Changing the electoral map in such a way may also play in the Conservatives' favour. That's because the party stands a good chance of picking up additional seats in suburban Alberta and B.C., and potentially Ontario as well.
"Some are saying this is the route not only to getting rid of minority governments, but it could be a route to a Tory majority," Clark said. "This might create a new dynasty.
Just what Canada needs. A fascist dynasty. Harper will no longer have to pretend that he gives a damn.
John Ryan has been pushing for a Progressive Coalition, and I think the time has never been more crucial for all progressive leaders to put down their partisanship and work toward getting rid of this destructive government, while we still have any rights as citizens.
"Canada's last two elections are proof positive that we have a flawed electoral system. Does it make any sense that it's impossible to get a government that reflects the views of the majority of our population? How is it that a little more than a third of the electorate can determine who forms Canada's government?"
And though Stephen Harper included the Bloc in his coalition; the NDP, Liberals and Green wouldn't have to, especially given the hypocrisy of the Harperites. They wouldn't even have to give up their party platforms or identity.
Carefully packaged and sold as a 'stay the course' budget, anyone paying attention would know that Flaherty's latest offering, was anything but.
However, since they made it just seemingly 'good enough', had the opposition tried to take them down over it, they would have once again been accused of self interest. Instead the media is now calling Michael Ignatieff spineless.
Fine. Do what you have to do so that you get to ask King Stephen a question a year, and avoid getting beat up.
Straight Goods has done an excellent break down, reminding us of what wasn't in the budget that should have been:
While the Harperites successfully conveyed a controlled message of "staying the course" with their "economic action plan," Canadians who most need help will see little aid.
The big national projects the nation so urgently needs — in green jobs, education, retraining, child care, housing, transportation, infrastructure, and so much more — simply are not happening. Meanwhile the federal government's ability to govern is being undermined by deregulation and cuts to programs.
But it was another statement from the article that got my overactive imagination going, so I'm going to throw caution to the wind, and lay out a little scenario here.
You may or may not know, that I have done a lot of research into a group that Stephen Harper helped to found back in the day, called the Northern Foundation. They were supposed to be the vanguard for the extreme-right in Canada.
The Northern Foundation of which Mr. Harper was a member, is a male-dominated and self-anointed "white brotherhood". Females are not excluded though, provided that they accept its highly conformist and male chauvinistic culture of fascism.
Now Chin felt the same way I did when I first learned of this. Harper was young and we all do crazy things when we're young that we may not be proud of (with the exception of myself, of course). He claimed that he was kicked out for not being right-wing enough, but so far he is the only one who has made that claim.
The NF had a publication called the Northern Voice, which was mostly visceral attacks on homo-sexuals, abortion and 'radical feminists' (women with jobs). The Reform Party advertised regularly in the publication, so it was pretty apparent that they weren't against attracting extremists. (Harrison, Toronto University Press, 1995)
But it was the other agenda of the foundation that I found interesting. They were in the 'Coup' business.
Now back to the Straight Goods article:
David MacDonald of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives told Straight Goods News that "The problems that were problems last year are still problems today." He said that the Budget does nothing for Canada's 1.5 million unemployed, many of whom are facing EI benefits that expire soon. Only half the unemployed are eligible to receive any benefits at all, he told Straight Goods News.
The big surprise for him was the "foreign policy shift. While every other department is being capped, Defence is continuing to grow for the next three years," at its current rate, he said. And after that, "it's only scaled back slightly... while at the same time the people who actually do reconstruction on the ground, in Haiti and Afghanistan, they're actually being capped.
That is, Canada is cutting foreign aid and increasing spending on expensive military equipment. "Our foreign policy is moving more toward combat military operations and away from the kind of reconstruction operations that are really what's necessary in Afghanistan. ... The question going forward is once Afghanistan ends, what are we going to do with these choppers?
Wolfgang Droege, was a close associate of Stephen Harper and according to Frank Dabbs, author of Preston Manning: The Roots of Reform, "...self-described white-supremacist Wolfgang Droege was the party's [Reform Party] policy chairman in Ontario."
Since Stephen Harper was the chief of Reform Party policy, they would have no doubt communicated often, since they were trying to break into Ontario. Droege also provided security for Manning when he was in the province, through members of his Heritage Front.
In 1981, Droege helped organize a failed attempt, codenamed "Operation Red Dog", to invade the Caribbean nation of Dominica and overthrow its government and restore deposed Prime Minister Patrick John to power. According to testimony presented at the trial of Droege and his nine co-conspirators, in exchange for restoring John to power, Droege would have been permitted to use the island as the centre of a drug-refinement and trafficking operation. The attempted coup went awry after a CFTR radio reporter who had been approached about an "exclusive story" decided to contact the police.
This brings us back to my posting on Canada's new 'Coup' business. Apparently the Harper government has appropriated up to 70 million dollars under the guise of 'spreading democracy'. I found nothing on this from the Canadian media, but Michael Allen from the University of California has written about this in the Democracy Digest.
And Dr. Chin believes that Harper is actually trying to fulfill the agenda of the Northern Foundation. Whether that's true or not, it's definitely something we can't just wave off:
...Mr. Harper appears to be attempting to use public office designed to defend the national interests of all Canadians, to carry out the apparent private agenda of a clique, whose members are determined to transform Canada into their own bleak fascist image under U.S. control.
I believe the ultimate goal is to open foreign markets (example Haiti), not drugs or anything of that nature.
I think I need someone like Dan Brown to put all of this together. I've been trying to drop little hints to the media (not the mainstream corporate media) hoping that someone will help me, because I believe there is a story here. And who knows, maybe even eventually a novel for someone (kidding). Unfortunately, I'm just afraid of how it's going to end.
Well I hope that while Harper is sitting home with his feet up, he's learning a new Beatles song, because he's on the ropes in popularity. To help him out, I'm suggesting one: HELP!
As always, he underestimated the Canadian people. Fool us once, like you did last December, shame on you. Fool us again and you're out. We don't put up with this nonsense.
So that poison pill budget, including Steven Fletcher's sneaky little offerings, that you planned to present to force Canadians to polls - I'd rethink it if I were you. And if you were going to give Dimmy Witty a senate seat ... I'd rethink that too.
But here's a novel idea. Do your damn job!
Thursday, January 7, 2010 Prorogation hurtles 'out of dusty law texts into the mainstream' Gloria Galloway
Most Canadians are aware that the Prime Minister has suspended Parliament until after the winter Olympics and they are, by and large, not pleased with the decision, polls released Thursday suggest.
Although there was strong suspicion among pundits and Parliament watchers that Canadians would pay little attention to the prorogation announced by Stephen Harper’s office, two-thirds of respondents to an EKOS poll this week said they knew about the move – 52 per cent of them saying they were “clearly aware.”
And, among those who said they know that Parliament will not sit again until early March, the margin of disapproval is two to one.
“This has morphed out of dusty constitutional law texts into the mainstream of public opinion,” EKOS president Frank Graves said. “The public decisively say they are familiar with this and, when you go on to find out what they think about it, they’re opposed and they tend to concentrate in the strongly opposed category.”
Nearly two-thirds of the 1,744 respondents to the EKOS poll agreed with the statement: “The elected House of Parliament is the proper place to conduct the business of the nation and suspending Parliament is antidemocratic.”
The Conservatives have given the opposition a two-month opportunity to attack the government without leaving themselves much or an opportunity to change the page, Mr. Graves said.
Meanwhile, an Angus Reid online poll also released Thursday suggests prorogation has been rejected even by Conservative supporters. Thirty-five per cent of respondents who voted Conservative in the last election said they disagree with the decision to suspend Parliament.
Not surprisingly, the move was panned even more decisively by supporters of the opposition parties.
Across the country, 53 per cent of the 1,019 respondents to the Angus Reid poll said they disagreed with prorogation. That compares to the 19 per cent who said they supported it. About 28 per cent were undecided.
The rejection of the decision to suspend Parliament was highest in Ontario (59 per cent) and lowest in the Prairies (50 per cent in Alberta, 48 per cent in Manitoba and Saskatchewan).
Two in five Canadians who took part in the Angus Reid poll said they believe prorogation was invoked in order to curtail an inquiry into the treatment of Afghan detainees. About one quarter of respondents (23 per cent) agreed with the federal government’s position that prorogation was necessary to recalibrate, consult and deliver the next stage of the economic plan.
The EKOS poll also suggests the issue has eroded the strong base of Conservative support that has, at times in the past year, seen the party skirt majority territory.
Just 33.1 per cent of respondents said they would mark their ballots for the Conservatives if the election were held this week.
While close to the margin of error, that’s a drop of 2.8 per cent since December. And it means the Tory lead over the Liberals, which was as high as 15 percentage points in October, is now about 5.
“Those are the worst numbers we’ve seen for them in at least six months,” said Mr. Graves.
“It’s very difficult to attribute it to anything other than prorogation because it was a period when nothing much else was happening.
The drop for the Tories suggested in the EKOS poll has not been a boon to the other parties. The Liberals climbed by just 1.1 per cent to 27.8 per cent in voter support. The NDP actually fell a little to 16 per cent. The Bloc Quebecois remained virtually unchanged at 9.8 per cent. And the Greens saw a slight increase of 2.2 per cent, which brought them to 13.4 per cent. But Mr. Graves said the numbers suggest that Canadians know what prorogation means and are not happy about it. And the Conservatives should be worried.
“Clearly this has hit a nerve,” he said.
Mr. Harper and his party “must be hearing footsteps,” the pollster said. “Instead of pondering how their majority is going to work out, they are closer to sitting on the other side of the House.”
A poll of this size is expected to reflect the opinions of all Canadians within 2.4 percentage points 19 times in 20.
It suggests that support for the Conservatives is once again spiralling downward in Quebec, where just under 15 per cent of respondents said they would vote for Mr. Harper’s party. EKOS attributes that to three factors: the detainee issue (as well as broader opposition to the Afghanistan mission), disappointment with the perceived tepid federal performance on the climate change file, and lingering fallout from the gun registry.
But their troubles don’t stop there. They have also lost their double digit lead in Ontario and the poll suggests that the Liberals are ahead in Ontario for the first time in several months.
A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada
In April of 2009, democratic reform minister, Steven Fletcher, appeared at the University of Manitoba to discuss the initiatives of his government.
Though sponsored by the Campus Conservatives, his talk was open to all students and was well attended.
However, much to the surprise of the crowd, he spent very little time on democratic reform, but instead attacked the university's student union and the school newspaper.
On Thursday, March 19, the University of Manitoba Campus Conservatives held an open event that was advertised to the public as a talk at the University of Manitoba with the Honourable Steven Fletcher, minister of state (democratic reform). The event was attended by both minister Fletcher and sitting MP for Winnipeg South, Rod Bruinooge. I attended this event in the hopes of hearing about Fletcher’s new mandate on the government of Canada’s opinion on state, and more importantly on democratic reform. Was I ever mistaken.Although towards the end of the forum, Fletcher did answer a select few pre-determined questions actually regarding Canadian democratic reform, the event did not focus on democratic reform as the posters advertised, but rather focused almost entirely on student union politics.
Steven Fletcher sat as UMSU president at the end of the 1990s for two consecutive terms, so clearly, he’s no stranger to the politics on university campuses. But as a representative of the constituents of Charleswood-St. James-Assiniboia and as sitting minister for the government of Canada, especially the minister of democratic reform, he has no business in the affairs of independent and democratic students’ unions and federations.
Minister Fletcher, on several occasions, went into rants where he referred to UMSU and the Canadian Federation of Students, my representatives, as a bunch of left-wing crazies, the “loony left,” and “loony tunes.” The minister further went into rants about the free press and independent students’ newspapers referring to the Manitoban as a socialist rag. He then began encouraging young Conservative members to take over students’ unions to promote the Conservative ideology. At several points in his talk, incoming UMSU president-elect Sid Rashid, who was also in the audience, challenged Fletcher on his clearly biased statements regarding current UMSU policies and procedures.
What is the government doing meddling in the affairs of independent and democratic student unions? This is not only offensive but completely inappropriate. ... The recent event held at the University of Manitoba further adds to the damning evidence that the Conservative Party, the current governing party of Canada, is engaged in a national campaign to advance their partisan agenda and undermine the role of democratic student organizations. (1)
The Winnipeg Free Press reported on the incident as students at the University demanded an apology. Fletcher told the paper, "I think Conservative values are student values," Fletcher said. "I was there to speak about the Conservative party and the role Conservatives play on campus. I wasn't asked to be there in a general way." (2)
But this was just part of a trend as members of the Harper government have been encouraging conservative students to take over student unions, infiltrate clubs, and establish front groups to further their cause. This again coincides with Morton Blackwell's Campus Leadership Programwhich has been mimicked by the Manning Centre's Campus Leadership Training Program.
Blackwell's institute has launched a website, billed as:
“CampusReform.org will dramatically increase the number of battles fought against leftist abuses on college campuses this year,” said Morton Blackwell, Leadership Institute founder and president. “And based on long experience, conservative students will win most of those new battles as they identify, expose, and combat leftist abuses and bias.” “CampusReform.org will dramatically increase the number of battles fought against leftist abuses on college campuses this year,” said Morton Blackwell, Leadership Institute founder and president. “And based on long experience, conservative students will win most of those new battles as they identify, expose, and combat leftist abuses and bias.” (3)
And if you want some idea of what that means, combating "leftist abuses and bias", when University of Manitoba students were engaged in their annual day of protest, with the Target Poverty campaign, campus Conservatives, under the direction of provincial conservative MLA, Hugh McFadyen, did whatever they could to stop the event, even forming a human chain to prevent their progress toward the legislature. They were clearly hoping for a physical confrontation.
Nov. 5 was another student Day of Action in Manitoba. This one was important because it linked issues facing students directly to broader societal concerns with the Target Poverty campaign, as well as linking up the organizations representing students with a broad cross-section of anti-poverty activists and civil society organizations in Manitoba. It’s a new tactic, and it really opens the door to building broad coalitions of activists, student unions, and other civil society organizations to confront the neoliberal* policies which have affected us all over the past couple decades. I would say that it was moderate success, in that new ground was broken and new spaces for resistance were opened up for people from diverse political backgrounds to unite and fight for a better world.
But, the latest Day of Action also featured the sorry spectacle of Hugh McFadyen and the University of Manitoba Campus Conservatives “teaming up”, presumably against students rallying against poverty. Or, as the Campus Conservatives called them on their website, a “army of pinkos”. (4)
"An army of pinkos?" I must admit, I haven't hurt that one in a while.
Apparently the Conservative Party has also been funding student elections and interfering with the democratic process on campus.
... the next big push by the University of Manitoba Campus Conservatives (UMCC)–who are well connected and appear to be well funded–will be to get partisans elected in 201o at the Students’ Union. The UMCC connections reach right to the Federal government via high profile alumni such as Steven Fletcher, current Minister for Democratic Renewal and former Manitoba Students’ Union president. (5)
Well if it means getting rid of "pinkos" who are fighting against poverty, I suppose it's a noble cause.
Footnotes:
*Neoliberalism is also referred to as neoconservatism.
Sources:
1. The True Hidden Agenda: Steven Fletcher's Recent Talk on Campus, By David Safruk, University of Manitoba, The Manitoban, April 5, 2009
Their goal was to create an American style Conservative party, mimicking the current Republican Party, who could keep citizens whipped into a frenzy over 'faith, family and freedom'. (Fundamentalist Christian, nuclear families only; an end to abortion and homosexual rights and of course the big 'f' 'freedom' - war!!!).
Scenes like the one above are becoming more commonplace, and will continue to be if we don't wake up and get these guys out. They just need a majority, and while Harper still polls rarely above a third of Canadian voters, they have crafted a way to gain more seats without gaining more votes. Gilles Duceppe will not vote for this and hopefully the Liberals and NDP won't either.
Steven Fletcher, the head of 'Democratic Reform', has been working like hell to remove any notion of democracy from a country I used to be so damned proud of. They are not just looking for a majority, they are looking for a social conservative (with all of it's ugliness) dynasty.
New federal ridings may be coming to the suburbs September 25 2009 CTV.ca News Staff
The federal government is reportedly working on legislation to create as many as 32 new electoral ridings across suburban areas of B.C., Alberta and Ontario.
Democratic Reform Minister Steven Fletcher is spearheading legislation on the proposed changes, according to The Globe and Mail. They could be presented to Parliament as early as this fall or early 2010, and would increase the number of MPs in the House of Commons to 340 from 308.
The rumoured changes are seen partly as a response to the Canada's changing demographic landscape. The country's population has been growing mostly due to immigration, and particularly near the larger cities in Alberta, B.C. and Ontario.
At the same time, Parliament has passed measures to protect smaller provinces and rural ridings from losing their voice on Parliament Hill. That's skewed the country's federal electoral map away from the more populous areas.
As a result, Alberta, B.C. and Ontario would be expected to share the additional ridings.
"What you've got here is the notion of democracy versus the notion of history and how this country started," Tom Clark, host of Power Play, told CTV News Channel on Friday. "It is why Prince Edward Island still has as many seats as it does. Even at four, it is grossly overrepresented in the modern world."
"At the same time, if you went strictly by representation by population, you would be denying the geographical reality of the country. So it's a very tough mix and a tough balance to strike."
The new ridings would in all probability go to suburban areas around the major cities of Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary and Toronto, communities typically with younger and more ethnically diverse residents. If the electoral reforms are eventually passed, they would hand more power to that traditionally underrepresented segment of Canadian society.
Changing the electoral map in such a way may also play in the Conservatives' favour. That's because the party stands a good chance of picking up additional seats in suburban Alberta and B.C., and potentially Ontario as well.
"Some are saying this is the route not only to getting rid of minority governments, but it could be a route to a Tory majority," Clark said. "This might create a new dynasty."
Stephen Harper's Conservative minority government proposed to redistribute the federal elections ridings last year as well. But the bill was never passed into law, partly due to complaints from Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty. He felt the province wouldn't receive enough additional parliamentary seats under the proposed changes.
The Bloc Quebecois is expected to oppose redrawing the electoral map. The Bloc has come to hold about two-thirds of Quebec's 75 ridings in recent elections. Since Quebec's population is not growing, however, adding seats elsewhere would erode the Bloc's political clout.
If passed, any reforms could take several more years to come into effect.
If it takes several more years we need to make sure those years do not include these Rerform Conservatives. The Manning's Political Realignment, drafted for the wealthy corporate sector and brought to fruition by the National Citizens Coalition and the Northern Foundation, must never be allowed free rein. They want to completely dismantle all social programs, including support for senior citizens, women and non-Anglos.
But is little Stevie Fletcher any better than little Stevie Harper? You be the judge.
QUEBEC CITY - The youth wing of the Bloc Quebecois is calling for the resignation of federal Democratic Reform Minister Steven Fletcher.
The Bloc is taking issue with Fletcher for re-iterating this past week the Conservatives' intention to eventually do away with per-vote subsidies.
He said Canadians are frustrated with the notion their taxes help fund a sovereigntist party. Bloc youth wing president Jean-Francois Landry says Quebec voters shouldn't be considered second-class citizens.
At the youth wing's general council meeting in Quebec City Saturday, Landry called Fletcher's comments unacceptable and undemocratic.
At the University of Manitoba, Fletcher berated left-leaning student politicians, and referred to their newspaper as a a 'socialist rag'. The students called him an embarassment.
One of the items that nearly brought down the Harper government last December, was their plan to end voter subsidies for political parties.
These subsidies were put in place by Jean Chretien to replace the eligibility of corporations and unions providing financial backing for politicians.
It was democracy at it's best, because it meant that all votes count. No longer could you say that you weren't going to bother to cast your ballot because your favourite didn't have a chance to win. At least your vote put a bit of money into their next campaigns.
When the right-wing parties united, they not only eliminated competition for that side of the political spectrum, but they also eliminated the competition for campaign funding. However, all those centre or left of center parties have to battle it out between them for dollars, and during a recession, it may be even more difficult.
The Liberals are doing much better now, but elimination of what amounts to less than $ 2.00 per voting taxpayer, will have a huge impact on the NDP, Bloc and Green parties, who count on these payments to survive.
Yet, here we go again. The Conservatives are about to table another motion, to end the silly notion that Canada is a democratic country. I'm not sure if it's wise to try to choke off left wing parties that help split the vote, making it more difficult for the Liberals to gain ground.
The Tory non-stop attack ads are already turning people away. Though maybe they figure low voter turnout will go in favour of the incumbent. Man Harper must really hate a democracy. He could do so much better with a dictatorship.
OTTAWA -- When Prime Minister Stephen Harper's attempt to cut off political party subsidies last year led to a very close brush with defeat, one might have thought the vote-tax debate would be dead and buried. Think again.
It appears Manitoba cabinet minister Steven Fletcher has been tasked with promoting the idea all over again.
Fletcher -- the minister of state for democratic reform -- has been talking about gearing up to take on the vote tax again. He has indicated it is something his government still plans to pursue.
"We believe that political parties should support themselves with people who voluntarily donate to whichever party they wish to support," said Fletcher. (they do when they vote for the party they wish to support)
Last November, you might remember, Conservative plans to cut off the per-vote subsidy which parties get led to a near meltdown of Parliament. The opposition parties accused the government of trying to use the threat of a recession to kill off its opponents by bankrupting them. Then the Liberals, NDP and Bloc banded together to form a coalition and were prepared to vote down the government and take over. Only Gov. Gen. Michaëlle Jean's decision to grant Harper's request to suspend Parliament kept the Conservatives from facing a confidence vote they surely would have lost.
So the fact Fletcher is bringing it up again has the tongues a-wagging.
There is likely one big difference, however.
A year ago, the Liberal Party was absolutely reliant on the money from that allowance. The Liberals raised a little over $5.8 million in direct contributions but received $8.7 million in the per vote subsidy.
The Conservatives, in comparison, raised $21 million in donations and $10.4 million came from the vote tax. Losing $10 million would hurt but they would still have had four times as much money as their nearest opponent.
But with a new leader, a new fundraising plan and at least the appearance so far of a wider appeal with voters, the Liberals' financial fortunes have improved. In the first two quarters of this year the Liberals already surpassed their 2008 fundraising totals, registering $5.9 million in donations with Elections Canada.
Added to that, with the Liberals' 2008 elections showing so dismal, they are bringing in far less in the per-vote subsidy because they got 800,000 fewer votes. In 2009, they will raise $7.2 million in the vote tax subsidy. If they raise another $4 million in the third and fourth quarters, they will no longer be as reliant on the vote tax money.
As well, the Conservatives cutting off the vote tax would not cripple the Liberals finances but would hamper the NDP and Bloc Quebecois, both of which earn more from the vote tax than from donations.
And that would be bad news for the Conservatives, whose victories are in part due to the splitting of votes on the centre-left of the political spectrum.
Some comments at the end of the story: 1. The history of this is that to improve democracy political parties gave up the ability to raise funding from corporations and unions - both of these are now limited under Election Canada rules. To make up for this loss, public financing was instituted so that parties had closer to equal opportunities to put forward their message to the public, based upon the number of votes they received in the most recent election.The minister of state for democratic reform should not be advocating a move that makes campaign financing less democratic! As it is now, every voter is making a contribution with their vote, no matter how poor they might be. Since our first-past-the-post system means that NDP and Green have far fewer seats than their percentage of votes, at least each vote counts for something in financing.
2.Terrible! The amount of money that a party has can greatly influence the result of an election. Without public campaign financing, those that have money that they can spare to donate to a political party, have more influence than those of us who don't. With public campaign financing, parties get financial support based how much support they have from the public as a whole, not how much support they have from the small part of the population who can afford to donate.
3. While thinking scrapping Campaign Finances would sound like a good idea, it isn't. As Overall the NDP, Bloc Quebecois, and the Green party rely heavily on campaign financing(and lesser extend the Liberals) and without these finances Canada would become a two-party system and this would hurt democracy greatly as not ALL opinions would be able to get a voice, no matter how large or little EVERYONE DESERVES REPRESENTATION! As look to the south of the boarder because they don't have something like campaign financing other parties can't get in, and now it's all become who can spend the most money and get the most interest groups. It's not about "what's best for our people". There it's become "In the interest of winning"
The Conservatives have tabled legislation to add 30 more seats to the House of Commons, under the guise of democratic reform.
