PEACEKEEPING? NOT ANYMORE

Regardless of ones political affiliations, the conclusion is:  Ours is the country it is today because of the Liberal Party's dominance over both the political landscape and Canada's agenda for nearly 70 years of the last century.

The policies, the legislation, the vision advanced and practiced by the 'natural governing party' of the 20th Century defined Canadians as peace loving, tolerant, multicultural, bilingual, charitable, socially responsible people within a prosperous nation.

So why is the current government of Prime Minister Harper turning us away from our present and our future in what appears to be a truly transformative shift in character and value - A root-and-branch supplanting of one kind of country for another - as someone recently described the apparent transformation?

In a comment this weekend in 'The Globe And Mail,' political activist Gerald Caplan warns to be afraid of the "new" Canada being invented by Mr. Harper and his associates. Perhaps it's worth noting that Mr. Caplan in 1985 was appointed by another Conservative Prime-Minister, Brian Mulroney, to co-chair (with Florian Sauvageau) a Federal Task Force on Canadian Broadcasting Policy which ultimately led to the Broadcasting Act of 1988. (I digress!) - Of the current Conservative leader, Caplan concludes: "It's in the nature of true believers and ideologues to believe that any means to their sacred ends are justified...It's also typical of such people that they're often motivated by unfathomable resentment and anger, a compulsion not just to better but to destroy their adversaries."

From the session of Parliament just ended there's at least anecdotal evidence on several fronts of the government's efforts to create a Conservative mythology as opposed to a Liberal mythology - Instead of peacekeepers, we're now warriors; the "royal" prefix has been restored to the military; Canada's embassies must now feature portraits of The Queen; the list is long and growing but it seems to suggest a very deliberate and calculated attempt to re-shape Canadian symbolism, nationalism and values back to those cherished by the mid-war generation of which John Diefenbaker was a prominent member. And, more importantly to ignore Canada's evolution as an independent country with an identity of its own.

Some critics see the government's crime and justice initiatives, the changes at the Wheat Board and to the Long-Gun registry, our planned massive military spending and other recent legislated initiatives as borrowed elements of the "Tea Party" revolution from the United-States, and the hard right Republican "destroy the enemy politics" now so prevalent as the American Presidential campaign gets under way.

In the 2010 best seller "Harperland," author Lawrence Martin portrays a leader firmly in control of his political agenda, and a man..."who goes to extraordinary lengths to see it implemented." - In a new book due out next spring -"Warrior Nation: Rebranding Canada in a Fearful Age" co-authors Ian McKay and Jamie Swift of Queen's University take the notion several steps further arguing that: "The Harper government is operating very much like a regime mounting and ideological crusade to rebrand the country."  A crusade that Mr. Swift has told the 'National Post' involves the "dismantling" of institutions which interfere with values such as the Puritan work ethic and respect for authority.

Maybe Gerald Caplan is right: "Be very afraid: Stephen Harper is inventing a new Canada" - I don't like it!

RUMOURS OF ITS DEMISE GREATLY EXAGERATED?

America's Presidential re-election campaign is getting underway. So in politics this is just about ancient history: But four years ago, it was the young voters of the United-States who engaged the movement of hope and aspiration that swept Barack Obama into office.

Conversely, last May back home in Canada's national election more than half of the population under the age of 45 did not bother to vote, in very large measure because they felt ignored and treated as a nuisance by the mainstream parties. The median Canadian age was 26 years old when the message of optimism and his charisma swept Pierre Trudeau to power in 1968. Today's typical Canadian voter is in his early 60's.

Facing as it seems currently a 'live-or-die' moment in history,  pundits have been quick to flesh-out obituaries of the Liberal Party of Canada, for 69 years the country's natural governing party during the last century. The latest by way of author Peter C. Newman's who's Christmas bookstore offering is aptly titled: "When the Gods Changed. The Death of Liberal Canada."

There is a perfectly valid reason why young Canadian voters lost interest and disengaged from the last Federal election and the several previous others of the first decade of the 21st Century - Young voters have found little to interest them in the Harper Government's Conservative agenda of military boosterism, bigger prisons and border security,  while it scales down social policy and trims government's engagement into the lives of Canadians. And at least as author Newman sees it, the Liberals: mired in internal leadership dissension, a lack of fresh ideas, arrogance and scandal could not (or would not) capitalize on welcoming and engaging "young" Canada into the national conversation.

The net result; for the first time since Confederation the Liberals are the third party in the House of Commons and right now they can't even be sure if they'll ever return. I am reminded of course that the Progressive-Conservatives in the Federal Election of 1993 were virtually wiped-out, electing just 2 members to the Commons, Elsie Wayne in southern New Brunswick and Jean Charest in eastern Quebec, and ending-up fifth in House standings. The P-C's subsequent overhaul led to the eventual morphing of the right-of-centre Harper "Conservatives" steeped in the doctrine (perhaps dogma) of Reverend Ernest Manning (Preston's father) the Evangelical Radio Pastor who ruled as Alberta's Premier from 1943 to 1968.

Alas! Lest I digress: Manning advocated the polarization of political viewpoints in Canada. He argued that the country would be better off with two political parties, One on the Left - One on the Right. Sound familiar? Well beware, because that is precisely the scenario Canadians have witnessed with growing angst and anxiety playing-out in the bitter, divisive, angry bi-partisan struggles which have paralyzed both the Congress of the United-States and the Obama Administration. And, which predictably will only worsen as the next Presidential election is further engaged.

Over the course of the 20th Century the Liberal Party made Canada the country that it is today. In about a month, for 3 days in Ottawa, Liberals will gather for a convention of the faithful which may very well be its most important since the Party was founded on July 1, 1867.  Partisans will consider and adopt a "Road Map to Renewal" - They must get it right, the stakes are that high, and the country's future may depend on it. A key responsibility which must be exercised is to engage young Canadians into our national conversation. There now exists technology that was unimaginable just 10 years ago to do it, and an enormously savvy generation of its users just waiting to be asked.

A QUESTION OF LEADERSHIP

A couple of provincial political parties have come to grips publicly this weekend with matters of leadership.

Out on the west coast, British Columbia's New Democrats are struggling with a decision whether to shift their traditionally left-wing party into the Centre to challenge head-on the Liberal Government of Premier Christy Clark in the next provincial election. - Or take the party to a more traditional hard(er) left; in a counter effort against the Right of Center burgeoning B.C. Progressive-Conservative party which is being championed by their own former NDP Premier, Bill Vander Zalm, and former Newfoundland P.C. Premier, Brian Peckford.

Whilst in Quebec, Parti Quebecois leader Pauline Marois picked-up 94% support in a confidence motion at the party's annual conclave. As with British-Columbia, Quebec is gearing-up for a widely anticipated Provincial Election pitting 3-term scandal plagued Liberal Premier Jean Charest (scraping the bottom of the polling barrel) against all comers. Despite her astounding "vote o' confidence;" in Quebec's political backrooms, Mme Marois is disliked and not the PQ's first leadership choice to confront the Charest Liberals. Federal Bloc-Quebecois Leader, the charismatic Gilles Duceppe, is much more likely to lead (and win) the provincial Separatist movement in any upcoming Quebec Election. Duceppe you will recall threw-in his hat against Marois in the PQ's last leadership go-round to replace former Premier Bernard Landry; but in a move never adequately explained, he stepped-out just as fast as he'd stepped-in.

Be that as it may: Beyond Mr. Duceppe's anticipated transfer to the Quebec Provincial scene; the current May 2Nd Federal General Election will define the future political career of all 5 major Canadian Party leaders: From Stephen Harper on down to the Greens' Elizabeth May:

STEPHEN HARPER: Pundits, observers and pollsters share the opinion that Mr. Harper's Conservatives will be re-elected On May 2 once more with a "Minority" of seats in the House of Commons. Though the Conservative Party of Canada is said to be a one-man effort (Harper's), waiting in the wings for the right moment to swing into a leadership challenge is New Brunswick's former Premier Bernard Lord. The charismatic fluently bilingual young politician has been purposely staying-out of the current Federal tilt so as not to taint his own image with the Harper Brand. A 2011 version of a Harper Minority Government; the Prime Minister's 4Th attempt at a majority will sound the death knell of his leadership either with another eventual defeat in Parliament...or more likely with the call of a party leadership convention and Stephen Harper's retirement from active politics.

MICHAEL IGNATIEFF: For the Federal Party dubbed the 20Th Century's "natural governing party," only a win will do. And, as an astute observer noted this week..."that win is squarely on the shoulders of 64 year-old Ignatieff." From Wilfred Laurier; on down through MacKenzie-King, Louis St. Laurent, Pierre Trudeau and Jean Chretien: Liberals are expected to perform, and the performance criteria is winning elections. And; as even Nobel Laureat Lester B. Pearson learned after being elected in two historic Minority Parliaments, if a House majority doesn't materialize, there is no room at the party helm for that person anymore. Although the (very) young Justin Trudeau has aspirations to, and is clearly being groomed for an eventual leadership bid, party insiders know that he's not yet sufficiently seasoned to take over from Ignatieff when, - barring a "Coalition" of minority Parliamentarians of sorts later this spring, - he does not end-up Prime-Minister, and walks away. At that point; the Liberals may be looking for another short-term leader and Ignatieff's old college roommate and former Ontario NDP Premier Bob Rae may be among the very few choices.

JACK LAYTON: Far less is at stake when you are the perennial third or fourth place finisher. His party aside, polls suggest Mr. Layton is best liked and integrates the leadership qualities Canadians demand. Someone observed in conversation just yesterday that had Layton stepped-on over to the Liberals (as did Bob Rae), he'd most likely be elected Prime Minister on May Second. Except for a limited number of strong New Democrat ridings, Mr. Layton "is" the NDP. One of those growing areas of support is in metropolitan urban Quebec. Based on decades of work by Phil Edmonston, picked-up much more recently by former provincial (Liberal) Cabinet Minister, and current NDP Deputy-Leader and Outremont MP Thomas Mulchair, the party may record significant gains in May taking votes away from both the Liberals and the Conservatives. In light of Mr. Layton's health issues, any significant breakthrough in the large urban ridings of the province of Quebec would bode well for a Mulchair leadership takeover and (perhaps like the NDP in British-Columbia) a significant makeover of the party philosophy.

GILLES DUCEPPE: The charismatic Mr. Duceppe is a consummate politicians and like many previous Quebec based fringe parties with national aspirations; Real Caouette and the "Socreds" for instance; I think he knows that the Quebec destiny (whatever it is) will be shaped at home. It's over for the "Separatist" movement as we've known it for 40 years. The new "Independantistes" are pragmatic and urbane and Mr. Duceppe is itching to be Premier of Quebec. A 21St Century Rene Levesque in white armour ready to tackle both domestic issues and "les anglais" of Canada. In the aftermath of the May 2Nd election (with a secure lifelong Federal Parliamentary pension in hand) he's about to be handed his chance. Despite her overwhelming "vote of confidence" this weekend, the machinations are already well greased in the Provincial Parti Quebecois to secure Duceppe's leadership so that he's poised to slay the pesky Jean Charest before year's end.

ELIZABETH MAY: A week in politics is an eternity. Never mind 3 years! Stephane Dion's cornerstone Liberal Party platform in 2008 was an omnibus "Green Plan." - Sadly, and despite a mountain of evidence to the contrary, in this second decade of the 21St Century, If at all, "The Environment" is an insignificant blip on the political radar screen. Though Mrs. May and the "Greens" polled about one-million votes in 2008, no one was elected. No positive results either at a handful of noteworthy Federal by-elections in the 3 years hence, including one or two attempts by Mrs. May herself. In eliminating Mrs. May from last week's debate, the "Leaders' Television Consortium" was anticipating realistically the Federal vote results. There's just nothing for Mrs. May to hang-on for.

As they say on Election Night: If the trends are maintained; though the standings in the House won't change much: 2011 may be a seminal election which leads to a wholesale shake-up in Canadian party politics. - In Monte Carlo they'd say: "Les jeux sont faits!"

SHOWDOWN IN PARLIAMENT - REDUX

HARD NEWS, STRAIGHT TALK: Meet the new signature tag for Sun News Network which launches on Monday, April 18th just as the dust begins to settle over next week's televised leaders' debate(s); and 2 weeks to Federal Election day. Pundit, blogger and former Jean Chretien campaign chief Warren Kinsella will assume a starring role over at Sun News as the web's token Liberal. Let it not be said that Quebecor's foray into English language all-news television won't be "fair and balanced" just like America's Fox News on whose template it's being propped.

SCARY EVEN TO LITTLE CHILDREN: Pundit Kinsella opines that the Harper Conservative campaign is flawed from the git-go. Mr. Kinsella has suggested that the Tory attack ads against Michael Ignatieff have been built..."on too many exaggerations, too many out of context quotes and too many falsehoods." And; as electors become increasingly exposed to the reality of the Liberal Leader, the Conservative contradictions become painfully obvious. With the campaign now well under way, Canadians tuning-in have seen that Ignatieff,(perhaps) unlike his predecessor Stephane Dion, isn't nearly as bad as he's been made out to be.

HECK! THE SAME OLD SAME OLD: The "Harper Headed to Majority" headlines have the Prime Minister's handlers fretting that the campaign efforts may be peaking too soon. They've had Mr. Harper launch the week's campaigning assuring his audience in Welland that..."the Conservatives would govern the same with a majority as they have in a minority." Implying that there is no hidden socially conservative agenda. It's the unspoken fear that derailed Mr. Harper's three previous campaigns and eventually scared enough voters away to deny his party a ruling majority.

ELVIS HAS LEFT THE BUILDING: The Prime Minister has successfully ignored his own suggestion of a "one-on-one" debate with the Liberal Leader. Neither politician is a scintillating spell-binder. Still there's a sense that (...here I hesitate) an American-style debate between the two front-runners would have injected considerable interest into a otherwise moribund campaign. Of course, the downside of a campaign debate moderated by Rick Mercer is that the CBC Comedian and current 'McLean's Magazine' pundit may himself have ended-up being elected Prime-Minister.

WHEN A MAJORITY IS NOT A MAJORITY: In the May 2nd election there are roughly 16-million eligible voters. If (as they say on election night coverage) the trend persists: Perhaps no more than 8-million people will be voting in this Federal Election. Regardless of which party wins on election night...if 40% of votes cast represent the magic majority of seats in Parliament: Under 4-million Canadians could elect the country's first majority government in eleven years. More than 40% of eligible Canadian adults did not bother to vote in 2008, the lowest turnout since Confederation, and there's little indication that next month's election will yield better results. I guess we'll get the government we deserve.

WITH ELECTIONS, IT'S BEST TO DIVE RIGHT IN.

-THAT COALITION THING: At the end of the day, Governor-General David Johnston will be hard-pressed to decline an opposition offer to form a two (or three) party coalition government if, as polls steadfastly suggest, another Conservative minority is elected on May second. In the early going, though the motive to take away as many seats as possible from the NDP and Bloc is strategic; Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff is wrong to categorically rule-out a coalition. To their disadvantage, this issue is not going away, and will continue to haunt the Liberals right through the election campaign.

-A REFERENDUM ON LEADERSHIP: The election is an unprecedented fourth attempt by any Canadian national party leader to secure a majority number of seats in the House of Commons. It's testimony to Stephen Harper's tenacious iron-grip on his leadership of the Conservatives that he's still around considering just how we've gotten where we are: Though it can't be argued that Mr. Harper forced the first election as leader of the Reform/Alliance back in 2004...in 2005 it was Mr. Harper's own motion of non-confidence that upended the Paul Martin government, and in 2008 it was he who asked the Governor-General to dissolve Parliament on the eve of the "Great Recession", describing The House as dysfunctional. In this fourth go around Mr. Harper is the centrepiece of the campaign. - Winner to be declared by whichever of the main parties presents the most credible version of the "real" Stephen Harper.

- IT'S NOT A POLITICAL GAME: When his government collapsed on Friday last, Mr. Harper lamented from the foyer of the House of Commons that Canada's economy is not a political game. Of course he's right. That's why the Conservative strategy to paint themselves as guardian of Canada's economic strength will fail. Where it matters, in the world's economic markets - New York, London, Tokyo, Beijing...Hell! even in Toronto; global investors have far weightier issues on their minds than the outcome of yet another election in Canada. Three days into the campaign, Moody's Investors Services is already telling its significant players that any new budget, Conservative or Liberal, introduced after the election will continue to embrace the (national)..."consensus on the desirability of debt reduction." - Mr. Harper's Government in fact may be playing loose with some of it's own economic facts: Canada is NOT leading the global economic recovery. The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) says we're 10th amongst it's 17 member nations in 2010; and (to be fair) expected to move up to ninth by this year's end. Matter of fact, Australia and Sweden are at the top of the list.

As the saying (repeated ad nausea) goes - "In politics a week is an eternity" - Stay tuned?

ABUSING POWER - PARLIAMENT PARALYZED BY CHILDLIKE BEHAVIOUR

I've got to admit about being all set to weigh-in heavily on Canada's parliamentary paralysis over this business of a Federal election in the aftermath of the national budget which will be tabled on Tuesday next.

I still will. But, it may tempered by President Barack Obama's "time-out" to record his College Basketball picks on America's national sports network ESPN, at a time when many believe that the most powerful political leader on earth should really otherwise be occupied with matters of much more urgent nature.

Really, I don't think President Obama needs me to remind him of those current event issues that really matter...Though I find it hard to locate "March (basketball) Madness" near the top of the list.

Okay; that said: Back to Canadian politics. We may wanna be; but unlike the USA it's plenty clear that we're nowhere near the top of any one's list of the planet's influential powers. Regardless, it seems that our Parliamentary democracy has been hijacked, overwhelmed and paralyzed by this illogical death desire to plunge us into a two or three hundred million dollar Federal election which every public poll known to man suggests won't change a damned thing.



The implied suggestion that Her Majesty's loyal opposition thinks, repugnant as it is, that the ethical sludge seeping-out of Parliament Hill is a strategy for winning the election is seriously flawed. Clearly the top-of-mind issue is, and will remain through an election, the nation's economic performance.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper has been criticised for telling an audience in British Columbia that Japan's unfolding disaster is a reminder of the fragility of the global economy; subsequently adding that the fallout from the devastating earthquake means now is not the time for an election. Few would argue with the Prime Minister's conclusion. But actions speak louder than pious words. His party and his government continue feverish unabated preparations for securing the elusive Parliamentary majority which has eluded the Conservatives since taking office in January of 2006.

When the dust settles following next Tuesday's Federal budget, and if the Government is ultimately defeated in Parliament, the Conservatives will go into the election on the strenght of all of the wonderful things which would (or could) have resulted from what in effect will have been an imaginary budget. It's plenty obvious that is not the frame nor context within which Michael Ignatieff and the Liberals want to campaign. Clearly the Conservatives are vulnerable on their promises to clean-house in the aftermath of the last decade's advertising scandal. It's just that at this juncture the timing appears quite wrong.

MAYBE NOT ON A FULL STOMACH

It may just be that I have been wrong to dread the resumption of Parliament in the third week of the month. Despite all the issues which have kept the media active through the intervening period, it has been a long three-months' summer hiatus. It has become anecdotally obvious that the nation's Parliamentary scribes are perhaps just as anxious as our elected officials themselves to get into the mayhem of the House of Commons and the fireworks of Question Period for the Conservative minority government of Prime Minister Harper.

Good God, in the interim they've taken to equating politics with food. In the process eliminating one of life's few simple remaining pleasures; to wit: A decent meal un-interrupted by politicians, telemarketers and snake-oil salesmen.

In a short series of articles being published by the Toronto Star, journalist Susan Delacourt has been examining how and why politics has been swayed from the institutional towards an ever increasing market-oriented model. She concludes that it's not by accident..."that politicians see the voters as one big crowd of hungry consumers, and that the citizens think politicians like...merchants, see them simply as wallets."

In fact, it is an accident of the prosperous "boom" period following the Second World War. Bolstered by the desire to re-construct the North American economy; citizens were encouraged to acquire feverishly every possible consumer gadget and widget starting with the automobile, the first television sets and even their complementary TV-Dinners. It wasn't long before we were lulled into equating prosperity and consumerism as the product of good politics and by implication those representatives we elected.

As "The Star" explains, nowadays the shopping/consuming link to politics is often expressed through coffee choice: liberal lefties sip "lattes" at Starbucks; the common folk to Tim Hortons for a "double-double. Which explains precisely why the pollsters and marketing gurus amongst Leader Michael Ignatieff's "Liberal Express" Tour over the summer sought so hard to dispel the image, regardless of how uncomfortable it made their leader:



Without missing a beat the Conservatives this weekend have countered with the release of a "celebrity" cookbook authored by Ontario Conservative MLA (Nepean-Carleton) Lisa MacLeod - "I'd Rather Be Home Baking Cookies" lampoon's a Liberal blogger suggestion during MacLeod's last campaign that implied she'd be better at home baking cookies. Obviously the list of celebrity chefs' recipes is a who's who of Tory politicians including the Prime Minister (salsa), Ministers John Baird (cookies) and Peter MacKay (lobster bisque); and even Ottawa Mayor Larry O'Brien (french toast).

Bloated at first, and worried that I might be sick or fat by the time Parliament resumes, I've been relieved to learn ironically that "Tums", the iconic tummy ache tablet, turn 80 years old this week. "Tums" basic formula is unchanged in 80 years; and from its single plant in St. Louis, Missouri it churns-out more than 4 billion Tums tablets each year: I digress! (24 flavours)

Cynics define politics as the art of looking for trouble and finding it - Then misdiagnosing it and misapplying the wrong remedies. I conclude with the fear that regretfully "Tums" short-term flavourful relief may not be very helpful for what ails us.

GAUZE BAGS PLEASE! WE'RE CANADIAN. THANK YOU.

I'm from New Brunswick. Back in my generation the drink of choice in the Maritimes was King Cole Tea (in gauze teabags), the finest Orange Pekoe imported from India since 1867 by Barbour Foods of Sussex. They still do! - I digress, relax, eventually this will make sense.

September usually brings a certain rejuvenating sense of well-being following the summer's hiatus. Except of course in Canadian politics where we've enjoyed / or suffered (depending on one's point of view) a minority Federal Government since January of 2006. Thus, the anticipated return of the Parliamentary session in just a couple of weeks means the usual litany of accusations, threats and bombastic intent to force, call, trigger, slip-into another unwanted national election.

So just this week both major national leaders, Liberal Mchael Ignatieff; and Conservative Prime-Minister Stephen Harper have traded barbs and pre-election rhetoric. In Baddeck, Cape Breton, Ignatieff described the Tories as..."the toughest and most ruthless machine in Canadian politics." - Last year to the same audience (the Liberal caucus) in Sudbury he'd advised: "Mr. Harper your time is up!." Same old, same old - Kinda reminds me of the 3 decades old cereal commercial: "Give it to Mikey, He'll eat anything."

As for Mr. Harper this September's mantra is all about "majority government." Fresh from his Northern Territories "wave the flag" tour, he's been telling anyone still listening that there is a stark choice to be made: "A stable majority Conservative government - or a coalition of Liberals, New Democrats and the Separatist Bloc Quebecois." Implying: Canada, the choice is yours - Vote for me!

Journalists and political commentators tell us the party leaders are "framing the ballot question." Sounds to me as if the "frame" is becoming frayed around the edges; but nevertheless the picture is in increasingly sharper focus:
- Party leaders rather than National leadership;
- Dogma ignoring issues;
- Division instead of unity;
- Victory over substance and vision;
- Popularity polls over the nation's welfare.

It is very Canadian of us to take a back seat on most issues to the lead of our southern neighbours in the United-States. Politics is no different, and we have been witnessing for 8 years or less what apporter partisan polarization and a disaffected, disenfranchised middle-class. Broadcaster Glenn Beck, ex-Governor Sarah Palin, and their Tea Party supporters being just a most recent manifestation:



Which begs the question (posed at least once recently in a newspaper headline) - "Is The Tea Party Canada-Bound?" -

Throughout modern history, protest movements have formed, existed and subsequently vanished. In the United States they've fueled Presidential candidacies from the Right by Ross Peroe; and the Left, Ralph Nader. On Canadian soil, Preston Manning's book "The New Canada" (1982), begat the Reform Party created in 1987; precursor to Mr.Harper's Alliance coalition with the Progressive-Conservatives. There have been similar manifestations on provincial territory including the current Wildrose Alliance Party in Alberta; the Action Democratique Quebecois (ADQ); and in the election now underway down east, the People's Alliance of New Brunswick.

The cautionary tale for Canada's Parliamentarians is the dangerous emergence of resentment against political elitism and what the Americans call "big" government. The former Premier of British-Columbia, William Vander Zalm, who spearheads the anti-HST movement in his own province now describes the effort this way: "When we started this whole campaign against the HST, it was just the HST. Now it has grown into a whole issue of democracy, people are saying that we don't have democracy, we elect dictatorships."

An embryonic "Tea Party Movement of Canada" has already formed on the media savvy Face Book Internet site. Still in its infancy and with just 1,400 signed-up members it's hardly a threat to mainstream politics and probably hardly worth notice nor mention. After all there are still considerable political differences between Canada and the United-States. However, while some anger and frustration may dissolve into much ho-hum apathy; in some other circles the basis of a Tea Party-like protest movement is the same on either side of the international border.

PARADISE LOST

It's a toss-up I think whether Canadians will face another Federal Election sometime in the fall. Unfortunately that's the territory created by a minority status government in a Parliament composed of four Political Parties. And, it happens irrespective of Federal legislation establishing fixed electoral dates every four years. That Legislation was ignored in 2008 by the ruling Party which promoted it. There are no valid reasons to believe it will be any different the next time.

Three months ago when the House of Commons adjourned there were high expectations that from a political perspective it would be a relatively quiet break from the routine drudgery of a Parliamentary session. Basking in the afterglow of the two Ontario Summits in June and the Queen's Canada Day tour of several provinces, the Prime Minister was to take the summer off with family at the Harrington Lake compound while the Liberal Leader, Michael Ignatieff, rode the country's back roads for a third summer's attempt at connecting with just plain folk. Oh my!

Just when you'd have thought we'd remain on safe ground for a few more weeks; the Prime Minister who's summer absence was described by critics as arrogant, uncaring and out of touch; has taken to the road with announcements in Vancouver last week, visits and job creation goodies in New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island this week, and an Arctic Tour which begins on Monday. And; amidst the unexpected clamour of accusations over the G-20 security tactics; the long-form census controversy; and the sacking of the RCMP's "Gun Registry" honcho - Though described as "somewhat respectably successful" - The Ignatieff summer camp tour has been forced to play to a significantly lesser National audience whilst his speeches, announcements and pronouncements have been preached to a largely converted crowd of existing Liberal supporters. "C'est la vie" as they say too frequently in Politics.

Front and centre, the Conservatives of Prime Minister Harper have faced a summer long barrage of growing accusations over the Government's treatment of officials and bureaucrats with dissenting views. The most recent to join the list is the RCMP Superintendent (Marty Cheliak) dumped from his job overseeing the national "long-gun registry" which the Conservatives have vowed to abolish before September's end. Very recent rumours suggest the Chair and the Vice-Chair of the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (The CRTC) are heading for the dumpster as well - At least one wag suggesting - to clear the way for the regulator's blessing of Quebecor's right of centre all news TV outlet: "Sun News" which is being fronted by Mr. Harper's former Chief Spokesman, Kory Teneycke.

Mr. Harper is obsessed with image and some say his Government and Party have taken their agenda control to a freakish new level. But, despite the government's centrally controlled information and news vetting efforts; Conservative insiders have frequently bristled over and complained about the national media's coverage of government initiatives. The Quebecor backed right-wing television news channel modelled on Fox News, and fronted by Mr. Teneycke, is said to be of paramount importance with Mr. Harper and his handlers.

Michael Ignatieff and the rag tag team of Liberals left behind from the back-to-back meltdowns of the Jean Chretien and Paul Martin governments back in 2005 & 2006 don't likely appear too well organized nor prepared much to seize the issue and capitalize significantly from the seemingly arrogant and obsessive behaviour of the current minority government.

Political leaders and observers from both sides of the aisle should know that Parties lose their grip on power when voters perceive that they are too arrogant to work cooperatively on facing and solving the country's common problems. It seems that many issues in Canada may well have reached the point that they should transcend political parties. The bi-partisan turmoil which has crippled the Administration of the Government of the United-States is just one recent (very nearby) example from which to draw our own critical lesson.

Canadians are right to be furious and disillusioned with our Federal politicians. It may be a toss-up on whether we'll be called (once again) to go to the ballot boxes in the fall. However before paradise is lost in a flurry of apathy and disillusionment we will need people who choose to run for office for the purposes that they can serve far more than to merely get elected. Politicians and representatives who are not just saying what they need to get elected, or make promises they can't keep. Beware because eventually they will be judged by their effectiveness and willingness to cooperate. Consensus, so that the tensions and the differences of opinions about the problems we need to address are resolved before the doomsday clock strikes twelve, would be a refreshing change and a good starting point.

PURGATORY ON A WAYWARD BUS

The Liberal Party dominated politics in Canada by holding power for 69 years during the 20th Century; more than any other elected Party in the developed world. Now that from all appearances Liberals are in Purgatory, there is no shortage of passions and emotions from every side of our political spectrum.

I was 9 years old in the summer of 1957 when for 25 cents at the "Capitol Theatre" I saw Jayne Mansfield starring in John Steinbeck's "The Wayward Bus." - I'm not quite sure if it was Mansfield's stunning performance (some say her best), or Steinbeck's riveting dark plot of strangers on a chartered bus nicknamed "Sweatheart", or a bit of both...but I've never forgotten the movie. Lest I digress - Steinbeck so despised the film version of his 1947 best seller that he refused to sign a re-release agreement, which explains why it's never been released on video or DVD.

I've thought a fair bit about "The Wayward Bus" as Michael Ignatieff's "Liberal Express" winds its way across the ten provinces and a couple of territories on its six week mission of purification for the Liberal Leader. Steinbeck's passengers aboard "Sweetheart" undergo a variety of life changing experiences: One surely may hope!

Since he became the Party Leader after the failed "coalition mission" to overthrow Stephen Harper at Christmas 2008, the knocks against Micheal Ignatieff are that he's out of touch; a self-serving academic; an elitist and an aloof loner. Strangely from my perspective (at least) the very same characteristics, values and qualities that gave Pierre Trudeau 42 years ago the charm and charisma with which he swept the country. Apparently times have changed.

Successive stories about the Government's decision to scrap that "blasted" long-from Census; and the Tory Industry Minister responsible - Tony Clement, having now morphed into "hero by night" saving damsels in drowning distress; have not helped the Liberal Chief secure very many productive headlines for his tour. But: - Micheal Ignatieff is not a Main Street kind o' guy, meant to, nor good at, shaking hands and kissing babies...and he shouldn't be playing one in THIS MOVIE either - Dressed-up in jeans and a red baseball cap. Had Trudeau's handlers, forty some years ago, suggested the same Get-Up; they'd been told in no uncertain words to "fuddle-duddle" and / or "mangez de la merde!" - I digress...

As a travelling salesman, Mr. Ignatieff's "Ernest Horton" isn't nearly as good as Dan Dailey's to Jayne Mansfield in "The Wayward Bus" - (PS- Fret not: The film is old and the bus drives through a tunnel for a few seconds)





When the Liberal Express rolled-through Justin Trudeau's turf last week in Montreal's Papineau Riding, what wasn't quite clear to the media is which of the two men: Liberal Leader, Ignatieff or Trudeau was more popular with the assembled Grit supporters. (Same phenomenon it seems a few days earlier with Chretien in Shawinnigan.) In Papineau, almost as an afterthought, Ignatieff reminded the crowd that his father, George, worked for Trudeau as Canada's Ambassador to the United Nations. Some say Ignatieff Senior was "unimpressed" by Trudeau and left shortly thereafter for a gig at the University of Trinity College.

To whatever degree anyone may have wished...the "Liberal Express" tour isn't the springboard into "Iggy-Mania" for a somewhat anticipated fall Federal Election. Just as Lester B. Pearson was shunned by Party insiders after the limelight switched-over to Pierre Trudeau; Ignatieff's years in Purgatory may be just a cleansing in-waiting for Justin Trudeau's ascension to Leadership...perceived and / or real - "Sweatheart" bus indeed!

SUMMER OF DISCONTENT(?)

Well, it's called the "Liberal Express" and somewhere, somehow, it will be hitting a town, barbecue, pig roast, Rotary meeting near you any day now, and (apparently) until the end of August.

You may call it what you will; but the underlying message is: Forget Ignatieff: Vote Liberal! Though it's being billed as Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff's attempt to connect with Canadians, the real message may be: Look! He may be a weak leader, but we've got all these other great guys...and frankly folks, wouldn't you rather vote Liberal than give Stephen Harper the majority he doesn't deserve.

This is Mr. Ignatieff's third summer at defining himself to Canadians. He flamed-out as Pierre Trudeau incarnate in summer tour #1 three years ago. Who can forget (oops! Looks like we already have) Mr. Tough Guy of the Summer 2009 tour - "Mr. Harper, your time is up?". Summer 2010: Flavour? To be determined.

Meantime in the other camp: Let's see - "Fall Election Threats Follow Budget Bill Debate" screams the latest Canadian Press headline as the Tories threaten yet another fall election after Liberal Senators stripped provisions from the 2010 budget implementation bill. Somehow, shouldn't we be weary and bored of all this by now?

According to the latest EKOS poll, the Liberals have sunk in popularity to their lowest level in over a year. Respondents claim they'd vote 34% in favour of the Conservatives, compared with 24% for the Liberals if a Federal election were held this week. The Conservatives, specifically the Prime Minister, has / have been in the spotlight over the G-8 & G-20 Summits and the successful visit of The Queen on Canadian soil through the Canada Day celebrations. The even more recent confirmation of David Johnston as the next Governor General seems to be playing particularly well with the conservative masses - "Well, he's not from the CBC" - is apparently the general consensus. But; 34% popular vote is considerably short of the 40-plus percentile generally considered majority government territory.

Mr. Harper thus intends to spend his summer at the Gatineau Hills, Harrington Lake estate, official country residence of the nation's Prime-Minister. Senator Douglas Finley who is threatening a fall election over the Senate's debate of the Federal budget bill, is the Federal Conservative Party Campaign Director. Mr. Harper may be on "staycation" up at Harrington Lake, but never too far for a huddle (or two) with the Tory campaign managers who've already acknowledged..."The buses, the planes, the trains, the money, the boardroom - every thing's ready to rock and roll."

Can the Conservatives pull-off a "majority" win election this fall? It's already a given that Micheal Ignatieff is out unless the Liberals can extricate a quite unlikely winning rabbit out of their hat come the next general election. But, Harper's future may be no more assured, and hang squarely on a "majority" win. A fourth unsuccessful attempt could be mortally wounding to the Prime Minister's leadership and insider pressure to step aside difficult to ignore.

Within days of "mounting the throne" (as it were) come September, Governor-General David Johnston may just be asked, as was his predecessor in 2008, to dissolve Parliament and call Canadians to another unwanted General Election. As the Conservatives face the prospect of implementing massive Federal program cuts to rein-in their own unprecedented $60-Billion budget shortfall; it is the future of both major national party leaders which may be at stake.

THERE'S A HANGIN' HERE TODAY!

"The hanging was the best show in town. But they made a mistake. They hung the wrong man and they didn't finish the job." - Clint Eastwood / Marshall Jed Cooper - "Hang'Em High" (1968).

Hundreds of guests are to gather on "The Hill" as Parliament resumes on Tuesday to hang Jean Chretien: The former Prime Minister will take his place with his twenty predecessors when his official portrait is hung amongst Canada's great, not great, and so-so elected political leaders of the last 143 years.

Jean Chretien, who is 76, served 10 years as Prime Minister (1993-2003). Though he lives in Ottawa and works not very far from the Parliament Buildings, his return to the Centre Block and under the "Peace Tower" will be (surely) an occasion for many to reflect on our nation's path over the 7 years since the scrappy "little guy" stepped away from the limelight. Mr. Chretien spent 40 years in Federal politics. His history will bear the mantle of the "advertising scandal" which precipitated his departure. It may be said though that "his" is the end of an era in Canadian politics. A truly remarkable four decades when Canada's legacy, from peacekeeper to our steady economic reputation, became the envy of the world.

It is true of course that others also played significant political leadership roles during the period. Brian Mulroney is responsible for the foundation of our economic growth through much of the last quarter century because of free trade initiatives. But it seems Mr. Chretien can rightfully claim to have been the constant woven through the careers of Mr. Mulroney, and other Prime Ministers, Joe Clark; Kim Campbell and Paul Martin.

To say nothing (alright..almost nothing) of the powerful National Liberal Party juggernaut he captained through a series of significant "majority" governments; Thereby earning the Liberals the title of: "Natural Governing Party". No party has had a majority in Parliament since Mr. Chretien's departure...And to be fair: From the succession of Leaders the Liberals have selected since 2003; It's hard to conjure any cathartic strategy to salvage hope for the Party's fortunes in the foreseeable future. Perhaps then Stephen Harper will somehow be granted his "majority" wish. End of an era indeed!

Regardless, this salute to Jean Chretien should be a joyous occasion for all former Prime Ministers, their friends, supporters and even past political opponents. In that realm it seems as if it may be downhill from here: Mr. Justice Jeffrey Oliphant, the Commissioner in the "Mulroney/Schreiber Cash Payments Affair," hands over his report on Monday of next week; while the next figurative hanging of a Liberal leader (Paul Martin) is scheduled for 2012.

GRAHAM'S WATERLOO?

There is a "watch" in the media over the 60,000 or so Canadians who (like me) have signed into the FaceBook Page of "Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament."

Down east, in my native province of New Brunswick, when the Legislative Assembly begins the 2010 session next Tuesday; the sale of NB Power to Hydro Quebec will dominate debate and some suggest, could eventually cost Premier Shawn Graham next fall's provincial election.

Though Mr. Graham's Liberals are absolutely right in the decision to unload NB Power's monstrous $ 3+ billion debt while securing an efficient source of abundant power from the world's largest utility (Hydro-Quebec); about 28,000 New Brunswickers have joined a FaceBook movement there opposing the move. Proportionally a far larger cross-section of citizens than our national "anti-proroguing" movement.

Opponents in New Brunswick have joined in a growing chorus of nay-sayers led by Newfoundland & Labrador Progressive-Conservative Premier, Danny Williams, and perhaps to a lesser degree, Nova Scotia's NDP Premier, Darell Dexter. Mr. Williams' disputes with Hydro-Quebec are legendary...and, well there's always capital to be raised when your opponents are of another political persuasion: In this case both Graham and Quebec Premier Charest are Liberals...I digress.

Even the Governor of the State of Maine, John Baldacci, made headlines down east recently by publicly seeking guarantees from Quebec's Premier Charest that the "have-not" northern state won't be left-out of the lucrative energy corridor Hydro Quebec would exploit to the American northeast when the NB Power deal is done. Governor Baldacci has been an ally of New Brunswick's efforts to channel hydro, nuclear and wind generated power to the American market along with the Irving Refineries' output of fuel oil and liquefied natural gas from facilities in Saint John.

Premier Graham's bold proposal to unload the limited future of a stand-alone NB Power isn't dead yet; but as New Brunswick's legislative session gets set to resume, it seems "dead in the water" and a major challenge for the first term Premier and his government. Though they have not cited a cabinet split over the NB Power debacle among their reasons; two of the Premier's Ministers have quit. On Monday, the Justice Minister, Michael Murphy, jumped-ship. Mr. Murphy may be a potential candidate for the Liberal Party leadership should Graham's government go down to defeat and humiliation over the NB Power deal with Hydro-Quebec. Murphy considered opposing Graham for the leadership race in 2001.

It would be a pity if a bold, practical and progressive deal such as the takeover of NB Power by Hydro Quebec were nixed. But such is the challenge Shawn Graham and his fractioned Cabinet will walk into next week. For sure the debate will dominate New Brunswick's politics as perhaps few others have before...In the process, should Mr. Graham fail and his Liberal Government defeated: His would become a historical footnote as New Brunswick's first ever "one-term" government.

LOVE-IN AT THE CENTRE RIGHT

It may not be as dramatic as a tectonic shift in the fundamental values which define us as Canadian; but there appears to be palpable evidence of movement in the basic tenets of the philosophical principles of the country.

Likely not since the election of the Progressive-Conservative Government of John Diefenbaker in the landslide victory of 1958 has there been such measurable evidence of a shift to the right in the values, principles, ideologies and assumptions, in short: The bedrock of the nation's foundation.

In the fall election of 2008 a year ago, popular support for the Liberal Party of Canada, the country's stalwart left-of-centre standard bearer since Confederation, fell to its worst ever showing: 26.3% - It may be just one poll; but the latest numbers released by Ipsos-Reid suggest that if an election were held this week, less than one-quarter of Canadians would support the Liberals.

Perhaps the malaise is not entirely within the party nor of its making; but the recent succession of dull leaders: Martin, Dion and Ignatieff share a measure of the blame for their uninspired clarion call to provided safe harbour for the listing ship of the national political left.

Though it is essentially a one man party; the coalition of the right under the banner of the Conservative Party of Canada has achieved the level of success with Stephen Harper that so far has eluded every Liberal Leader since Chretien stepped-down. Though that may not say much for Mr. Harper, like the man on a tight-rope, as long as he maintains a measure of balance between the more extreme elements of the Reform/Alliance wing (from which he spawned), and the centre right Progressive-Conservatives mentored to this day still by Brian Mulroney, the Prime Minister could remain successful for quite some time - Parliamentary minority or not.

The political left - The Liberals, the New Democrats, The Greens and (yes) the Bloc Quebecois - is scattered, divided and ineffective. It was not pretty to watch; Constitutional circumstances and dictates, politics and history, doomed it to fail. But last December's Parliamentary Coalition of three which sought to overthrow the Harper Tories may have been as close as it gets for quite some time. The charismatic, unifying and inclusive leadership the left seeks is not yet anywhere on the horizon.

In short, the Liberal "Barack Obama" remains unidentified.

THE TROUBLE WITH THE GRITS

Everyone knows that Micheal Ignatieff's ill-advised and poorly timed ultimatum to Stephen Harper at the Liberal Caucus in Sudbury 5 weeks ago isn't the root cause of the Grit problem. It just accelerated the party's current flame-out by snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

Prognosticators are already predicting the Liberal leader's demise and some behind the scenes maneuvering may already be on the way to line-up a list of potential successors.

Somewhat like the man with the accent in the ING Bank television commercials, I was about to suggest to the Tories to..."Save your money!" by dropping the attack ads. I understand that's already been done by those close to the Prime Minister's office. There is at least one report that Mr. Harper himself told his Conservative colleagues at this week's caucus meeting to "back-off" and let the Liberals "implode on their own." Something the Liberals seem quite willing to oblige judging by the contretemps caused in Quebec by Denis Coderre's very public internal conflict with his party leader.

This problem is bigger than Michael Ignatieff though he may end-up one more of its victims. The Liberals don't know how to be an opposition party; let alone an effective opposition in the House of Commons. They've never learned, and this very public and somewhat nasty on-the-job training is not helping, at least for the foreseeable term.

WITHER THE NATURAL GOVERNING PARTY: In the 71 years between MacKenzie-King (1935) and Paul Martin's defeat in 2006, the Liberals governed Canada for 55 years, ceding power to the Conservatives for a total of only 16 years in between to: Diefenbaker, Clark, Mulroney and Campbell...and two of those (Clark and Campbell) were little more than political aberrations. In contrast when Harper's Conservative forces won their first election in winter 2006 they were accused of governing as if they were still in opposition. No surprise they'd had plenty of experience. Lest I digress: Some suggest Prime Minister Harper still rules as if he were Opposition Leader and they point to his regular diet of attack ads against the Liberals as ongoing evidence.

Virtually since Wilfrid Laurier who was Prime-Minister from 1896 to 1911, the Liberal Party's strength and influence have rested inside the Province of Quebec. Almost every effort to wrestle that power base away from Montreal has failed miserably. Micheal Ignatifeff is just its latest manifestation and has so far not measured-up to the challenge. One wonders why, other than for his Toronto-centric handlers, he'd want to upset such a winning, and obviously delicate strategy?

Quebec and Ontario votes are pre-requisites for governing this country. Ontario Liberals, Ontarians in general; because they can, have been magnanimous in carefully ceding their influence to Quebec: Ontario after all doesn't suffer from threats (real or imagined) against its language and culture. Ontario's benefit from the trade-offs has been to become the country's most politically powerful and influential province - Whether the Liberals or the Conservatives have been in power in Ottawa.

Of the exceptions: Lester Pearson and John Turner - Turner (like Clark and Campbell) was a political aberration. Pearson secured two "minority" terms from 1963 to 1968 and in fact was unceremoniously dumped as leader by the Liberal Party after his second minority election. (Beware Stephen Harper - I digress!) In the intervening five years, with Quebec's concerns front and centre; Pearson gave the country a new flag; hosted the world at Expo '67 in Montreal; and formed a Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism which paved the way for the Trudeau era. - And, as if to show future Prime Ministers that minority Parliaments do work: Pearson's Governments also gave Canada - Universal Health Care (Medicare); The Canada Student Loan Program; and the Canada Pension Plan (CPP).

Lest recent history repeat, read Martin and Dion, Mr. Ignatieff and the strategists who surround him have considerable lessons still to learn from those who preceded him as Liberal Leader. His Party has the experience, knowledge and history to recover from its current morass. The jury is still out on whether they will.

HIGH NOON AT THE RIDEAU CORRAL

Though I am hesitant to say this: Perhaps it is time for the real Parliamentary session to resume rather than the confrontation of "swinging dicks" we have all witnessed this week.

As crude a description as "swinging dicks" may be; It seems appropriate to what appears at least from my vantage point as a testosterone fueled gambit of high stakes politics with the real potential of accidentally plunging Canada into another national election. Yikes!

Sadly yes, I too am venturing into the now well travelled territory where everyone else has been since Micheal Ignatieff blurted his: "Mr. Harpper, your time is up!" call to the political battlefield even before his own Liberal troops had caucused on Tuesday in Sudbury, precisely to - whether or not - make that decision.

Ignatieff's withdrawal of Liberal support means Mr. Harper's Conservatives, with just 143 seats of the 308 in the House of Commons will now somehow have to cajole votes from either the Bloc Quebecois or the New Democrats on an ad hoc basis to pass legislation...the most contentious of which is a "Ways and Means" motion on last spring's budget to allow the very popular home improvement rebate credit program to kick-in.

In Parliamentary terms a budget related motion is a "vote of confidence" in the Government. The Tories (as many are increasingly suggesting) may be tempted to test every one's resolve over the Ignatieff challenge by introducing the home improvement rebate motion shortly after the House resumes on September 14.

In the confrontation of "dicks", Mr. Ignatieff's latest ultimatum to the Tories was as much a rallying cry to his own fractious Liberal caucus lest the Party's own internal divisions become public during or after this week's Sudbury caucus. Mr. Ignatieff has determined to gamble that the Bloc and the NDP really don't want an election - Probably no more than he wants one himself - but his message is that it's someone else's turn to prop-up the Harper's Tories. The truly cynical have suggested that with 100 Members of Parliament from all parties with less than the mandatory six years served in the House to qualify for the "gold-plated" lifetime pensions - No one wants to jeopardize losing their seat in yet another election this fall.
(About 40% of the Bloc Quebecois' 49 Members fall into that category - Get the picture?)

In raw numbers, the Conservatives are really only about 15 or so votes from of an absolute majority in the House of Commons. And, there is the threat of a national outbreak of the H1N1 (Swine) Flu by early fall. Real or imagined, of 308 Members in the House of Commons, odds are that a dozen or more could easily come down with Flu like symptoms and stay home on any given day a crucial vote is scheduled in Parliament.

Of Mr. Ignatieff "ballsy" outburst; writing in the "Calgary Herald" earlier this week, Columnist Licia Corbella quoted an unidentified Liberal insider's description of the Party Leader..."to know him is not to love him." I suspect that's part of the message party faithful communicated to their elected representatives over the summer political BBQ season; and why there is no way Mr. Ignatieff can now back away from his threat against the Harper Government.

But reality dictates that this "Showdown on the Rideau", like the others over the past year; also will pass particularly as electors forcefully communicate their disdain over yet another election which would halt the business of Government at a crucial moment in our economic recovery.

Otherwise; as we prepare to host the 2010 Winter Olympics, and arrange next spring's Summit of World leaders (The G-8) in Huntsville, Ontario: From an International perspective; Canada risks displacing Italy as the world's "poster child" for the pre-eminent fractious and dysfunctional of democracies. Justifiably, the Italians have had more than 70 elections since the end of World War II. But just three national elections since the year 2000. Canada has had a total of four...and may be on the way to number five!

THE GRITS AND THE HORNS OF A DILEMNA

In my west Ottawa Federal Parliament riding I suspect I am better known for more frequently disagreeing with our sitting Member. But: This time the Minister of Transport and my local MP, John Baird, is right - It would be irresponsible for the Liberal Party of Michael Ignatieff to topple the Harper Government when the House of Commons resumes after the Labour Day holiday.

To the extent that I wish it were not so; given that Mr. Harper and the Tories have just about abandoned every principle over which they were first elected in January 2006 and re-elected in October 2008: Including of note the P.M's own fixed-election date law, loading the Senate with partisan cronies, and a spending orgy which according to some sources tops $70-billion in the last 10 months. I just can't quite understand how seemingly intelligent well informed politicians and their strategists, starting with Stephane Dion and now Mr. Ignatieff have allowed themselves to be manipulated into corners from which they can't seem to escape unscathed.

In Sudbury this week the Liberal Party's national caucus is coming to grips with a reality of its own creation over the agreement reached last June that the Party would not defeat Harper's minority forces and provoke a summer election in return for an inclusive working group on reforming Employment Insurance...Or else!

So contentious an issue it was at the time that the Leader, Michael Ignatieff, virtually staked his leadership on the outcome. Guess What? - Employment Insurance it now seems is not an issue which is universally popular neither with members of the Liberal Party, and it is too complex for Canadians to quite understand why it should trigger an election. The Conservatives have known this all along, which is why despite several meetings over the summer of the bipartisan committee Ignatieff insisted on in June; it has had no success.

Don Drummond, the well respected TD Bank economist, told Ottawa's "Hill Times" just this week that neither Conservatives nor Liberals have enough popular support for their different positions on the E.I. debate to win an election. Little wonder that up in Sudbury the "Globe and Mail" quotes the Party's caucus chair that..."there is no real unanimous mood in there." To the extent that Members of Parliament from all political affiliations have been listening to their constituents over the summer hiatus, it is clear as someone in Sudbury pointed out that Canadians would rather hear about job creation than insurance for lost jobs.

At the very least; Canadians do not want to hear about another Federal Election this fall and Mr. Harper's increasingly vocal anti-election campaign...and it will get even louder as Parliament gets set to return...is a reflection of that sentiment.

Sadly though it will be difficult for the Liberals to extricate themselves from the corner of the seemingly ill conceived and poorly executed strategy they created late last spring. Similar options over past Party threats and ultimatums destroyed Stephane Dion's credibility and eventually his leadership. Without more concise, popular and effective strategies no one wants Micheal Ignatieff to be next, I suspect not even the Conservatives who are probably grateful to see their opposition faced with another embarrassing "back-down" from the latest ultimatum just as Mr. Harper's Tories prepare to take credit for Canada's economic turn around.

EROSION OF CONFIDENCE

There was never going to be an election this summer. I said so a week ago...days before the last 48 hours of media-spun nail biting drama erupted on Parliament Hill. (See: "Iso-Dopes" June 10)

I am passionate about politics. It, and a passion for journalism, I owe to my mother. A typical stay at home 1950's housewife, she had never even entered a grocery store by herself when my father died suddenly in 1954, leaving her with two sons, no job or job prospects, a mortgage and car payments.

She dusted herself-off; became one of the country's first female Canada Customs Border Officers; and on those long shifts at the International border between Northern New Brunswick and Northern Maine developed a passion for the political issues she read (And subsequently discussed with me) from the office's French and English language newspapers. Enough digression.

In the bi-partisan agreement to form a 6 member panel on changes to the Employment Insurance Program reached with the Prime Minister; the Liberal Leader, Michael Ignatieff, has concluded that he has obtained the significant concession he sought to call-off the threat of a summer election. But, at what cost? Surely the drummed-up threat of a mid-summer election was hollow at its very best. No one, let alone an intelligent and articulate politician like Mr. Ignatieff wanted to trigger, and be blamed for, what with certainty would have been the most unpopular election in modern Canadian history. So what gives?

Although rare, it happens from time to time, somewhat like cream rising over the milk of platitudes; that an intellectual, a thinker, a visionary rises to shake-up the humdrum of a country's political existence. Even fewer such candidates actually make the transition to reaching a role of historic leadership. I don't know whether Mr.Ignatieff has that potential. Certainly, barring the Conservative Party "attack ads", he seems to show a level of statesmanship; the background and the aptitudes that could qualify him. The greatest danger to his success is in playing badly at the "game" of politics. On that score, I suspect that he's been getting bad advice.

I share the opinion of a timely editorial published in the "Montreal Gazette" that this week's election "dare" shows poor political acumen and that, unlike in the Tory "attack ads", this time the damage is of the Liberal Leader's own making: "Many Canadians have never liked Stephen Harper, others have been disappointed by him. So Canadians are eager to like Michael Ignatieff, but with his grandstanding about forcing a summer election, the Liberal Leader has put himself in a bad light and he seems to keep wanting to make it worse."

With this current crisis of confidence ended (yet again) - Words of wisdom that each politician should contemplate over the summer hiatus. More particularly the Leader of the Liberals, as he and his entourage contemplate their actions and re-actions heading into the fall of 2009. Canada's future and what is at stake for each of us are just too important to be reduced to a game of political checkmate as if on a Chess Board of toy soldiers and little matter.

A MATTER OF LEADERSHIP

Come this weekend, members of the Federal Liberal Party are meeting in Vancouver where they will officially anoint Michael Ignatieff the party's leader.

As someone pointed-out just a couple of days ago, since taking-over the helm early in January, Mr. Ignatieff has been as lucky as his predecessor, Stephane Dion, was cursed. The Liberals, which some say are nearly out of debt and riding a small-wave lead in the polls over the Tories expect to come out of their Vancouver policy sessions energized and ready for battle against the Harper Conservatives.

Hold-on though! While the Prime-Minister has been doing his level best to plaster over the cracks in his own caucus over Brian Mulroney, some commentators are suggesting that Mr. Ignattieff may be facing a similar challenge over his Quebec's lieutenant's long-wished desire to lead the party himself. On the eve of the Liberal's Vancouver meetings, Montreal's "La Presse" says M-P, Denis Coderre, and the Leader haven't exactly been seeing eye-to-eye. According to the newspaper one of the more contentious issues involves Mr. Coderre's decision to invite Guy Gougoux to assume a leading role (Vice-President) of the Quebec wing of the Federal Party. Quebec is obviously a key to an eventual Liberal Government.

Mr. Gougoux heads BCP Advertising which although no charges were ever brought, the Gomery Commission learned had received Federal advertising contracts worth about $300-million during the period Jean Chretien was Prime-Minister. Mr. Ignatieff isn't in any way prepared to re-open that nefarious affair.

As for the Prime-Minister and the Conservative caucus. It's clear that scabs on wounds dating back to the period before the merger of the Progressive-Conservatives and the Alliance have been ripped-open by Mr. Harper's efforts to distance himself from his old mentor, Brian Mulroney. Lest I digress: As April is "Organ Donor" awareness month. Wags in Ottawa have been telling a joke about Mr. Mulroney donating Karl Heinz Schreiber's "tongue", preferably in a plain brown envelope...

Mr. Harper though has had a heck of a time putting the lid back on the ill-conceived notion of leaking a story that Mulroney was no longer a member of the Party. Off the record, former Progressive-Conservatives within the ruling Conservatives have pointed-out that Mulroney led his party to two straight majority victories in 1984 and 1988. Milestones which have so far eluded Mr. Harper in the three Federal elections since becoming leader.

It seems there are enough elements of in-fighting at work in both major federal parties to ward-off an election in the short-term. But: Writing in the "National Post" about the recent good fortune of the Liberal Party since Ignatieff's arrival, John Ivison says: "Happy days are here again for Liberals...The fairy-tale nature of the story has Liberals itching to bring down the Conservatives this fall."

All of which means we're likely in for a long summer of damaging accusations, attack advertising, and very few concrete accomplishments to get the derailed economy back on track.

AU REVOIR M. DION

Back in November of 2006 when Stephane Dion, on the 4Th ballot, became the 11Th Leader of the Liberal Party of Canada many had hoped that he could bridge the gap over the schism between Paul Martin and Jean Chretien. Bridge he did, but only as a "stopgap". The "Martinites" have triumphed...for now.

Confused you say? Finance Minister, Paul Martin, and his boss, the Prime Minister, Jean Chretien, were at odds virtually from the beginning of their relationship in the Liberal Party and in the Parliament of Canada. Chretien, "le p'tit gars de Shawinigan", felt both inferior to, and challenged by Martin, the multi-millionaire President of Canada Steamship Lines who's father had been a star Cabinet Minister for Lester B. Pearson and pretender to the Party's leadership throne until the upstart, Pierre Trudeau left him dangling in the wind. There's a lot of history there, all of it political. In politics things frequently get dirty.

Jean Chretien has never forgiven Paul Martin for engineering his Prime Ministerial demise and subsequently launching the Gomery Inquiry into the Quebec sponsorship scandal as a post script to his legacy. Chretien paid Martin back in kind when his appointee, RCMP Commissioner, the imperial Giuliano Zaccardelli, issued a December 28, 2005 News Release confirming that the National Police Force was targeting Liberal Party insiders for illegal stock market transactions in the government's Income Trust debacle. Paul Martin's Liberals, leading in the midst of a snap election, lost nearly 20% of public support virtually overnight and handed victory to Stephen Harper's Conservatives on January 23, 2006. Game set and match! To close the loop permanently...Harper dumped Zaccardelli less than a year later over his mishandling of the Maher Arar Affair...I digress.

Thus at the November 2006 Liberal Party Convention in Montreal, Liberals in the Chretien camp of old anointed their front runner candidate, the former Ontario NDP Premier Bob Rae, whilst the Paul Martin camp trotted-out their star candidate, Michael Ignatieff. More than two years later most can't still quite figure out just how the Toronto based candidate, Gerard Kennedy, was made to withdraw and throw his support behind Stephane Dion...It matters not. That too is politics and Dion who had avoided being drawn directly into the Chretien/Martin squabbles during his 10 year tenure in the House of Commons became the compromise, some might now say "compromised" Leader of the Party. The fog of your confusion is now lifted, right?

I am unclear as to why people choose to enter Party politics. There are probably as many reasons as there are politicians. However I will take the high road and presume that in most there is an element, a flicker perhaps, of service to the country and to their fellow citizens. In 1996, stung by the near break-up of the country in the 1995 Referendum, Jean Chretien asked Stephane Dion, a brilliant federalist academic to join his Cabinet. Another member of academia, Pierre Pettigrew, also joined the Liberal Cabinet on the same day. As Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Dion rose to prominence...dubbed "Captain Canada" for handling the "Clarity Act" through a tumultuous Parliament. Unlike many others, the aforementioned Pettigrew included, Dion successfully transitioned to the "Martinites" championing the "Green Mantle" of the burgeoning environmental movement which climaxed with the adoption of the Kyoto Accord.

Sadly nothing in the ten years he had spent in Cabinet could have prepared Stephane Dion for the unrelenting, cruel, aggressive and downright nasty campaign against his leadership mounted by Stephen Harper's Conservatives under the banner "Stephanne Dion is no Leader!"...from the very start of his tenure at the helm of the Liberals. Eventually pretty much everyone bought into the salacious, acrimonious, reputation crushing campaign and it has now become a self full filling prophecy. Since the Federal Election of October 14Th, successive developments and events, many of them of historic proportion have catapulted Mr. Dion out of the limelight. And; in a triumph of will, Michael Ignatieff has crushed Bob Rae's leadership aspirations...Advantage "Martinites"!

Stephane Dion's reputation as a political leader is undeservedly tattered. The country is still buffeted by economic and market forces from afar. The future of our Government, as we know it, is undetermined beyond the January 27Th Federal Budget.

Author Paul Wells' conclusion to the 2006 book: "Right Side Up", bears paraphrasing: "All I know is what Stockwell Day, Joe Clark, Bellinda Stronach, Peter MacKay, Paul Martin...Stephane Dion...have had to learn at their own expense: That you underestimate Stephen Harper at your peril!"