Aboriginal Issues: forgotten all over again

Once again, the issue of making a real difference in the lives of First Nations people in this country is not front-and-centre in the election campaign. It's not a matter of a promise here or there, it's a political party stepping up and admitting we're facing a national emergency that will be treated as such after the election, with timetables and deadlines for action. This party would say substandard education, schoolrooms without heat and Third World medical and housing conditions are not acceptable in Canada, just as they haven't been acceptable for the last century and more. This party would say changing economic conditions for the First Nations would have a positive effect on the entire economy.

Instead, this election is like every other. Paul Joffe laments human rights issues have not been a significant part of the election debate. Joffe is a constitutional lawyer who has focused on aboriginal rights for more than thirty years, going back to the battles over the James Bay hydro-electric project in Quebec. He says he's concerned that the Canadian government continues to take actions that "not only prejudice over 370 million Indigenous people in every region of the world, but also undermine the international human rights system." As a member of the Human Rights Council at the United Nations, Canada has failed to meet its "most basic international obligations and commitments," according to Joffe. The Canadian government has opposed UN recognition of the rights of indigenous peoples.

These concerns are raised in a joint submission to the UN Human Rights Council by Indigenous and human rights organizations from different regions of the world.  Says Joffe: "The actions of the Canadian government to oppose the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples transcend Indigenous issues and serve to set back global efforts to promote human rights. "

He advises that Canada's performance on human rights will soon be evaluated at the United Nations. The UN Human Rights Council will be conducting its Universal Periodic Review of Canada, which is scheduled to take place in February 2009. September marked the first anniversary of the adoption of the UN Declaration by the General Assembly Joffe argues "the specious concerns of the government have never been realized." The latest report from the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people concludes:

"The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples represents an authoritative common understanding, at the global level, of the minimum content of the rights of indigenous peoples, upon a foundation of various sources of international human rights law."

When the public stops believing

Toronto Star Photo

At the Toronto Star's election panel yesterday for the "Word on the Street" festival someone asked why the media doesn't do a better job of pointing out when politicians are lying, both on and off the campaign trail. (BTW, our turnout was great, the questions smart and I only wish some of these people would drop by our daily newsroom meetings.) Both Ian Urquhart, editorial page editor, and I gave similar responses: We do our best but we probably could do better. During the election, we carry a feature called, Reality Check, in which we decode ads, political statements and campaign literature to get at the truth. We try to uncover lies. It's an uphill battle,

Just yesterday, for example, during an interview on  Cross-Country Checkup, Liberal leader Stéphane Dion accused Stephen Harper of always following U.S. policy. Always? Clearly not true. All the parties do it, although I must say my award so far for the biggest nose-stretcher goes to Stephen Harper's claim last week Dion is on the sidelines "virtually cheering for there to be a recession." The idea Dion would be gleeful at Canadians losing jobs is vile.

The lies are only my starting point today, however. Rather, I am noticing a trend this election. Several times over the past three weeks, I've heard  expressions of disgust among friends over some statement or other, followed by the observation that it doesn't matter because nobody believes politicians anyway; they all lie. It's not the first election I've heard this, but never with the same frequency and distaste. When did this attitude harden so completely? We all know people have felt this way to some degree, probably since Madison Avenue began selling politicians like soap in the 1950s and '60s. In the same way people regard commercials with skepticism, they have lost faith in politicians.

There's more to the story. If the public thinks politicians are lying, the corollary is the media is an accomplice in repeating the lies. It's a vicious circle with a growing lack of faith in the media. (It's more complicated than that, of course, and worth a whole debate about whether standards of accuracy are lower in new media and, if so, how that affects faith in the MSM.) To underscore the point, the public doesn't believe politicians and they don't believe the messengers carrying the message. To use the cultural cliché, it's a perfect storm.

In my view, loss of faith in the media has been deliberately fostered, particularly by the American entertainment industry and the conglomerates that own the entertainment and info/tainment realms.(By media here, I'm not talking about pundits, but about solid daily journalism.) People are being taught to view journalists with contempt. For instance. How many times have you seen a police drama on TV, or gone to a movie, in which the hero is an intelligence agent or police offer trying to protect society, only to be foiled by the idiot reporter who doesn't understand 10,000 people will die if he/she runs with their story? It's rare the journalist isn't the complete doofus actively working against good American values and totally unaware of the harm they are doing. I always notice it because I'm in the business and don't like being portrayed as a clown, Also, I've seen it creeping into some Canadian drama. There's a larger problem than my sensitive little feelings, and that is the loss of faith in the value and necessity of a free press. Why have it when journalists keep dragging their muddy boots over Horatio Cain's nice clean investigation? (I'll keep this tangent short but we're also programed to cheer when human rights are abused on television and in movies. I, too, want Jack Bauer to stop the nuclear blast and if he has to use electric shock, so be it. Just hurry.) The constant denigration of the press is dangerous and, in my view, contributes to a public left with nothing to believe in or hold dear. One can see why a free press might be a hassle for large conglomerates who'd prefer to operate without public scrutiny.

This election campaign in Canada is only a taste of what's to come. The road leads to a loss of democracy — and we know what that's called — because if we can't believe anybody, then we at least want somebody strong to protect us.

Now do you see why your parents told you never to tell a lie?

Word on the Street

The Star will have an election panel at 3 p.m. Sunday at Word on the Street with Linda Diebel, David Olive and Ian Urquhart.

We See Thee Rise: A Gift for Dougie

Great news! Usually I keep personal information to myself but this is too exciting not to share. I've got a friend, a former boyfriend actually, who's been feeling rather down lately. Nice guy and I want to cheer him up. so I've had a terrific idea for a Christmas gift.

I'm going to give him the line, "We see thee rise," as his own personal motto. (Little bit of double-entendre so he can have fun with it.)

Isn't that a terrific idea? I saw my copyright lawyer this morning and she doesn't think there will be a problem. What a cool gift, eh?

The lawyer told me there's a chance the line will have been taken and I know there are already dibs on "With glowing hearts," but I'd be happy with, "Glorious and Free." My gift must also be regarded as a public service because my friend Dougie gives of himself enormously. A giving kind of guy. He's works with kids in a northern community, teaches hockey and is always available to haul groceries, help somebody with a move or just crack a joke to cheer everybody up. He likes animals.

So you might say I am giving a piece of the anthem to a whole town. I am just tickled, really. Canadians should be proud of me - and Dougie.

This WARNING, INVASION OF PRIVACY:  How tired are you getting of the cold advertising calls our federal government keeps promising to stop?

I just had one here, at my desk, at work, on my Star cell phone, by a person who says she's part of a survey by Box Data Canada for TD Canada Trust. They are hocking credit cards that gives American Airlines frequent flyer points with purchase. Now, I assume they took my cell number from information American Airlines has in my file, supposedly in confidence. It's in my travel file for the Star, and with AA.

I always check every box with every company forbidding the sale of my personal information; therefore I was less than pleased with the call. The woman gave me this number at TD Trust, btw, in case anybody else has had a similar experience and wants to complain. 1-866-222-3456. This is an invasion of privacy. I thought the federal government planned to put a stop to these cold calls, but it seems to be getting worse. At least on my end.

If one of the parties has promised to put a stop to these calls - many originating outside Canada - I've missed it. To me, privacy is an election issue.

YOUNG VOTERS: VOTE!!!!

Elections Canada hopes to bring some 406,000 young voters to the polls on October 14 through a mailing to newly identified eligible voters. Called "Make Your Mark," the agency has fingers crossed the trend among young voters — up to 44 per cent in 2006 from 37 per cent in 2004 — might even squeak up over 50 per cent. (The national overall turnout last time was 64 per cent — hardly worthy of bragging rights for this democracy.)

It may be just in time. The Dominion Institute released a study by Innovative Research Group this week showing Canadian political parties are failing to engage with new media and, thus, run the risk of leaving young voters on the sidelines. Their poll showed fewer than one in ten respondents (9 per cent) said Canadian political parties had reached out to them through a new media method (email, text messaging, Facebook, MySpace and/or Twitter). The polling sample comprised 1,000 people from 18-25, with a margin of error of 3.1 per cent. Marc Chalifoux, executive director of the Dominion Institute, said he was surprised the numbers are so low, and suspects it's because the parties look at their Internet campaigns as "add-ons" to the "real campaigns" on the planes, buses and advertising. The results indicate those who also look to the Internet for election information are more likely to vote than those who don't and bloggers show a greater voting intention than non-bloggers.

The Dominion Institute is running Youth Text 2008 to allow the estimated 81 per cent of young people with cellphones to communicate directly with political parties through text messaging.

While the polling results appear negative on the surface, it may in fact be good news young voters are tuning out the standard whirlwind political tours of planes whizzing across the country carrying leaders with pre-scripted messages and aides bustling about for the best "photo ops," as the general public is polled to death. Text messaging is also pretty limited. But imagine the possibilities of a Net-based campaign in which voters actually were able to question candidates on a regular basis about issues and in depth. And let people vote online. It really could open up a new world with an informed electorate making informed choices. Or not.

Then again, maybe Craig Ferguson has the best approach when he reminds American young people, they have a (gasp) duty to vote. Not that their elders are setting the world on fire.

Canadian Culture, eh?

I offer a novel take on Canadian culture, although not about the Trailer Park Boys. This time. But they certainly qualify and, hey,  I'll grab any excuse to exhibit these exquisite specimens of manly manliness.

No, this is about the 1989 Australian flick, Emerald City. Anybody seen it? I think I caught it on a plane so I'm guessing it wasn't much of a hit, at least not on this side of the world. It was adapted by David Williamson from his play of the same name and, roughly summarized, revolves around a couple of screenwriters who want to make a hit but yearn for quality and self-respect. (I said roughly). Anyway, they put together a script about the Aboriginal experience, rich in themes of social justice. One of them goes to the U.S. for financial backing and comes back elated, telling his partner they've got their funding, but will have to make a few minor adjustments. Nothing significant. The protagonist wouldn't be Aboriginal after all, but an African-American and the action wouldn't take place in Australia, but in the Deep South of the U.S. You get the picture. The other guy is appalled and walks away from the project. Cue music, he's rediscovered his soul.  Before he goes (and here's the point of this anecdote) he delivers a speech to his now ex-partner that touched a nerve with me, and has stayed with me. Here's what he said:

"We need to feel important enough to have fiction written about us. Otherwise, we will grow up thinking real life is something that happened to somebody else, and in accents other than our own."

Not a bad argument for Canadian culture.

Yikes! Stop that woman before she says something

You can never be too careful. It's one thing to allow Janine Krieber to head out on a cross-country campaign tour solo this week but quite another to let her speak to the media. Think about what she might blurt out. I mean, Stéphane Dion's wife is an internationally recognized counter-terrorism expert, on leave from her professorial duties at the Royal Military College, Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu campus. A voracious reader, she's bilingual, multi-talented, a good mother (according to her daughter) and, by most accounts, a perfectly charming woman. Danger, danger. Not the kind of person you'd want campaigning. According to Joan Bryden's Canadian Press report today, Liberal brainiacs not only appear to have muzzled Krieber, but done it a particularly slapdash manner. Better safe than sorry, I always say. What if she started musing about the role of the Divine in the Afghan war? Gotta watch these women.

Speaking about Stéphane Dion: How about the Liberal team cuts off the list of helpful souls giving Dion advice on how to handle himself at the current 4,102?  Granted, Dion has been criticized for trying to manage his own campaign — and that seems fair enough. But it looks like he's been coached so much on how to speak, how to hold himself, what to say, he's wound tighter than an old-fashioned watch. On Mike Duffy Prime Time last night (go to ctv.ca and follow the links), Duffy tried mightily to coax a few personal insights from Dion after a good chunk of time on the Liberal policy book. No go. It was as if Dion had a tape inserted — fairer, greener, richer, blah-blah. Insiders say he won't take professional coaching but my guess is it's the opposite. Professional or not, Dion has been given so much advice on what not to say and how not to say it in English, he's getting stiffer and his language skills are deteriorating. The media folks on the campaign plane may be getting a look at a more relaxed Dion, but the Canadian public certainly isn't. Time's a-wasting, kiddies. I'll add the 4,103rd piece of advice: Relax and stop practising. Everybody else back off.

Useful information: Don't let it be said I'm a frivolous hack devoted to personality journalism. (I'm only a frivolous hack.) Today, the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, a progressive think tank based in Ottawa, released its analysis of the Harper government's programs. It's worth a look. Originally slated for release next month, this is an election version that's available from their website at:

http://www.policyalternatives.ca/Reports/2008/09/HarperRecord/index.cfm?pa=BB736455

Toronto Centre: Hey voters in Toronto Centre, we can't see you. George Stroumboulopoulos noted on The Hour last night Chris Reid's dive didn't overly concern Conservatives because the riding doesn't figure highly in their future plans. It's bizarre former candidate Mark Warner went through weeks of vetting by Conservative boss Doug Finley, including at a six-hour session at CPC HQ in Ottawa only to be replaced by a candidate with truly hare-brained ideas. (See same in Sunday's Decoder.)

It's only semantics: Nobody has added much to the conversation since George Orwell, I'll admit. But in this post "free trade" and "patriot act" world, it's interesting to hear the call to "unite the left." Where? In Canada? We're in pixieland where Conservatives occupy the centre and the Liberals sit on the left. The Earth really did move.

Elections no time for truth in advertising

The Canadian Press

The PM with Winnipeg kids.

The Canadian Press

Stéphane Dion does a puzzle with children at a daycare in Regina, Saskatchewan Sept. 19.

Once upon a time during an election campaign, Kim Campbell said an election was no time to discuss serious issues. Bad idea. The smart folk ridiculed her — for stating the obvious. Now, it seems (or has it always been?) an election is no time for truth in advertising. Or, like Tommy Smothers said on the Emmy Awards last night: "Truth is what you get other people to believe."

Today's untruth lies in a Conservative ad about Stéphane Dion and the Liberals. Maybe "untruth" is too harsh. It does have its own truthiness (thanks SC) in a wacky, out-of-context kinda way. The Conservative ad says Dion would strip families of the $1,200 universal child care benefit brought in by the Harper government. Whoa! Bet voters are taking notice of that one. In fact, the Conservative election team has launched a "public information campaign to warn parents" about what Dion would do.

There's a problem with the ad. But first, let me say, I think both Mr. Harper and Mr. Dion like kids.

But, to get picky-picky here, the Conservative ad says Dion will cancel the child tax credit when, in fact, Dion has said he wouldn't cancel it and would double it for low-income families.

The Conservatives are careful, though. In their ad, the narrator says, "When asked if he would cancel the $1,200 child tax benefit," Dion said, "Yes." That's not what Dion was asked, But the ad is tricky. As the narrator speaks, a line is visible on the screen, saying, "Would you cancel the Tory daycare plan?" That's the question Dion answered in the interview in The National Post. The date was Oct. 21, 2006 and Dion was a candidate for the Liberal leadership.

Here's that interview:

Post: What social program would be your top priority?

Dion: Many, but since you have asked for only one, I will play the game. It is the Child Tax Benefit, and increasing it, as I have already discussed. The rate of child poverty in this country is a disgrace and I will not tolerate it.

Post: Would you cancel the Tory daycare plan? What would you replace it with?

Dion: Yes. The Dryden plan was much better. We need child care facilities to provide Canadian parents with real choice. It's a matter of social justice, but also sound economic child care facilities are a good way to encourage flexibility and mobility of our workforce, at a time when, often, two parents are working outside the home.

Many childcare advocates thought former social development minister Ken Dryden's plan wasn't so hot. It pumped money to the provinces, rather than directly to families. But shouldn't the Conservatives critique Dion's plan for child care in 2008? It might help Canadians, and especially parents, make an informed choice.

Note to readers: I'm always happy to concentrate on misleading ads from any party, so please send them over to ldiebel@thestar.ca

The disappearing CPC candidate in Toronto Centre

Bob Rae Website

Bob and wife,Arlene at PRIDE parade

On CTV's Question Period today, Bob Rae, Liberal Dream Team-er and MP for Toronto Centre, said the loss of the Conservative candidate in his riding shows the "incredible weakness" of the Conservative team. Chris Reid dropped out earlier today, following in the footsteps of former candidate Mark Warner, fired by Doug Finley. It looks like a posting on the blog, BigCitylib, contributed to Reid's fate, if not doing him in entirely. The posting helpfully offered Reid's apparent views on a number of issues. It's a good bet they didn't sit well with Stephen Harper. The website, Canadian Blue Lemons ("We're Conservatives and we're Sour") had already weighed in on Reid.

The new candidate is David Gentili, who introduces himself on Facebook. He worked in Harper's PMO. He has three weeks to put together a campaign against Rae. High hopes.

On the Liberal campaign front, the party released two ads recently, one negative on the Listeriosis outbreak. Behind-the-scenes buzz says there were at least two attack ads in the can and ready to go. Probably, there's push-pull in private about going negative for a number of reasons. When the centre-left vote is split, as it is in this election, it would seem there's a danger in any party going too hard on Stephen Harper. The unintended result could be to boost your rivals on the left. In this case, the Libs attack Harper and the Greens or NDP benefit on election day. It's a delicate dance. The last Angus Reid/Toronto Star poll (national sample size of 1,502 adults) shows the Conservatives at 38 percent, with the LIberals at 24 percent, the NDP at 19 percent, the Greens at 10 percent and the Bloc at 9. The last thing any party wants to do is drive voters to the wrong party. Watch the Liberal ads in the coming days. Going heavier on the negative side would suggest: a)Stéphane Dion has backed off his hardline anti-attack ad position; 2)The situation is critical enough to ignore worries about giving a boost to the NDP or Greens.

Health Minister Tony Clement's own Listeriosis funny

First, a little Craig Ferguson for John Doyle and his column asking why Canadian pols aren't being mocked with the savagery of the Late Night host. Why, indeed?

Conservative health minister joins the Gerry Ritz comedy team

THE CANADIAN PRESS

Why should the agriculture minister take all the heat? Health Minister Tony Clement (shown right) handed over the heavy slogging on the Listeriosis outbreak to the Ag-Min in late August while he bopped off to the Democratic National Convention in Denver. There, Clement attended a lunch reception at the Canadian consul-general's official residence where he made a few remarks. They did not go unnoticed by the Toronto Star's sharp-eared Tonda MacCharles. She wrote about his opening line at the luncheon, which she describes as a "shwish" affair that offered "bite-sized bits of beef, shrimp, tortellini and potato gratin." MacCharles gave us Clement's opener:

"I'm Health Minister Tony Clement and I have to say I approved this food."

The bane of print media is the space crunch, and readers didn't see the final observation from MacCharles on what she'd witnessed. Let's correct that here:

"Asked Tuesday whether it wasn't a rather inapporopriate quip, Clement hastened to say it's his 'shtick' - a line he uses at almost every reception where there's food - and he just, well thought it was kind of a funny play on the political tag lines used on campaign ads in the United Stas. Allllllllrighty, then."

Many pundits weighed in this week on the Ritz affair - a joke about cold cuts, the reference to Wayne Easter - to say an apology suffices. Poor taste, inappropriate, everybody uses black humour, blah-blah. That's one way of looking at it. MacCharles documents the comment of a minister of the crown responsible for the file before an audience in Denver, Colorado, as Canadian cases of Listeriosis rose. By September 18, seventeen deaths had been linked to the listeria bacteria, with many more falling ill. Another view suggests these ministers don't understand their portfolios or get the larger picture.

Free trade threat to health care not on election agenda. Why not?

shutterstock.com

Sure, politicians talk about health care on the hustings, but there's no focus on the elephant in the room. It's long been argued by free trade specialists Canada's health care system is at risk under the terms of the North American Free Trade Agreement, just as it was under the prior Free Trade Agreement with the U.S. Signatories swore Canada's Medicare plan would remain safe but, with the increasing privatization of health care in the provinces, there are concerns about whether the plan is protected against "national treatment" trade challenges. That clause ensures equal treatment for non-Canadian investors within the framework of the treaty. Such a challenge looms.

In a recent article in the Canadian policy news weekly, Embassy MagazIne, Luke Eric Peterson describes a process underway that could lead to formal artibration against Canada under that very clause, which he explains, permits "foreign investors to sue governments for certain investment losses." Arizona businessman Melvin J. Howard recently filed legal papers saying he and some 200 financial backers long attempted to benefit from British Columbia's openness to private investment in the health care industry. Peterson explains the consortium faced apparent "anti-American roadblocks" and claim they incurred $4 million in expenses and $150 million in foregone profits, all included in their suit against Canada. They want compensation from the federal government.

Peterson, who specializes in cross-border lawsuits, says not all threats lead to arbitration and it's hard to prove damages. Currently, he says, there are more questions than answers about Howard and his Centurion Health Corporation. He quotes legal papers as saying: "There are serious inconsistencies throughout Canada in terms of the Canada Health Act and provincial health care programs. Centurion will seek to be compensated for damages for barriers to entry and expropriation."

This may go nowhere. However, Peterson writes:

"Observers have long cautioned that Canada might one day find itself sued by U.S. health care interests. Many assumed it would come in the form of a Goliath vs. Goliath scenario, pitting a group of massive U.S. health care corporations against the Government of Canada in a high-stakes test of Canada's NAFTA commitments. Instead, we may be about to see a David and Goliath contest brought by an Arizona businessman with grand ambitions. While Ottawa insists that it is largely immune from NAFTA legal challenges, legal observers have long questioned the extent of that immunity. No one doubts that the existing system of publicly-delivered health care is well-protected, but when the provinces start experimenting with greater private financing and involvement in the health care sector, such experimentation may oblige the federal government to extend certain standards of NAFTA treatment to U.S. investors."

Other fears about a NAFTA challenge have been raised. Would a national Pharmacare program contravene NAFTA terms by discriminating against foreign investors? Would Ottawa have to compensate them? Peterson also raises the concern if Canada had been bound by NAFTA in the 1960s "we might never had seen our single-payer government health insurance scheme brought into being." And he concludes:

"This much is clear: the resources committed by Mr. Howard and his partners to their B.C. ventures, assuming they can be documented to the satisfaction of arbitrators, appear relatively modest. Any looming arbitration claim would not be the type of high-stakes claim that might arise if large-scale foreign investments were permitted in the Canadian health care sector—and then later reversed thanks to a change in government policy. Rather, the Howard claim looks more like a warm-up act—one which may help to shed some preliminary light upon several hotly-contested portions of the NAFTA."

Remind me again: Okay, this Gerry Ritz, agriculture minister, all wrapped up in the tasteless listeriosis jokes, is the same agriculture minister who filled in for Canada's Health Minister Tony Clement who breezed off to the Democratic National Convention in Denver at the height of the outbreak, right? Ah yes. Maybe the health minister could have handled it better, had he thought it important enough.

The PSAC website: To the reader who couldn't make the link from a previous blog, the site is: http://www.psac.com/home-e.shtml

You should be able to follow the links from there.

Cartoon on LIBs Worth 1,000 words

In the wish I had talent department, today's cartoon from the other resident genius, Theo Moudakis, says it all. 

Paul Martin Campaigning? My colleauge Chantal Hébert makes the interesting point in her column today if the Liberals want credibility on the economy, they should bring Paul Martin out of obscurity for the campaign, instead of relying on Bob Rae. She argues Martin should be presented not "as a failed prime minister, but as the most successful finance minister of his political generation." That may well be the view of Canadians, other than those on the other side of 1995 federal budget cuts leading to provincial downsizing.

Would Martin do it? Maybe. It's not likely he has hard feelings with the current leader. Jean Chrétien brought Dion into politics, but he tried to stay out of the ugly Chrétien-Martin feud. At one point in 2003, with the chasm at its deepest, Dion went to his boss Chrétien to say he didn't think he could even deliver his Quebec riding association to Martin and that meant other Liberal associations would oppose the PM. He told Chrétien the party belonged to Martin. It's true Martin kept Dion out of his first cabinet in the fall of 2003, but he brought him in a few months later, after the 2004 election. On election night in 2006, when Martin announced he was stepping down, Dion was with him at his Montreal riding.

Hard feelings wouldn't be the problem. Rather, the word is Liberal finance critic John McCallum is set to hit the national hustings for Dion.

When Middle-Aged Women Fight For Dion

That's what the email says. It came to me recently from one Cynthia Venables and says: "I thought you might be interested in the non-partisan progressive website that six of us (Yes, all middle-aged women) launched." She goes on to lay out her reasons: "We had become very tired of the American-style personal attack ads levelled at Stéphane Dion. Many of us have voted NDP some of the time; some of us are longtime Liberals. We have all lived through the destruction of the Harris Tories. We have come together because we are very worried for the future the country we love if Harper gets a majority . . . The Majority of Canadians do not want a Reform/Conservative government and their Republican policies. So all being over fifty (OK, for me now 60) we must do something. Using our time and our own money we have created a website."

I liked that last comment about doing it themselves and this: "Mr. Dion and the Liberal Party are not aware of us nor have we asked their permission. This is about individual voices."

It's a fledgling site run by feisty amatuers; should be worth a look so I'm passing it on - http://www.progressivesfordion.ca/

Decoding the PM

Nobody has explained deregulation of food safety inspections better than in-house genius Patrick Corrigan. A picture is worth and all that...

Howcum: Stephen Harper keeps referring to himself as a young man at 49 when a woman of that age is on a fast train to Hagsville?

Hidden Agenda: The refrain goes Stephen Harper has one. I don't agree, in that I haven't seen a lot of secrecy. His government has acted where it could as a minority — deregulation, arts cuts, derailing U.N, attempts to make water an international human right — and Harper has indicated where he wants to go. (This isn't to suggest Canadians aren't sympathetic to the PM's policies, or that there isn't a larger audience for the Conservative message.) He hasn't defined some of his terms, which presents challenges but, if you listen, you'll understand the template. Last week, for example, the PM gave an intriguing interview to John Ivison of The National Post. It's worth reading. Harper tells Ivison: "I said for a long time, and nobody listened to me for the longest time, that my goal was to make conservatism the natural governing philosophy of the country."

One can find fault with Harper's historical memory in the interview. He says: "When we took office, this country was looking at a third referendum in Quebec and today the sovereigntists don't even want to talk about separation, let alone promote it. We're moving in the right direction there."

I don't remember a referendum looming in early 2006. Seems to me the heavy lifting in tackling separatism had already been done by others, notably by Jean Chrétien and his intergovernmental affairs minister Stéphane Dion, by that time. The Conservative move to recognize Quebec as a nation is playing well in Quebec, but that's different story than beating the province back from the brink of separation. But people say a lot of things during election campaigns.

Arguably more interesting are Harper's views on other issues. He tells Ivison:

"We also stress the importance of family, through our tax and other policies. I think what we're showing Canadians that family doesn't mean — it's something that people of faith like — but it doesn't mean you have a theological agenda. It means you worry about the social fabric of the country. So I think we're moving the country in the right direction and I also think our party is becoming, I wouldn't say centrist, maybe more pragmatic.

The big unanswered question about Stephen Harper? Which is more powerful: his pragmatism (which he discusses at length); or his worries about the "social fabric" of the country? To repeat, he says people of faith like his family policies but it doesn't mean there's a theological agenda. Does it?

Decoding Liberal Woes and Cash Concerns or, How Bad Can It Get?

It can't get worse for Liberals, can it? Muchisimo, and I've got a mushroom ear to prove it from the last few days on the telephone for a Toronto Star story. I talked to backroom people from the Dion campaign, as well as folks who are, unhappily in their view, not involved in the current election battle. The former insist all is well and the latter raise potential dangers, including:

Money, money, money. It could be very difficult to pay down party debt, not to mention unpaid balances from the 2006 leadership race, without a good showing in the election. Here's how it works, as it was explained to me. The Libs, like most parties, borrow money at election time from a bank or consortium of banks. They can spend around $20 million during the campaign (under Elections Canada rules) and they pay down that debt after the vote using quarterly stipends from Elections Canada, as well as fundraising monies (still a big Liberal problem). The amount of that stipend depends on the number of votes Liberals receive on election day, and the party would have borrowed an amount based on their expectations of that number. Fewer votes equals less money. Less money, less ability to pay down the debt at a time when a party with fewer votes and fewer seats (under a worse-case scenario) could find itself in massive disarray. Remember Kim Campbell in 1993? Some Liberals feel the money situation is a time bomb that could threaten the very future of the party. The leadership debt alone for Stéphane Dion and some other candidates exceeds $2 million. They don't all have the skills of the master, John Rae, who helped his brother, Bob, repay his debts. Could get ugly in Liberal-land.

What about Gerard Kennedy? There is scuttlebutt he could find himself in the kind of trouble that impacts long-term life planning. Kennedy was "kingmaker" for Dion at the 2006 leadership convention. When I spoke to him this summer, he said he was on track to pay down the final $240,000 of his loan. But he's in a tough fight in Parkdale-High Park against New Democrat Peggy Nash. It's harder to raise money  when you're not an MP and a defeated Kennedy would have his work cut out for him. He was, by the way, Special Adviser to the Leader for Election Readiness and Renewal, I'd forgotten.

Paradox within a paradox. Liberals "get" the paradox facing Dion in this campaign: Canadians dislike Stephen Harper and don't trust his policies (say Liberals) but they might vote for him because of his leadership. Liking strong men (women?) and all that. That makes it tough for Dion and there are increasingly strong voices pushing for negative campaigning. The idea is that Dion's only hope is that he's not Harper. (We're talking about the crass optics of this campaign to date, not whether Dion does offer more or what he's really all about.) Negative ads were taped last week by Elements in Vancouver (for the Red Leaf Liberal election consortium) and are ready to go. Most are betting they'll be coming soon to a station near you. The call for them is getting deafening.

The other paradox was the lose/lose situation for Dion's Liberals over almost two years. The Liberals dragged their feet on an election call, only to see the agenda usurped by Harper. Even while waiting, they planned to talk about the PM's "hidden agenda" during the campaign. They were well-aware the longer Harper governed, the harder it would be to complain about such an agenda, especially to Canadians who aren't policy junkies glued to regulatory change and its effects. (Cutting back on food inspectors is hardly a hidden plan, but it's not getting traction during the campaign.) It's not clear if Dion understood this. Some argue he doesn't get the mechanics of a minority government as Harper evidently does, or he would have brought down the government when he had the chance. Over many months, some close to Dion argued the party wasn't ready for an election in terms of money, organization and policy, making it prudent to wait. MPs who wanted to go early tended to be those confident of winning their ridings (and straining to dump Dion post-election) while those who were nervous about their chances preferred to wait. In the end, it was apparently pretty much Dion's call. Proof of his wisdom will come on election day - duh!

Finally amidst the gloom, Liberals see positive signs, however dark. A marketing refrain has it, "even a dead cat bounces," and some Liberals are talking about the "dead cat bounce" they expect for Dion and the Liberals in the polls. It's gotta get better, right? There's also a sense (a wild hope) the Conservatives have peaked too soon and that hubris is creeping into the PM's statements when he talks about Canada being a conservative country, etc. etc. Maybe. If by next week, Dion hasn't begun to recover, Liberals say it will be down to "save the furniture" time. The party is not there yet. But some Liberals already see evidence that political heavyweights like Senator David Smith are already honing in on saving what ridings they can.

Meet PM Behind Building For Trip To "Unidentified Location"

Toronto Star Photo

PM speaking pre-writ

The Liberal campaign press office had some fun today with Stephen Harper's election itinerary, which they call the "steel bubble campaign."

According to Lib funsters, "Prime Minister Stephen Harper has stepped up his efforts to ensure he does not meet a single Canadian voter who hasn't been pre-screened and positively identified as a partisan Conservative during this election campaign."

It was unclear, said the Libs, whether journalists would be blindfolded or whether the "undisclosed location" was that favoured by U.S. Vice-President Dick Cheney.

The PM's sked:

8:30 AM (ET) Photo opportunity at undisclosed location
Meet behind Confederation Building on Parliament Hill

The Prime Minister will visit a local business and take time for a photo opportunity with the owners of the enterprise. Media should convene behind the Confederation Building on Parliament Hill where they can either receive directions to the location or use the provided shuttle.                      

10:00 AM (ET) Remarks by the Prime Minister followed by a Media Availability at the Conservative Campaign Headquarters

Ho-Ho. The Libs' release is the kind of inside baseball thing that appeals to journos, junkies and time-pressed bloggers. But it hardly resonates with the public - unless Canadians are turning into a nation of bloggers with short attention spans. I doubt it. It's Monday and real people are actually working.

Post-mission warfare: MacKenzie assault on Dallaire

The Canadian Press

Lewis MacKenzie receives Order of Canada in 2007

Toronto Star Photo

Dallaire at the Genie Awards, 2008

If you thought civilian politics were rough, you might take a look at the excerpt from Maj.-Gen. Lewis MacKenzie's memoir, Soldiers Made Me Look Good, about Senator Roméo Dallaire, another former soldier who bore the rank of Maj.-Gen. The excerpt from the book published by Douglas & MacIntyre, ran in the Sept. 1 edition of Maclean's and you may have missed it in the last days of August holidays. It blew me away because MacKenzie is brutal in loading a burden of guilt on a man who has become a Canadian icon. MacKenzie attacks Dallaire for his handling of U.N. forces in Rwanda at the outset of the 1994 massacre of 800,000 people — events Dallaire covers with literary self-mutilation in his best-seller, Shake Hands With The Devil. The book was adapted for a movie of the same title starring Roy Dupuis. MacKenzie says Dallaire made the mistake of putting mission before his soldiers — when a more experienced general would have known better in the circumstances. One could infer Dallaire's actions contributed to more than the death of the Blue Berets under his command. MacKenzie portrays himself as a military man trying to get at the truth for the benefit of future missions. Perhaps. Who's to say what motivates people? Human nature is a curious thing. Maclean's entitled the excerpt, "Dallaire's Deadly Error" and here's a taste:

Even with the benefit of 14 years of hindsight, now Senator Dallaire steadfastly refuses to acknowledge that the mission does not always come first in a commander's priorities. There is perhaps an explanation for his inflexibility on this matter; it relates to the fate of the 10 murdered Belgian soldiers.  If Dallaire is permanently wedded to the view that the mission must always come first, then his Belgian soldiers' sacrifice and the fact that he ordered no action be taken to assist them while they were being slaughtered could be both explained and justified. Acknowledging now that not immediately alerting his HQ that he would be mounting a rescue operation was incorrect would be a heavy burden indeed.

MacKenzie says those who argue a rescue mission would have been suicidal should understand that "macho bullies who beat, torture and murder defenceless women and children" are cowards who crumble when faced with professional combat soldiers.

From tragedy to the comedy of the election: I see at the Toronto Star's website, my good friend and colleauge Julian Beltrame, from The Canadian Press, examines what Stéphane Dion has to do this week on the campaign trail. Beltrame writes Dion must "find a way to become more likeable to Canadian voters."

Yup. That's what he's gotta do. (Not that I have anything better to offer.)

Meanwhile this afternoon, Elizabeth May is Rex Murphy's guest on Cross Country Checkup. Who hasn't observed she's had a most excellent week. She's taking calls as I write, and just said respecting another politician (as she does Dion) is "tantamount to sin" in Canadian politics.

On air, she's lambasting Stephen Harper and Jack Layton, while praising Dion. Sure, she could be a boost to Dion in the TV debates.

Another thought, though, a wild and crazy one. Women appear to be so "in" these days, it's thrilling just to be a woman. Yeah, right. Wouldn't it be a ride if Elizabeth May stormed to real power in the House of Commons. Naw, not possible.

Deja Vu All Over Again

More of the same:

Brian Mulroney, 1984: "Canada is open for business again."

Stephen Harper, 2008: "We will significantly increase the threshold of foreign investments."

Description: Consistent bipartisan federal policy in Canada over 24 years.

The Downside: Some sale items may no longer be available.

For the Toronto Star, I'm not Rex Murphy

For starters, let me say I like Rex Murphy (pictured here with Paul Martin in 2004). I'm a lifetime CBC fan (nobody ever said my name like the late Alan Maitland) and I listen to Cross Country Checkup faithfully. Great for fans of human nature and a valuable tool for journalists. While I may not always agree with Rex Murphy's opinions, he is unfailingly courteous to callers and, in my book, that's what counts. He was brought up right. Where I come from in northern Ontario, being polite and treating others with respect are qualities next to godliness. Fail to do so and, in a small town, there's an excellent chance your parents would have heard about it by the time you got home. Except for the ocean - a big exception, but not so much inland -there's no place closer to the rockcuts and tight communities of northern Ontario than Murphy's home province of Newfoundland. Murphy gets an A+ - on top of his fine intelligence - for treating callers well, even when exasperated.

But I must respectfully object to one comment he made Thursday night in his commentary on The National. He said Stéphane Dion is not a woodsman. (Hold tight, and I'll link you to his broadcast at the end of the post.) Not a woodsman! Now, I am as irritated as the next person with bloggers who continously reference their latest books or columns or articles, so please forgive me. Hold your noses. But I can't make this argument without explaining I spent a good deal of time in the northern Laurentians with Dion and family over the 2006/07 holiday season in order to write his biography. I stayed near the Dion cottage and heard what the locals had to say about his hiking, snowshoeing, wildlife, cross-country skiing and dogsledding enthusiams. He's a fanatic and that's an understatement.

I'd already written about Dion's fishing exploits, as told by his buddy Peter Russell, U of T political science professor emeritus, for the Toronto Star. But in northern Quebec, teenagers couldn't keep up with him. His wife Janine Krieber, daughter Jeanne and friends threw up their hands. No, I didn't want to get up at 4 a.m (okay, maybe 5) to join him and Kyoto on a three-hour hike through six-metre snow (maybe a little less) before breakfast. Yeah, the dogledding looked fab but it was friggin' freezing and I know freezing. I didn't grow up skating until my feet were numb or checking in the washroom between periods to see if my bloodless ears were still attached (hats ruin hair) for nothing. As for M. Dion's other skills - or lack of - both personal and political - I quibble not. But he is, most definitely, a woodsman.

Here's that link.

Finally, Another worthwhile site from the Public Service Alliance of Canada aimed at dogging candidates on the issue of food safety. The site will give you all the details, but Patricia Ducharme, PSAC executive vice-president says: "The outbreak of listeriosis due to tainted food products have shaken the country's confidence in our food protection service."

The NDP campaign brought the site to my attention.

The Birds

Maybe Stephen Harper should avoid the Wawa Goose.

First the misstep with the pooping puffin — and it had to be the national bird of Danny Williams's Newfoundland — and today the insensitivity of Conservative media aide Ryan Sparrow in referring to a late Canadian soldier's father an "Iggy" supporter. He was playing down the man's criticism of Harper's announcement yesterday that the Canadian war effort in Afghanistan would end in 2011.

Who's directing the Conservative campaign? Stephen Harper or Alfred Hitchcock?

Jimmy, you think you're the only one with problems with Elections Canada?

Hrumpf. Join the club. Liberal MP Jim Karygiannis complained this morning about his dealings with Elections Canada. Seems he called the Toronto office Monday to get forms he needed to register and was told they weren't ready. He figured out, however, he could download them from the site and is getting the signatures he requires. But today when the Scarborough-Agincourt MP called Elections Canada again to ask for an up-to-date riding map and key (with detailed info), he was told he had to wait until his papers were in. Karygiannis says MPs are entitled to maps and keys twice a year. As far as he knows he's still an MP. Unless Elections Canada knows something he doesn't?

I thought just journalists trying to figure out the world's most complicated, illogical website had their woes with Elections Canada.