horwath continuing to be, by far, the most popular of the 3 main party leaders.

Current party standings compared to standings at election time Oct 2011:

NDP 31% (23%) - up 8%
PC 34% (35%) - up 1%
Lib 28% (38%) - down 10%
Green 3% (5%) - up 1%

Current leader popularity compared to Jan 2011:
Horwath (NDP) 46% (40%)
McGuinty (Lib) 30% (33%)
Hudak (PC) 24% (26%)

The NDP budget proposals for a wealthy surtax and to cap provincial executive salaries are very popular.

For more details, see
Toronto Star: Ontario budget: Andrea Horwath's tax-the-rich scheme 'hugely popular', poll suggests

Forum Research

kirbycairo: Why I don't Believe in a Merger. . . . .

kirbycairo: Why I don't Believe in a Merger. . . . .: I don't think I am naive. Nor am I ignorant of contemporary or historical political issues; I have made a careful study of political philoso...

Great post by Kirbycairo. Click the link above to read the whole thing.

I've never really understood the push for a merger either. Here we have 2 very different political parties - very different views, policies, ideals and values. I think those all for it from the Liberal side of things see it as a way to grow the Liberal party back up, and destroy the NDP. No other explanation makes much sense. The NDP was a thorn in the backside of the Liberals for so long, but now the NDP is the rising star and the Liberals are in the dog house. The Liberals are pissed and they want back in the sand box. What better way than to cheat their way in by promoting merging with a party who they claim to be like, but are so unlike in practice.

Those who claim they would like to see a merger between the NDP and the Liberals for the purpose of defeating the Harper Conservatives are very short-sighted.  You can't run a successful government solely on a negative aspect. There have to be other goals besides defeating an enemy. And the goals of the NDP and the Liberals differ almost as much as the NDP and the Conservatives. So, a merger between the NDP and the Liberals would never succeed in the long run.

Considering the record of the Liberals over the past 5 years, you would think there would be more talk of a merger between the Conservatives and the Liberals. 

Friday, 13 April 2012

Smack Stephen Harper

Frustrated with Harper and his government of looters in suits lying to us and taking our money to spend on jets that don't work and jails we don't need, and cheating to get elected? Take your frustrations out at Smack Stephen Harper!

After smacking him a few times, leave a comment.

Thursday, 12 April 2012

Rob Ford Is Doing Bad, Bad Things

Centa says the questions of whether Ford improperly took funding from his family company and overspent his campaign limit are important to the provincial Municipal Elections Act, and to democracy itself.
“Mr. Ford was, and is, represented by excellent counsel and we think the interests of justice are best served when both parties are represented by capable counsel to . . . allow the court to make the best decision possible.”
Ruby cites the same pro bono principle but is more pointed when it comes to Ford’s conduct.
“I think (Ford) is doing bad, bad things,” Ruby said. “It’s not a left-right thing . . . He came in as a bully determined to demonize anyone who disagrees with him, and is a person whose approach to governance is not what I think is in the Canadian public interest.
“If Mayor Ford gets a pass, for whatever reason he may advance, why would everyone not get a pass, and then integrity doesn’t have the importance that the legislation of Ontario placed on it.” 
- From the Toronto Star: Mayor Rob Ford vs the lawyers