Canada Not Impressed With China Adopting Canada's Approach to Climate Change

Mind boggling, the Conservatives have the nerve to criticize China for offering an "intensity based" approach as a way to reduce GHG's:

Environment Minister Jim Prentice is playing down the climate-change pledges made Tuesday by Chinese President Hu Jintao at the United Nations, saying Beijing has yet to commit to clear targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

The contradictions are everywhere. Canada doesn't have any plan at the moment, apart from it's intensity based mumbo jumbo, soundly rejected by every single environmental expert. We now wait for Obama to tell us what to do, as a default position to justify INACTION. We have consistently resisted doing exactly what we now ask of China, using China as an excuse to do nothing. Prentice is now biting his own tail, stuck in some ridiculous hypocrisy REVERB.

Canada is essentially asking others to do what we're not prepared to do, and only when they do what we won't do, will we consider doing something. Bzzzz, bzzzz. Countries that propose the exact same arguments that Canada has presented with it's past "leading the world" plan are now offering nothing, even though by arguing that you are NOW saying to the world that we were NEVER offering anything, validating the MOUNDS of criticism directed at you over the years.

Is this shit for real? I mean, seriously, how can this clown go to a mic and not get drowned out by hysterical laughter?

Ignatieff Offers "Coherence"

A pretty favorable review of Ignatieff's economic speech, from the paper that supported Harper in the last election (liberal media, liberal media!). Coherence:

The Liberals have staked their ground as enthusiastic interventionists; the Conservatives, who have governed as occasionally reluctant interventionists for the last year, will have to explain their post-recession vision before Canadians cast their votes...

For his part, Mr. Ignatieff has chosen a classically large L-Liberal approach, with few new ideas, leaving some to wonder if he has done much to advance the debate on Canadian economic policy. A shorter list of areas where the government can really make a difference would be preferable.

In the end, there is a coherence to Mr. Ignatieff's vision, and Canadians need to hear Prime Minister Stephen Harper enunciate his own.

There is obviously more to come, in the way of details, so any "gaps" are of no immediate concern. What is important, Ignatieff is providing a contrast to the Harper approach. The vision is a center-left, that sees the government as active, if not overbearing. There is a demonstration of different tenticles operating in a co-ordinated fashion, to advance the economy. The Conservatives aren't capable of this type of vision, because they essentially rely on creating "the climate" without direction. Harper has bent, but only because events dictated and he is already assuring the faithful that intervention is temporary.

I see the distinction Ignatieff is setting up as key election issue. With all parties voluntarily shying away from a substantive debate on the deficit, the economic argument will center around who has the best platform for future prosperity. Within a world where the free market has revealed itself, naked capitalism hardly attractive, the Liberals are even better placed to make the argument for government as driver, only it capable of a comprehensive vision to address Canada's shortcomings.

It does appear, based on this reaction and other discussions, that the Liberals are finally starting to articulate a vision beyond just platitudes. Still general but focused, this "coherence" is something you can sell to Canadians.

In The Dead Of Night

It's almost similar to Conrad Black removing documents from his office when the HEAT was turned on. I've marvelled at the overt Harper love fest that is the government Action Plan website, people might recall a screen shot or two, Harper PLASTERED everywhere, to the point of obscene (not to mention unattractive and creepy). In reality, this sudden visual CHANGE is an admission of guilt, because if the site content was never an issue, why the need? People were starting to FINALLY pay attention, and the Conservatives scurry to remove the irritant:

The Government of Canada website set up to promote the Conservative economic action plan had a leaner look yesterday: more than 30 photos of Prime Minister Stephen Harper had been removed.

Critics have complained that the website, actionplan.gc.ca, looks like a partisan promotion – complete with a Tory-blue colour scheme, glowing third-party testimonials, more than 40 photos of Harper and repeated references to "the Harper government" rather than the Government of Canada.

References to the "Harper government" remained on the website yesterday. But photos of the Prime Minister were reduced to about seven, from the original 40-plus

Funny what happens when you shine a light on the egomaniac. POOF he's gone. Oh, and I heard more radio ads on swine flu preparation this morning than I have previously. Just a coincidence I'm sure.

Nice Line

Waterloo "Dungeons and Dragons Club" Excursion

Someone sent this to me, from the massive protest at Ignatieff's Waterloo stop this past weekend:




I like our chances.

Get It Right In Outremont

Outremont isn't a slam dunk return to the Liberal column by any means, which means any counter-productive "development" denotes PURE FOLLY. I couldn't give a rats ass what Coderre wants, nor is Cauchon's personal ambitions of any concern. The Liberal members of Outremont should decide who represents them, so glaringly obvious it hurts.

It's actually a positive, that two impressive figures want to carry the Liberal banner. Let those two individuals appeal to the grassroots, and may the best person "win". The LAST thing you want is a process that leaves bitter feelings, that effectively turns off people that will be crucial in an election. Why would you want to shutout Cauchon, and alienate what I assume is a large following of Outremont Liberals?? That type of process essentially volunteers unnecessary weakness and benefits Mulclair. I see this debate as a question of arrogance- only a fool doesn't put their best foot forward, maximize every intangible to present your strongest hand. Hard feelings, excluding Cauchon and his pedigree, is frankly NUTS in the grand scheme.

If Liberals are "determined to win back Outremont", then put aside silly turf wars and have a spirited contest. Get it right in Outremont.

Telling Contrast

This issue of excessive Conservative government spending, promoting THEMSELVES never seems to get much traction, even though obscene by any measure. The Economic Action Plan ads are so partisan it's embarrassing, and yet the Conservatives seem to suffer no backlash. I'm not sure I necessarily agree with the direct comparison in this article, but if it highlights the misuse of taxpayer money, then it's a useful contrast:

The Conservative government is spending more than five times as many taxpayer dollars on promoting its economic plan as it is on raising public awareness about the flu pandemic.

The TV spots are just the latest $4-million salvo in a $34-million media blitz trumpeting the Conservative's recession-fighting budget.

Meanwhile, with public health officials fretting over an onrushing fall flu season, the spread of the H1N1 virus and widespread public apathy about the need for vaccination, no television ads are in the works to combat swine flu.

Health Canada's home web page, however, does include a prominent link to the Conservative economic action plan website (www.actionplan.gc.ca).

What you have is public health on the one hand, personal ambitions on the other. The argument that it's important to instill confidence, as justification for these economic ads, has long since passed, they've become nothing more than transparent campaign ads. Despite the obvious intent, not to mention gross misuse of money when the government is in deficit, it seems the Conservatives don't suffer. I hate to say it, but the prospects of people dying, a government with misplaced priorities, might just sharpen the focus on what has been happening.

New Liberal Ad

All Rise

NDP Caucus Split?

There have been rumors floating around Parliament this week, of an emerging split in the NDP ranks and a "raucous" caucus meeting. I was offered this quote from a well placed "little birdie":

"the NDP caucus is in the middle of a fierce battle over whether or not to support the government through the winter. The Mulcair people are pushing back hard against Laytons team, and other NDP MPs are opposing the current tactics on principle and fear of losing credibility in their constituencies."

In all seriousness, the above isn't exactly hard to believe, given the circumstances. Cue the denials....

Let The Record Show

Note the tense disposition of the Liberals:

Labour Takes Lipstick Off Pig

Interesting contradiction (what else is new) from the NDP. While supporters busily try to validate the EI sellout as substantive, the NDP's labour friends are criticizing the miniscule for what it is, pushing the party to try and get something in return for their voluntary capitulation:

One day after claiming victory for extracting employment insurance reforms from the Conservatives, New Democrats now say they've read the fine print and the government's latest bill is not the prize they had hoped.

But NDP MP Joe Comartin, whose Windsor, Ont., area riding includes many unemployed auto workers, said the government's bill – and the NDP's support – will be short lived unless the government agrees to NDP amendments.

“Unfortunately for communities like mine, the auto sector generally as well as forestry are going to be pretty extensively, if not completely excluded from being able to access the extended benefits under this bill,” he said.

Mr. Comartin said the bill applies only to people who first applied for EI in 2009, leaving out those who lost their jobs at the start of the recession.

Peggy Nash, the president of the NDP who also works for the Canadian Auto Workers, agreed the bill must be changed.

“Is it enough? Absolutely not,” she said in an interview.

When the NDP say they just read the "fine print", it means that for the past few days labour leaders and fellow supporters have been expressing concern about these EI reforms. Everybody knew what this reform was on Monday, the CAW and Canadian Labour Congress were criticizing immediately, so PLEASE with the "fine print". This is a reaction to blowback from the NDP base, as they now scramble to find something they can tolerate, a resignation that NO you can't put enough lipstick on this pig to make it attractive. It's actually a confirmation of what's been said from the beginning, this EI "reform" was never a concession, it was never the life raft that hapless supporters have tried to make meaningful.

The latest NDP stance is about trying to regain some credibility, a balancing act between fear of an election and party dignity. Lots of rumors of a "raucous" NDP caucus meeting this week, there is clearly some internal conflict. The NDP now sending signals they need more on EI tells us that there is some blowback, this crumb to make an issue disappear isn't acceptable. Let the tortured dance continue...

Squeeze Play

Remember back in the day, when the NDP would introduce this and that in Parliament, all in the name of embarrassing the Liberals, running up their now ridiculous confidence vote tally? Amazing what a little bit of latitude allows, as the Liberals play "what goes around comes around" with the No Dough Party:

The four parties in the House of Commons are nearing a deal to fast track the government's new employment-insurance legislation and put it to its first vote as early as Friday.

Government House Leader Jay Hill invited his Liberal, NDP and Bloc Québécois counterparts to a closed door meeting just after noon to discuss the government bill, which was officially introduced in the House of Commons Wednesday afternoon.

The Liberals announced Thursday morning that they are offering to pass the bill quickly, in the hope of taking away the NDP's stated reason for keeping the Conservatives in office for the short term.

“We don't want to give Mr. Layton any alibis,” Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff said.

Politics is a bloodsport, so people should be cautious with their reaction, given PAST history. Besides, this is shrewd politically, a bit of a master stroke if you will. Not only do we further expose the NDP, but the Liberals take away this EI issue, should we go to an election. It's a classic squeeze play, and the final end product will be an even more embarrassing statement, should the NDP vote confidence AGAIN on the next occasion. Rather than using this paltry EI nonsense as validation, people are left scrambling with new rationalizations. Meanwhile, the Liberals project strength and resolve, no sense whatsoever that we fear an election- an interesting posture, given the recent trends.

Make em squirm, and don't let up. "Do unto others as they have repeatedly done unto you".

More Of The Same

The weekly EKOS poll confirms the basic trend, Conservatives opening up a outside of MOE lead, renewed strength in Ontario:

shows the Tories with 35.1 per cent support, followed by the Liberals with 29.9 per cent. The New Democratic Party followed with 16.5 per cent, the Bloc Quebecois with 9.6 per cent and the Green Party with 9 per cent.

The Conservative lead increased slightly from last week’s poll, which saw the Tories with 34.2 per cent of support and the Liberals with 30.8 per cent. The NDP rose from 14.8 per cent, the Bloc slipped from 10 per cent, and the Green Party slipped from 10.1 per cent.

A slight uptick for the NDP, maybe capitulation is a winning strategy? I suspect it's just statistical noise, but latch on if need be :)
In Ontario, EKOS gives the Conservatives an edge:

Cons 40.1%
Libs 35.5%
NDP 16.5%
Greens 9%

Another poll pegging Con support above 40%, and further evidence that the Liberal vote is slipping. It's fair to say, the Liberals lost the PR battle in Ontario. It's also a testament to how soft support moves easily in Ontario. In the past months, we've seen a GENERALLY consistent picture of Libs 40%, Cons low to mid 30's. Prior to that, Ontario was up and down like a yoyo. The question now, is this a temporary Con uptick, or a real trend that holds. I still think the former, but we'll see.

No real movement anywhere else. In Quebec:

Bloc 38.9%
Libs 27.1%
Cons 16%
NDP 10.5%
Greens 7.6%

Liberals with a healthy lead in Atlantic Canada, but they've fallen into the mid 20's in B.C. EKOS had shown some previous strength in B.C., but now the Liberals run a close third.

On the question of what type of government Canadians prefer, another poll gives the Liberals the edge, although it isn't massive. 39.4% would prefer some type of Liberal government, while 35.9% want a Conservative government. A full 24.7% want neither, which is significant.

BLACK FRIDAY

Your own MP calls it "paltry". Your union base calls the reforms "scraps" and "discriminatory". Even worse, the meager wasn't even extracted as concession, it's a unilateral move by the government to make an issue disappear. A quick review of NDP EI demands, quotes, over the past few months, you'll see no mention of this reform as a priority- this was never about concessions for the government, it was about leaving a peanut for a squirrel faced with a long winter.

All this hollow partisan blather about the Liberals getting nothing in return for supporting the government (even though every fair minded observer in the country recognized the decidedly LIBERAL flavor of the budget), and now the NDP is reduced to making a molehill look like a mountain to save face. There is no other word for it than capitulation. This isn't a "deal", it's pure panic and after the fact spin.

Tomorrow, in Parliament, NDP members will rise and place CONFIDENCE in this government, erasing their ivory tower disposition. They will do by endorsing measures they rejected in the budget. They will do so, as a prelude to effectively abandoning their own EI bill that they've pointed to for months as the FIRM template for any agreement. They will enable Harper to take EI off the table for the near future, for longer than his TEMPORARY measures last. They've sold out in the name of political expediency, they've put their own self interest above their principles, they've become what they've vilified, they've betrayed their own sanctimony, they've become the LIBERALS. The horror!

BLACK FRIDAY. Welcome to the practical world, where adults must roam.

Angus Reid

Angus Reid weighs in(no pdf yet), and we see a significant change, particularly in Ontario. The national numbers (last poll two weeks ago in brackets):

Cons 36% (33%)
Libs 29% (32%)
NDP 17% (19%)
Bloc 10% (9%)
Greens 7% (7%)

A noticeable difference, further indication that the Conservatives are winning the election speculation debate.

Most of this gap seems to be a function of a large change in Ontario. The last AR poll had the Libs 40%, Con 37%, NDP 14%. While we don't have the full numbers yet, quite a shift:

The Conservatives held a commanding 12 point lead over Michael Ignatieff's Liberals in Ontario.

A 15% shift in two weeks is massive, by any measure. Ontario has fluctuated quite a bit this year, quite volatile. I can't recall this sort of lead for the Cons in Ontario from this pollster. Part of this may be explained by this finding:

The poll also showed almost six in 10 – 58 per cent – were against any move by the opposition to topple the Harper government.

The question now becomes, is this a temporary wave for the Conservatives, borne out of immediate election anger, or does this momentum "stick"?

UPDATE

Here are the internals. A couple of raised eyebrows. Not a dispute of changing fortunes in Ontario, but that Liberal number looks odd:

Cons 41%
Libs 29%
NDP 18%
Greens 10%

I expected another Con at mid 40's to justify the gap, but AR has the Liberals below 30%, which I'll put in the "one off" category for now. What's interesting, despite these seemly horrible numbers, AR finds that Ontarians pick the Liberals as their first choice to look after their interests, above the Conservatives. That suggests support beyond election reaction, a underlying number that bodes well in a campaign. Anyways, I'll take the trend, but the spread is questionable, given the Liberal score.

It's a good thing AR has the Liberals relatively high in Quebec, or the national number would look worse. Not sure I buy this number necessarily:

Bloc 40%
Libs 36%
Cons 13%
NDP 10%
Greens 2%

I haven't seen a Liberal number that high in quite some time, so another "one off" perhaps. Anti-election sentiment is weakest in Quebec, so it's believable that there is no backlash for the Liberals.

AR also asks people which type of government they would prefer. The Liberals come out on top, as the preferred future government. 54% prefer a Liberal minority or majority, 46% some form of Conservative government.

Only 1/3 support the opposition taking out the government. Interestingly, there is quite a bit of opposition from Liberal and NDP supporters.

Follow The Money

If I can offer a few words of advice. Kennedy should be at sea level:

It's All Good

All things being equal, and with added evidence emerging, I'd say today's development represents the best possible scenario for the Liberals moving forward. Of note, the initial reaction in the media seems to view the Liberals as the "big winners", just to take it out of the partisan realm.

The reason, well it's pretty obvious. Putting aside the 11 people in denial online, the overwhelming condemnation of the NDP is striking. There's just no credible way to rationalize the contradictions, this was the core NDP rallying cry and it has been obliterated. The moves reeks of weakness, that fact alone works for me from the Liberal perspective. Watching the NDP cling to the most paltry of EI reforms, as though central to their cause, well, reasonable people see it for what it is, enough said. Beyond that, the NDP now have to deal with Harper, and it's hard for me to see that relationship bearing much fruit, when you take the "strain" into the totality. At best it's a net neutral, more probable it starts to do damage.

If you're going to let the government survive this week, seems a reach to see another 180 degree turn in a couple weeks when the Liberals vote non-confidence. The NDP will work to avoid an election in the coming weeks, and not much is required to assure their support.

Assuming we have some breathing room, it's really hard to see the Liberal downside. I said this before the Sudbury caucus, that I preferred to see us build "up a lather" in Parliament, get the government on the defensive for a few weeks, before we entertained an election. If we would have went now, so be it, I still have some optimism, but the "chess" play was a slow buildup, rather than an instanteous pull the plug. If all these new "relationships" mean no fall election, then it is a question of competiting realities. Yes, the economy probably improves, although nothing seismic is on the horizon for quite some time. Yes, Harper gets the Olympic glow and his personal election "scenario" want (which is concerning), but he doesn't operate in isolation. If the Liberals are truly free of this "prop up" albatross which is dragging down another leader, then I see plenty of latitude to present a strong, confident front. I'm quite comfortable listening to others defend their support, if that's the case, while we simply oppose with impunity.

If it all unravels in October, that gets us over this hump and its temporary quality more assured. If it's a prolonged awkward dance with the socialists and the separatists, then we build and build without the constant defensive posture, which has blunted us for years now. One important factor, the Conservatives have put all their cards on this coalition argument, the effectiveness of that line is quickly evaporating, a few weeks, it will enter the realm of the ridiculous and that potential hammer will be gone. No matter the timeframe, there will come a TIME where others say "enough is enough" with these guys, or the Conservatives short curcuit themselves- whatever, the Liberals are a secondary consideration in terms of blame now.

It's all good. Maybe by accident, clearly this wasn't the primary plan in Sudbury, but I'll take it.

Harris Decima

Another poll from Harris Decima, as everybody ramps up the frequency, trying to gauge the situation. Interestingly, HD shows no movement from last week's poll, a close race:

A new poll suggests the election frenzy gripping the country's political class isn't stirring movement among voters.

The latest Canadian Press Harris-Decima survey finds the Conservatives maintaining a slight lead in popular support, with 34 per cent to the Liberals' 30 per cent. The NDP are at 15 per cent, the Bloc Quebecois at nine and the Greens at 10.

The findings are virtually unchanged from a survey a week ago, even though politicians have been jockeying non-stop for electoral advantage. An election could theoretically be triggered as early as Friday but the NDP are now signalling their intention to prop up Stephen Harper's minority Conservative government.

The telephone survey of just over 2,000 Canadians was conducted Sept. 3-13 and is considered accurate within a margin of error of 2.2 percentage points, 19 times in 20.

Big sample, HD uses last week's findings and this week's, dropping the last with each successive week. The fact that we see little movement is interesting, given the clear signals that the Liberals are "wearing" the election speculation.

UPDATE

Internals released:

Ontario:

In Ontario, the survey found the Liberals and Tories in a statistical dead heat, with 38 per cent and 35 per cent support respectively. The NDP was a distant third with 15 per cent while the Greens had 10 per cent.

Quebec:

In Quebec, the Bloc extended its lead slightly. The separatist party stood at 39 per cent, with the Liberals at 30 per cent, the Tories at 16, the NDP at seven and the Greens at six.

British Columbia:

The Conservatives maintained the advantage in B.C., with 36 per cent. The Liberals and NDP were tied at 23 per cent while the Greens had 17 per cent.

Taking A Hit

Nanos provides some pretty sobering numbers for Ignatieff. A moment in time, I get the "reaction" effect, but those gaps are something I wouldn't gloss over:

The most trustworthy leader

National (n=1,002)

Stephen Harper: 31%
Michael Ignatieff: 14%
Jack Layton: 14%
Gilles Duceppe: 8%
Elizabeth May: 8%
None of them/Undecided: 25%
The most competent leader

National (n=1,002)

Stephen Harper: 36%
Michael Ignatieff: 20%
Jack Layton: 11%
Gilles Duceppe: 7%
Elizabeth May: 2%
None of them/Undecided: 24%
The leader with the best vision for Canada’s future

National (n=1,002)

Stephen Harper: 32%
Michael Ignatieff: 20%
Jack Layton: 15%
Gilles Duceppe: 4%
Elizabeth May: 4%
None of them/Undecided: 25%
Leadership Index Score

Stephen Harper: 99
Michael Ignatieff: 54
Jack Layton: 40
Gilles Duceppe: 19
Elizabeth May: 14

In an election campaign, leadership numbers are key. I subscribe to the notion that the opposition leader must be within striking distance or on par with a sitting PM for his party to win an election. Without that dynamic, the task is almost herculian. This is clearly a snapshot, I would expect some narrowing when everybody calms down, but that doesn't diminish that these are BAD gaps, those are "lose election by a good margin" gaps.

Harper is doubling Ignatieff on some measure, which is something we haven't seen prior. The Liberals are taking the full brunt of this election backlash, Canadians clearly aren't pleased with Ignatieff's stance. Whether that is fleeting remains to be seen, but it is serious, and people should take heed.

What does this say about the dueling ads? I'm not sure if you can sift through the election anger to get a read, but at the same time there's no evidence of "warmth" developing, the opposite in fact.

I take findings like this to heart, in the sense that you should treat them seriously, understand why Ignatieff is tanking, Harper looking formidable. In that way, rather than reacting comfortably, you address in a forceful way. These numbers blow. Discuss.

UPDATE

In the pdf, he last asked the same questions in April, so it's a large gap in between. The numbers are slightly less informative when you use those as a backdrop, a few points difference, but that's hardly the point in the grand scheme.