In the wake of Friday's loss to Calgary, there seem to be some stunningly short-sighted theories flying around. So let's point out that the game featured plenty of good news when it comes to building the 'Riders for this season any beyond - even if it did also provide ample evidence that there's room for improvement.
To start with, anybody even considering the possibility of replacing Darian Durant with Ryan Dinwiddie needs to have their Monday morning quarterbacking privileges revoked.
Yes, Dinwiddie put together one good series once the game was out of reach, while Durant threw a single costly interception. But Durant once again completed over two thirds of his passes, while adding a few more deep completions to the mix than he had for a few weeks. And most importantly, Durant made plenty of the types of plays that set him apart from any other quarterback in the CFL - regularly avoiding what seemed like sure sacks, and this time turning a good number of those seemingly broken plays into positive yardage.
Of course, the receiving corps was somewhat better than usual in converting Durant's wizardry into passing yardage. And the thanks goes in large part to a development that caught me by surprise.
When I put together a list of receivers who might help to fill in the 'Riders' gaps this season, I left off Efrem Hill based on the theory that an import with unexceptional size and speed who couldn't cut it with the Eskimos likely wouldn't be anything more than a replacement-level player. And until this week, nothing in Hill's game seemed to suggest otherwise - particularly when some glaring mental errors were added to the mix.
But in Friday's game, Hill constantly found ways to get open, and did a brilliant job of converting when Durant threw the ball his way. And as long as he can keep up even a reasonable facsimile of that performance, he should have no trouble holding onto at least a complementary job no matter which additional receivers work their way onto the 'Riders this year.
Similarly, Hugh Charles took advantage of his best chance to prove himself as a starting running back by providing more explosiveness than the 'Riders have seen since Kenton Keith's prime, while also holding onto the ball without any apparent trouble. And that should not only give the 'Riders confidence in his performance while Wes Cates is hurt, but also signal that they can count on Charles in a platoon role once Cates returns.
Of course, if the offensive story had all been a matter of good news, the 'Riders wouldn't have spent the entire game trying to climb out of a hole. And while the largest culprit put up some numbers after the game was out of reach, James Robinson seems to have offered reason for the 'Riders to look for a replacement as soon as humanly possible.
Yes, Robinson drew a couple of penalties which helped to move the 'Riders into scoring position. But there's a reason why the name of the position is "receiver" rather than "interference magnet" - and aside from his late-game receptions from Dinwiddie, Robinson has shown little ability to actually catch the ball, combined with a maddening propensity for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Which means that he, not Terrence Nunn, should be the first receiver benched for one of the 'Riders' newer acquisitions - though Nunn too has plenty left to prove.
As for the defence, I'm a bit less concerned with Saskatchewan's early-game performance than some commentators. Unfortunately, the streaky Stampeder offence tends to go through a spell or two per season where it can't be slowed down let alone stopped. And the first half of Friday's game looks to have been one of those times: the 'Riders put some heat on an elusive quarterback, made most of their tackles and didn't leave a lot of open receivers, but Henry Burris was nonetheless able to find the right read on nearly every play to give the Stamps a lead they wouldn't relinquish.
At most, one might say the secondary could have gambled a bit more on the theory that it wasn't going to stop Calgary by playing straight-up defence. But the best bet against the Stamps probably is to let Burris beat himself - and I'm not sure the defence could have done more than to maximize the chances of that happening by forcing Burris into extended drives.
Meanwhile, there was one bit of unqualified good news on the defensive side of the ball, as Shomari Williams applied plenty of pressure against Burris in his opportunity to replace the departed Luc Mullinder. And no matter what happens the rest of the season, the 'Riders should work an ensuring that Williams can work on doing the same consistently as one of the team's Canadian cornerstones.
In sum, there's plenty of reason for frustration with both the 'Riders' record and how they've reached it. But the right move for a rebuilding team is to recognize the pieces which can support something stronger - not to tear down a useful foundation. And there's still little reason to think there's much structurally wrong with the 'Riders.
Sunday, August 14, 2011
Burning question
Since declaring themselves enemies of Amnesty International apparently wasn't enough villainy for one week, the Harper Cons have also decided to pick a fight with an asbestos widow. Can National Kick a Puppy Day be far behind?
[Edit: updated link to full story.]
[Edit: updated link to full story.]
Saturday, August 13, 2011
A response in kind
Shorter Toronto Star:
We're *outraged* that our transparently systematic attempt to cause trouble for the NDP was met with an equally systematic refusal to play along.
Update: pogge has more.
We're *outraged* that our transparently systematic attempt to cause trouble for the NDP was met with an equally systematic refusal to play along.
Update: pogge has more.
Saturday Morning Links
Assorted content for your weekend reading.
- Armine Yalnizyan discusses how inequality is no better for business than it is for society at large:
- Armine Yalnizyan discusses how inequality is no better for business than it is for society at large:
Just a few months ago, two IMF economists, Andrew Berg and Jonathan Ostry, showed that the more equitably incomes are distributed, the longer are the spells of economic growth. They note, “Growth and inequality-reducing policies are likely to reinforce one another and help to establish the foundations for a sustainable expansion.”- Meanwhile, Marc Lee considers the option of printing more money:
Yet the IMF analysis shows the reverse is also true, that higher inequality leads to more volatility. Against a backdrop of low and falling interest rates, wealthy investors hunt for returns with higher yields, which means higher risk and more volatility. As Mark Thoma, professor of economics at University of Oregon, writes, “When we see income inequality rising, we ought to start looking for bubbles.”
All bubbles eventually burst. The boom-bust cycle wipes out even successful businesses, and increases market share for the larger players in the game who can tough it out longer or buy up the competition. This dynamic has led to the “too big to fail” phenomenon, distorting the game for everyone, leading to bailouts and higher prices.
Lack of real income growth and falling interest rates over a generation have led to more borrowing, which points to a world of trouble tomorrow. Nobody gets hurt if the incomes of the top 10% grow more slowly than the bottom 90%, but current compensation practices make that highly unlikely. If the only change on the horizon is higher interest rates, personal bankruptcies and foreclosures will go up. That could slow access to credit for everyone, and further raise the costs of borrowing for businesses and households alike.
The big barrier is psychological: once we start talking about “printing money” the danger is that millions of misunderstandings about what money is get amplified. In a fiat money system like ours it is the faith or belief that a colourful piece of paper has a certain value in purchasing goods and services that matters, and we need to be careful in shaking that confidence. That most people seek to get money (by selling their labour, or making investments, or buying low and selling high) to acquire things now or in the future is pretty obvious.- Which leads nicely into Megan Leslie's column on the need for real investment in renewable energy and conservation:
But how the money supply itself grows through the expansion of credit in the banking system is not broadly understood. The scale of private money creation is huge. Bank of Canada data for a number of monetary aggregates show that money expands rapidly during boom times, and slows down during downturns. Going back to 1996, M1+ has been at lows of about 4% annual growth, while peaking at more than 14% annual growth. M1++ peaked at around 20% annual growth through much of 2009. A broader monetary aggregate, M2++, did not grow as fast as that, but still was in the 8-9% annual growth range between late 2006 and late 2009. All of this money supply growth was compatible with low and stable inflation.
...
(F)inancing a $50 billion deficit through the Bank of Canada at a time when demand and private credit creation are slow is not a really big deal – apart from fear that would be whooped up in the media by those who do not get this or whose economic interests were adversely affected. Even a modest uptick in inflation is likely to bring hysterical cries from those who own the debts that must be repaid. And higher but stable inflation can get locked in to price and wage expectations that impose some economic costs on society, although costs will be minor for inflation rates in single digits.
...
(G)iven that there are horribly polluting industries out there that need to be phased out, why not use public money to offset the economic hit of decommissioning? At a time of deleveraging and record high household debt, a new public sector stimulus program is just what is needed, rather than the conventional wisdom that nothing more can be done by governments.
We must not forget that the development of the oil sands in Canada was the result of substantial government-sponsored research and subsidies. As part of a federal initiative, taxpayer money was invested into figuring out how to extract and refine bitumen, which has led to enormous profits for the industry. However, we have not seen a similar long-term commitment from the federal government to support the transition to clean energy, including long-term investment in energy efficiency technologies.- Finally, Anne Lagace Dowson weighs in on the media's baseless attacks on Nycole Turmel, while Tim Naumetz neatly ties the latest loyalty test to the RCMP's history of spying on Tommy Douglas which is still only in the process of coming to light.
...
Oil and gas subsidies have been touted as necessary for keeping the industry competitive through development of modern, cleaner technologies, yet a recent government study found that research subsidies for the fossil fuel industry have done little to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
It's time to shift the focus of the government's initiatives from big oil to renewable and conservation technologies. All Members of Parliament should commit themselves to supporting the much-needed and greatly-delayed transition to a green economy powered by renewables and energy efficiency technologies. This transition should include putting a price on carbon.
Friday, August 12, 2011
Friday Morning Links
Assorted content to end your week.
- The Mark is the latest to point out that the NDP's success in winning over former Bloc members and/or sovereigntists should be considered a huge victory rather than reason for criticism:
- Thanks to the Harper Cons, Canada's federal government is now a dependent subsidiary of the oil industry. And it fully expects Canada's provinces to become the same. Don't everybody be shocked at once.
- Finally, Ontario's other provincial parties are feigning outrage at negative messages while contributing two for every one they criticize. But the NDP is actually working on debunking them without adding more into the mix.
- The Mark is the latest to point out that the NDP's success in winning over former Bloc members and/or sovereigntists should be considered a huge victory rather than reason for criticism:
The Globe, at least, notes that “Canadians want, and need, former sovereigntists to join the ranks of federalist parties.” Which is, by and large, exactly what the NDP has done with much of Quebec, and certainly much more so than the supposedly more federalist parties (and heck, we give credit where credit is due to the Tories in bringing Lebel onside). Yet the tarring continues for the NDP, despite all their work in killing off the Bloc and bringing those sovereigntists on board. Sure, there will be birth pangs among the motley caucus, but incessantly arguing that every member of the NDP must pass a federalist smell test surely won't bring more sovereigntists their way. If it's good enough for their constituents, it ought to be good enough for the rest of us. Besides, it's not like we make every Tory MP who supported the Alberta firewall swear an oath to upholding confederation.- Meanwhile, yet another federal poll signals that little has changed since the May election, even with Jack Layton out of the picture on an interim basis. But there's still some rather important news in that lack of change - as anybody who tried to pretend that the NDP's newfound strength was either entirely fuelled by Layton or a temporary blip would seem to have to put that skepticism to rest now that it's stabilized over a period of months and under Nycole Turmel's interim leadership.
- Thanks to the Harper Cons, Canada's federal government is now a dependent subsidiary of the oil industry. And it fully expects Canada's provinces to become the same. Don't everybody be shocked at once.
- Finally, Ontario's other provincial parties are feigning outrage at negative messages while contributing two for every one they criticize. But the NDP is actually working on debunking them without adding more into the mix.
Juxtaposition
An unnamed person with some clue about economics:
Pundits, Very Serious Politicians, and more have spent the past two years plus doing everything they can to make the deficit the center of public discourse, to focus all our fears on the attack by bond vigilantes that was supposedly just over the horizon.Update: And more:
And now it turns out that what really terrifies the markets, let alone the suffering unemployed, is the prospect of a second Great Depression — a prospect that has become much more likely thanks to the utter wrongness of elite policy priorities.
Great work, guys.
(M)arkets were signaling, as clearly as anyone could ask, that unemployment rather than deficits is our biggest problem. Bear in mind that deficit hawks have been warning for years that interest rates on U.S. government debt would soar any day now; the threat from the bond market was supposed to be the reason that we must slash the deficit now now now. But that threat keeps not materializing. And, this week, on the heels of a downgrade that was supposed to scare bond investors, those interest rates actually plunged to record lows.An unnamed government with no clue whatsoever:
What the market was saying — almost shouting — was, “We’re not worried about the deficit! We’re worried about the weak economy!” For a weak economy means both low interest rates and a lack of business opportunities, which, in turn, means that government bonds become an attractive investment even at very low yields. If the downgrade of U.S. debt had any effect at all, it was to reinforce fears of austerity policies that will make the economy even weaker.
"Markets right now are being pretty clear that debts and deficits are the problem - that's why we're moving to eliminate the deficit - because we don't want that to be a problem here.[Edit: fixed wording.]
"If the NDP's out there calling for bigger deficits and more debt, that's the problem."
Thursday, August 11, 2011
Deep thought
Anybody who sees the need to treat Amnesty International as an "adversary" has every reason to take a much closer look at whether they're on the right side.
The last stand
Glen McGregor breaks a bigger story than he seems to realize, as the Harper Cons are now quite explicitly declaring their intention to take a wrecking ball to the Canadian Wheat Board:
Instead, the Cons have pretended that removal of single-desk authority wouldn't have any impact whatsoever on the Wheat Board's operations - or at least not one which would substantially affect its ability to market grain. And it's the Board's defenders who have pointed out that there's no realistic prospect of survival without either single-desk status, or regulated access to storage and handling facilities.
Now, without coming clean about their intentions, the Cons have let it slip that they're planning for the Wheat Board to be rubble by this time next year. And that leaves no room for doubt that anybody wanting the CWB to survive will need to take every opportunity this fall to force the Cons to change their mind.
[Edit: fixed wording.]
Anyone doubting the government’s commitment to shutting down the Canadian Wheat Board is instructed to take a look at this notice posted on the procurement site, MERX.Now, to correct where McGregor seems to have missed the significance of the Cons' new action: it isn't true that Ritz has ever been honest enough to declare that the Cons would "shutter" the Wheat Board.
It announces the government intends to seek an auditor to check the books and “provide reasonable assurance of the total financial impact of the repeal of the Canadian Wheat Board Act and the dissolution or winding up of the CWB after the final pooling periods (expected to be July 31, 2012).”
The contract value is projected at $500,000 to $1 million and only pre-approved accountants are eligible to bid on the work.
After a contested plebiscite and the firing of the board’s president, Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz announced in May the government’s intention to shutter the single-desk marketing agency by August of next year.
Instead, the Cons have pretended that removal of single-desk authority wouldn't have any impact whatsoever on the Wheat Board's operations - or at least not one which would substantially affect its ability to market grain. And it's the Board's defenders who have pointed out that there's no realistic prospect of survival without either single-desk status, or regulated access to storage and handling facilities.
Now, without coming clean about their intentions, the Cons have let it slip that they're planning for the Wheat Board to be rubble by this time next year. And that leaves no room for doubt that anybody wanting the CWB to survive will need to take every opportunity this fall to force the Cons to change their mind.
[Edit: fixed wording.]
Thursday Morning Links
This and that for your Thursday reading.
- Graham Thomson notes that for all the permutations and combinations that have developed among Alberta's opposition parties over the past few years, the NDP's strong principles have positioned it nicely in the lead up to a possible fall election:
- Andrew Steele offers some common-sense advice to political parties: for all the promise of online citizen engagement, knocking on doors is still the #1 priority in trying to win over voters.
- I'm not sure we can accurately say that Terence Corcoran is leading Canada's intellectual retreat when politicians like the Ford brothers and the bulk of the federal Cons receive so much more attention. But Erin is right to call out his Tea Party-esque nonsense.
- Finally, Matt Taibbi points out one of the many outrageous possibilities on the U.S. political scene, as it seems entirely possible that corporations who have sent money offshore will once again be rewarded for their manipulation of the law with a tax holiday.
- Graham Thomson notes that for all the permutations and combinations that have developed among Alberta's opposition parties over the past few years, the NDP's strong principles have positioned it nicely in the lead up to a possible fall election:
Even though they might not admit it, New Democrats wouldn't mind a fall election. The provincial party is still basking in the afterglow of the Orange Wave that saw federal leader Jack Layton take the party to Official Opposition status for the first time.- Simon Enoch discusses Saskatchewan's highly unusual and distortionary electoral boundaries - just in time for the boundary review process which looks likely to change them.
The Environics poll of Alberta politics put the New Democrats into a statistical three-way tie for second place with the Wildrose and Liberals. All of a sudden, New Democrats are no longer in fourth place. Also giving the Alberta New Democrats a confidence boost are the federal election results where more than 230,000 Albertans supported the party.
Almost half that support is in Edmonton where the party is focusing its attention on a fall election. And narrowing the focus even more, the NDP won its one Alberta seat in Edmonton-Strathcona with the reelection of Linda Duncan.
It's all good news for Alberta New Democrats, especially Notley who represents the provincial riding of Edmonton-Strathcona and who, thanks to the federal campaign, already has targeted more than 12,000 supporters.
...
Alberta's New Democrats have such a long uphill climb they should equip their candidates with crampons and rope. But they are also among the most optimistic of Alberta's political parties, realizing they are staking out a unique position as the only politicians talking about increasing royalties on oil and gas companies and cracking down more forcefully on the environmental impact of the oilsands.
- Andrew Steele offers some common-sense advice to political parties: for all the promise of online citizen engagement, knocking on doors is still the #1 priority in trying to win over voters.
- I'm not sure we can accurately say that Terence Corcoran is leading Canada's intellectual retreat when politicians like the Ford brothers and the bulk of the federal Cons receive so much more attention. But Erin is right to call out his Tea Party-esque nonsense.
- Finally, Matt Taibbi points out one of the many outrageous possibilities on the U.S. political scene, as it seems entirely possible that corporations who have sent money offshore will once again be rewarded for their manipulation of the law with a tax holiday.
On targeted development
Shorter Stephen Harper:
To anybody who dares question my free trade agreement with Colombia, I say this: you can't make a free market omelet without breaking a few skulls. That's the expression, right?
To anybody who dares question my free trade agreement with Colombia, I say this: you can't make a free market omelet without breaking a few skulls. That's the expression, right?
New column day
Here, on how B.C.'s HST referendum and Wisconsin's state Senate recalls should rekindle our interest in setting up direct democratic mechanisms to hold governments accountable between elections.
No followup links for now since both have been amply covered in the corporate media and the blogosphere alike - but feel free to post any particular favourites in comments.
No followup links for now since both have been amply covered in the corporate media and the blogosphere alike - but feel free to post any particular favourites in comments.
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
Wednesday Afternoon Links
Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.
- Marc Lee tears into the "unfunded liabilities" spin on public benefits which is now making an appearance in Canada:
- Pogge points out the latest example of the Cons' deliberate know-nothingness being both a point of pride and an all-purpose excuse for ignoring realities which don't fit their political spin.
- Finally, Claude Denis offers up some more educational content about the realities of Quebec politics:
- Marc Lee tears into the "unfunded liabilities" spin on public benefits which is now making an appearance in Canada:
(W)hat’s missing from this horror movie is that this is an artifact of CPP being a mostly pay-as-you-go plan. The report calculates all future payouts to beneficiaries, less current holdings of financial assets, but ASSUMES that all CPP contributions from workers present and future ceased. It is as if the CPP closed shop and took in no more premium revenues and simply paid out its legal obligations. On this basis, my telephone connection is an unfunded liability running thousands of dollars because I do not have that money in the bank to pre-fund those future phone bills.- Barbara Ehrenreich writes about how the U.S. has turned poverty into a crime.
In the real world, we have to consider both income/revenues and expenditures, particularly since the CPP is “intended to be long-term and enduring in nature,” according to the Chief Actuary. So a second calculation that does include future contributions from workers, and this basically wipes out the “unfunded liability”, though not entirely. By this second estimate there is still a shortfall of $6.9 billion, but this is over the coming 75 years and amounts of 0.3% of the CPP’s liabilities.
The gist of the Chief Actuary’s report is that the CPP is financially sound for at least the next 75 years.
...
(S)urpluses are being accumulated and invested in financial markets. A decade from now, those surpluses will be depleted and expenditures will exceed contributions, with the difference made up by income from accumulated assets. Those CPP assets are currently worth $143 billion and are anticipated to continue to rise, even amid negative cash flow from premiums less benefits. That is, only a share of investment income will be needed to keep payments up, and the rate of return on CPP assets would have to drop big time for the plan to start drawing down its capital at all.
So when the right cries “unfunded liabilities” do not panic. They are either mis-informed or deliberately trying to mislead you.
- Pogge points out the latest example of the Cons' deliberate know-nothingness being both a point of pride and an all-purpose excuse for ignoring realities which don't fit their political spin.
- Finally, Claude Denis offers up some more educational content about the realities of Quebec politics:
Much has been written over the years about the effect of the Bloc’s electoral dominance on Quebecers’ sense of belonging to Canada: that it has insulated them, weakened their sense of responsibility for the governance of the country, etc. But we are now seeing that the Bloc has also enabled non-Quebecers to ignore Quebec, to treat it as a non-entity when it comes to governing Canada. So, since the early 1990s, Canada has been governed essentially without francophone Quebec, and people outside Quebec like it just fine.
Now the NDP has come along to upset that happy blindness. Canadians outside Quebec are being shown that if Quebecers are going to rejoin the game of governing this country, the game itself is going to change. This was a risky gamble from the start for the NDP: speaking convincingly to Quebecers might alienate other Canadians. Indeed, the New Democrats had faced this choice many times before and had always shrunk from the challenge.
Jack Layton decided to go for it. He and his team are trying to articulate a new language of solidarity on the centre-left, between Quebecers and other Canadians. The first difficulty was to bring enough Quebecers on board. The second one, likely to prove the greater, is now to make other Canadians accept a change in their own sense of the country, of themselves, and of Quebec.
...
Layton’s mistake — if any — has been to call attention to Turmel and to what she represents too soon. The plan was to engage Canadians and Quebecers in a renewed political conversation over the next several years. Obviously, and sadly, circumstances forced Layton’s hand. Considering that Canadians outside Quebec have not had time to adjust to new realities brought on by the “vague orange,” he might have chosen someone else, most likely not from Quebec, and delayed a reckoning.
But who knows if and when this would have been possible? As it is, rather than looking at this as a mistake, I would rather see Layton’s choice as another courageous gamble. In effect, he is telling his fellow Canadians: “open your eyes.” Please.
Still feigned indignation
At the very least, the media finally seems to have picked up on the reality that all Canadian national parties include some former Bloc members and/or sovereigntists in their ranks. But that leads to the next obvious problem: that it's scolding the NDP for a position it doesn't hold rather than picking up on a rather important difference in the parties' messages.
No, the NDP is neither saying "everyone was doing it" as a defence to any misdeeds of its own, nor implying that other parties' acceptance of former Bloc members is wrong while its own is just fine. And the Globe itself knows better:
Of course, there are indeed two parties trying to say "sovereigntists for we, but not for thee". And those are the Cons and Libs - in part based on a typical IOKIYAC/IOKIYAL sense of self-entitlement, in part thanks to a delightfully brazen "but we question the NDP's dedication to federalism, therefore we get to invent different standards for them" argument.
If there's any good news, it's that it only took a week to get the media to notice the first bit of absurdity in the other parties' attacks on the NDP. And if the NDP's message machine can get the next part of its position to sink in on a similar time frame, then it should be able to put the issue to rest long before Parliament reconvenes.
[Edit: fixed wording.]
No, the NDP is neither saying "everyone was doing it" as a defence to any misdeeds of its own, nor implying that other parties' acceptance of former Bloc members is wrong while its own is just fine. And the Globe itself knows better:
“What is at issue is the hypocrisy that the Conservatives displayed when they were commenting on Madame Turmel’s former membership in the Bloc,” said Mr. Lavigne. “They did this at the same time they themselves have members of their cabinet who are former members of the Bloc Québécois.”And again, if spun to fit the Globe's narrative rather than the real one:
Mr. Lebel has a defender in an unexpected corner: outspoken Winnipeg NDP MP Pat Martin: “He is one of the most affable and friendly Conservative Ministers in cabinet,” Mr. Martin told the Globe. “He’s my office neighbour and frequent gym buddy. Quite the athlete, actually.” Mr. Martin argues that you cannot “grow your party” by ignoring others and “shunning anyone who once belonged to a different party.”So the NDP's position is in fact consistent: national parties can, do and should accept former Bloc members and/or sovereigntists (which aren't necessarily synonymous). And the other parties' criticisms of the NDP for doing just that are entirely hollow given that they've adopted the exact same principle in putting together their past and present cabinets.
“Denis Lebel reminds us that many people have been associated with the Bloc for many different reasons quite separate and distinct from the sovereignty issue,” he says. “I hope more former Bloc members come and join the NDP.”
Of course, there are indeed two parties trying to say "sovereigntists for we, but not for thee". And those are the Cons and Libs - in part based on a typical IOKIYAC/IOKIYAL sense of self-entitlement, in part thanks to a delightfully brazen "but we question the NDP's dedication to federalism, therefore we get to invent different standards for them" argument.
If there's any good news, it's that it only took a week to get the media to notice the first bit of absurdity in the other parties' attacks on the NDP. And if the NDP's message machine can get the next part of its position to sink in on a similar time frame, then it should be able to put the issue to rest long before Parliament reconvenes.
[Edit: fixed wording.]
On broken systems
Let's add one more to the list of theories as to how the other parties' pearl-clutching over interim NDP leader Nycole Turmel may actually play to the NDP's advantage - and this time with a far more immediate effect.
Keep in mind that the last national poll taken primarily before the Turmel brouhaha showed the Libs effectively on even terms with the NDP. And it surely can't escape notice that the Libs had spent most of the summer to that point talking about policy and party rebuilding, rather than falling back into their familiar pattern of scandalmongering.
In contrast, the first poll taken after the attacks on Turmel restored the NDP's double-digit lead over the Libs, as well as its strong second-place position compared to the Cons.
So could it be that by piling on Turmel, the Libs merely reminded Canadians that Ottawa is still broken - and encouraged poll respondents to show their support for the party which is working to rise above the same old mud-slinging?
Keep in mind that the last national poll taken primarily before the Turmel brouhaha showed the Libs effectively on even terms with the NDP. And it surely can't escape notice that the Libs had spent most of the summer to that point talking about policy and party rebuilding, rather than falling back into their familiar pattern of scandalmongering.
In contrast, the first poll taken after the attacks on Turmel restored the NDP's double-digit lead over the Libs, as well as its strong second-place position compared to the Cons.
So could it be that by piling on Turmel, the Libs merely reminded Canadians that Ottawa is still broken - and encouraged poll respondents to show their support for the party which is working to rise above the same old mud-slinging?
Tuesday, August 09, 2011
Juxtaposition
Stephen Harper's rule for others when it comes to interfering in the affairs of other governments:
Tory provincial election rule number one: don’t become the storyIn other news, Harper becomes the story:
Stephen Harper locks himself in Brazilian minister’s bathroom until he gets his way
Deep thought
I can think of a few appropriate introductions to a plan belatedly acknowledging the existence of a housing crisis. But proudly pointing to past programs which have evidently accomplished nothing isn't one of them.
Tuesday Morning Links
This and that for your Tuesday reading.
- Andrew Jackson describes the next phase of the global economic crisis:
- Which isn't to say that the Cons have offered anything different. But they've at least tried to pretend to offer a steady hand even while flailing wildly at Canada's public institutions.
- Finally, in a signal of what looks like a much-needed debate this fall, the NDP is backing up its previous call for a firm end date to Canada's involvement in Libya by demanding that the Cons withdraw this fall.
- Andrew Jackson describes the next phase of the global economic crisis:
Now we face a new financial crisis, or at least a stock market correction of major proportions, which may precipitate a new phase of the crisis.- Yes, it's well and good to point out that Stephen Harper's appearance with Rob Ford reflects a break in his usual image control. But isn't it more significant that Harper is willing to make common cause - behind closed doors or otherwise - with somebody so bent on imposing uncompetence in the first place?
The financial markets seem to suffer from acute schizophrenia, with the bond markets demanding more fiscal austerity in much of the Euro zone, while stock markets are panicking at clear signs of slowing US and global growth.
How should governments be responding to the panic in the markets?
Not, as they have, by caving in to the bond markets.
...
The key problem...is that the policy shifts we need seem to be political non starters. Which is why the G7 focus remains very much on austerity. Which will make things worse. Which is why the stock markets are panicking.
- Which isn't to say that the Cons have offered anything different. But they've at least tried to pretend to offer a steady hand even while flailing wildly at Canada's public institutions.
- Finally, in a signal of what looks like a much-needed debate this fall, the NDP is backing up its previous call for a firm end date to Canada's involvement in Libya by demanding that the Cons withdraw this fall.
On distinguishing factors
Lest there be any doubt, it's still ridiculous to pretend that any person's past involvement in a Quebec sovereigntist party should be taken to disqualify that person from Canada's public discourse. But for those looking to facilitate the Cons' attacks on the NDP by trying to differentiate between Con MP and cabinet minister Denis Lebel and interim NDP leader Nycole Turmel, let's note that any reasonable distinctions look worse for Lebel than for Turmel.
After all, Lebel's involvement with the Bloc came in the '90s when its primary focus was on separation - while Turmel's came well into the 21st century when the Bloc had settled predominantly into a role as a regional rather than a nationalist party.
And for anybody looking to impose a loyalty test, surely Lebel's lack of ties to any federalist party while he belonged to the Bloc would serve as far more of a red flag than Turmel's simultaneous membership in the sovereigntist Bloc and the federalist NDP.
Again, though, the proper conclusion is that none of Lebel, Turmel or the leaders who appointed them should be forever banished from national participation based merely on past Bloc ties. And to the extent the Cons try to pretend otherwise, the right answer is to suggest that they'll have the right to take an even faintly principled position on giving power to a former Bloc member just as soon as we see Stephen Harper's resignation papers for appointing Lebel to cabinet.
After all, Lebel's involvement with the Bloc came in the '90s when its primary focus was on separation - while Turmel's came well into the 21st century when the Bloc had settled predominantly into a role as a regional rather than a nationalist party.
And for anybody looking to impose a loyalty test, surely Lebel's lack of ties to any federalist party while he belonged to the Bloc would serve as far more of a red flag than Turmel's simultaneous membership in the sovereigntist Bloc and the federalist NDP.
Again, though, the proper conclusion is that none of Lebel, Turmel or the leaders who appointed them should be forever banished from national participation based merely on past Bloc ties. And to the extent the Cons try to pretend otherwise, the right answer is to suggest that they'll have the right to take an even faintly principled position on giving power to a former Bloc member just as soon as we see Stephen Harper's resignation papers for appointing Lebel to cabinet.
Monday, August 08, 2011
"We've got more to do"
Aaron Wherry's story on Jack Layton's new cancer diagnosis includes a reminder as to what needs to be done no matter what happens in Layton's latest fight:
McGrath prepared herself to find out what was happening on July 25, when a significant test was to take place, but that test was moved up five days. With those results came a diagnosis and on the evening of Wednesday, July 20, two days after his 61st birthday, Layton called McGrath to tell her it was cancer. “He’s so upbeat,” she says. “He really is. It’s so funny. I don’t get it sometimes myself.”
He told her to tell him that she was going to keep working. “ ‘We started this journey together…and look at how far we’ve come and look what we’ve done,’ ” she recalls him saying. “And he starts going through the things that we’ve been through and everything. He says, ‘And we’ve got more to do.’ He was talking to me about fundraising, about increasing the party’s membership. This is on Wednesday night, you know?”
He was not unmoved by the situation he now found himself in, but he was not shaken from the focus that sometimes seems to be all-encompassing. “He was upset and I could tell that there were tears,” McGrath says. “But again, he’s just very determined.” Here Jack Layton began the latest fight of his life: confronting it, McGrath says, as if it were a political campaign. “He’s the same with his health situation as he is with the party. It’s like, ‘I want the team together, I want to plan, it won’t be acceptable if it’s not this and that and the other thing.’
“He knows,” she says later, “he’s got a big fight on his hands.”
Monday Morning Links
Assorted content to start your week.
- On the Nycole Turmel front: Christopher Majka cheers the fact that the NDP has managed to encourage so many more Quebeckers to see a place for themselves in Canadian federal politics. Michael Taube doesn't see any reason for the anti-NDP pile-on. And Charlie Smith offers another theory as to how the brouhaha could ultimately help the NDP.
- Meanwhile, the Hill Times checks in on the NDP's ongoing staffing process. And it's worth keeping in mind that the party's effective planning and use of its new resources may prove far more consequential in the long run than any short-term distraction or polling.
- John Mumme suggests that Canada look to Australia's superannuation system for an example of improved pensions and retirement security.
- But then, why stop at better national systems when the same issues are popping up around the world? And Thomas Palley's proposal for a global minimum wage looks like a great place to start in ensuring that development around the globe actually results in benefits for workers.
- On the Nycole Turmel front: Christopher Majka cheers the fact that the NDP has managed to encourage so many more Quebeckers to see a place for themselves in Canadian federal politics. Michael Taube doesn't see any reason for the anti-NDP pile-on. And Charlie Smith offers another theory as to how the brouhaha could ultimately help the NDP.
- Meanwhile, the Hill Times checks in on the NDP's ongoing staffing process. And it's worth keeping in mind that the party's effective planning and use of its new resources may prove far more consequential in the long run than any short-term distraction or polling.
- John Mumme suggests that Canada look to Australia's superannuation system for an example of improved pensions and retirement security.
- But then, why stop at better national systems when the same issues are popping up around the world? And Thomas Palley's proposal for a global minimum wage looks like a great place to start in ensuring that development around the globe actually results in benefits for workers.
Monday Morning 'Rider Blogging
Once again, the 'Riders' latest loss was more a story of missed opportunities than poor play overall - particularly in the third quarter, when Saskatchewan's near-total dominance on both sides of the ball led to a grand total of one point. But there's a downside to that type of loss as well, as the fixes normally available for a losing team don't apply to the 'Riders in the slightest.
Normally, the best advice for a struggling team is to take better care of the ball. And indeed, usually a losing streak involves losing the turnover battle handily - which tends to even out over time.
But the 'Riders' last two losses have featured a grand total of zero turnovers, to two for the team's opponents. So there's nowhere to go but down on that front.
Likewise, a struggling offence can normally find some obvious room to improve its completion rate. But Darian Durant has completed two-thirds of his passes over the past two weeks - and while a few too many of those have been for little or no gain, it's hard to see much prospect of pushing that number upward.
And aside from Geroy Simon's first-half eruption, the 'Riders' defence has played about as well as could be hoped for - holding two fairly strong offences to 22 and 24 points.
So what's left for the 'Riders to improve?
Well, the biggest problem looks to be getting some touchdowns out of the current possession offence. And there are a couple of obvious points which might help, including setting up receivers to take the ball in stride rather than catching the ball flat-footed, and designing plays to let Durant make better use of the time he buys to find receivers far downfield.
And of course it would help for the 'Riders to stop shooting themselves in the foot. In particular, it's beyond me how an offence with an elite quarterback has so much trouble working within the play clock - and indeed a faster-moving offence might also help to set up bigger plays by getting opposing defences off stride.
Meanwhile, the 'Riders' receivers have plenty of work to do on timing up the play without going offside - not to mention catching the ball once it reached them. (Needless to say, James Robinson didn't help on either front.) And of course, a better field-goal conversion rate would at least help to keep games close.
But even if the 'Riders can improve on those points, they might face enough concurrent decline in their turnover ratio to keep them on the losing side of any given game. Which means that while it's too early to give up on the season or any large number of the 'Riders' players, there's ample reason for concern that matters will get worse before they get better.
Update: I won't claim to have much insight on Dallas Baker, the import receiver who arrived in a trade for Luc Mullinder today. And hopefully he'll provide one of the playmakers the 'Riders have lacked.
But it's seldom a great feat of CFL roster management to trade a perfectly serviceable non-import for an import lottery ticket who was available as a free agent just months earlier. And if Baker isn't ready to help immediately, the effect of the deal will be to push the 'Riders even further away from where they need to go.
Normally, the best advice for a struggling team is to take better care of the ball. And indeed, usually a losing streak involves losing the turnover battle handily - which tends to even out over time.
But the 'Riders' last two losses have featured a grand total of zero turnovers, to two for the team's opponents. So there's nowhere to go but down on that front.
Likewise, a struggling offence can normally find some obvious room to improve its completion rate. But Darian Durant has completed two-thirds of his passes over the past two weeks - and while a few too many of those have been for little or no gain, it's hard to see much prospect of pushing that number upward.
And aside from Geroy Simon's first-half eruption, the 'Riders' defence has played about as well as could be hoped for - holding two fairly strong offences to 22 and 24 points.
So what's left for the 'Riders to improve?
Well, the biggest problem looks to be getting some touchdowns out of the current possession offence. And there are a couple of obvious points which might help, including setting up receivers to take the ball in stride rather than catching the ball flat-footed, and designing plays to let Durant make better use of the time he buys to find receivers far downfield.
And of course it would help for the 'Riders to stop shooting themselves in the foot. In particular, it's beyond me how an offence with an elite quarterback has so much trouble working within the play clock - and indeed a faster-moving offence might also help to set up bigger plays by getting opposing defences off stride.
Meanwhile, the 'Riders' receivers have plenty of work to do on timing up the play without going offside - not to mention catching the ball once it reached them. (Needless to say, James Robinson didn't help on either front.) And of course, a better field-goal conversion rate would at least help to keep games close.
But even if the 'Riders can improve on those points, they might face enough concurrent decline in their turnover ratio to keep them on the losing side of any given game. Which means that while it's too early to give up on the season or any large number of the 'Riders' players, there's ample reason for concern that matters will get worse before they get better.
Update: I won't claim to have much insight on Dallas Baker, the import receiver who arrived in a trade for Luc Mullinder today. And hopefully he'll provide one of the playmakers the 'Riders have lacked.
But it's seldom a great feat of CFL roster management to trade a perfectly serviceable non-import for an import lottery ticket who was available as a free agent just months earlier. And if Baker isn't ready to help immediately, the effect of the deal will be to push the 'Riders even further away from where they need to go.
Sunday, August 07, 2011
Sunday Evening Links
Miscellaneous material to end your weekend.
- Floyd Norris' column on the gap between stagnant wages and soaring corporate profits. But let's add Digby's take as to what we can expect if the corporate sector gets its way:
- Sixth Estate adds a few more names and numbers to the Harper Cons' patronage list.
- The National Roundtable on the Environment and the Economy concludes that the Cons' already sad excuse for a climate-change program is double-counting any expected emission reductions.
- Finally, Alison's latest comic - on the Cons' loyalty testing - is well worth a look.
- Floyd Norris' column on the gap between stagnant wages and soaring corporate profits. But let's add Digby's take as to what we can expect if the corporate sector gets its way:
- Erin is among many to point out how Standard & Poor's was determined to downgrade the U.S.' credit rating even when its entire factual basis for doing so was proven wrong."I've never seen labor markets this weak in 35 years of research," says Andrew Sum, director of the Center for Labor Market Studies at Northeastern University. Wages and salaries accounted for just 1 percent of economic growth in the first 18 months after economists declared that the recession had ended in June 2009, according to Sum and other Northeastern researchers.In the same period after the 2001 recession, wages and salaries accounted for 15 percent. They were 50 percent after the 1991-92 recession and 25 percent after the 1981-82 recession.(J)udging from the claptrap these CEOs are babbling every chance they get (read the article), they are planning to squeeze more than just their workers --- they want to use this situation to blackmail the government into cutting their taxes and deregulating them even more than they already are. It doesn't make sense, of course. They are sitting on a ton of capital, it's not like they don't have the money to invest. It's sheer opportunism and they'll probably get away with it.
Corporate profits, by contrast, accounted for an unprecedented 88 percent of economic growth during those first 18 months. That's compared with 53 percent after the 2001 recession, nothing after the 1991-92 recession and 28 percent after the 1981-82 recession.
...
(I)t's not as if their profits are being being put to work at all. They just aren't being put to work in the US. And if the political establishment has its way, they'll be doing even more. Free trade deals are on the top of both parties' "jobs agenda." If all goes well, they'll end up with a few high profile loopholes temporarily closed in exchange for lower tax rates forever and some sweetheart trade deals. With any luck they won't even have to give up the loopholes.
- Sixth Estate adds a few more names and numbers to the Harper Cons' patronage list.
- The National Roundtable on the Environment and the Economy concludes that the Cons' already sad excuse for a climate-change program is double-counting any expected emission reductions.
- Finally, Alison's latest comic - on the Cons' loyalty testing - is well worth a look.
What might have been
Wilf Day offers up one what-might-have-been scenario based on proportional representation. But as one astute observer pointed out at the NDP's Vancouver convention, there's another alternate set of possibilities which wouldn't have required a different electoral system - only some better choices by the then-leader of one of the parties which has seen its fortunes decline most.
When Michael Ignatieff decided he preferred keeping Stephen Harper in power to working with a progressive coalition in 2009, his operating assumption seems to have been that the Libs simply needed to bide their time in order to become the next government down the road. But what he seems to have missed was that the coalition itself offered an opportunity to entrench a set of party rankings that worked in the Libs' favour.
Indeed, there isn't a single plausible outcome of Ignatieff seeking to take power under a coalition that wouldn't have been a far better result for the Libs than where they ended up instead.
At best for the Libs, Ignatieff would have had a chance to govern for a year and a half with an NDP coalition partner and Bloc support - not only effectively neutralizing any criticism from any other party to the left of the Cons, but ensuring that the comparative popularity of Jack Layton and Gilles Duceppe served to reinforce the argument that the Libs belonged in power after a subsequent election. And if the coalition had held together, the likely result would have been either a change in leadership for the Cons, or at least a serious loosening of Stephen Harper's hold on his party - weakening the Libs' strongest opponent at the time while strengthening their own hand.
What's more, even the less desirable outcomes from Ignatieff's standpoint would figure to have positioned the Libs in a secure second place for the foreseeable future. If the coalition had taken power but its underlying support structure had fallen apart, the Libs would have been able to blame whichever party withdrew its support for breaking a deal to keep the Cons out of office - which would have given them a particular opportunity to rebuild in Quebec where the coalition was most popular. And if a coalition had been stopped in its tracks by defections to the Cons or by a snap election that resulted in a Con majority, the Libs would figure to have had no trouble at least locking in their second-party standing for the duration of the majority mandate.
Instead, by deciding that he couldn't stand to rule with another party at the cabinet table, Ignatieff sharpened distinctions which played to the NDP's advantage - while ensuring that the Libs would be seen as enemies both by the Cons for agreeing to the coalition in the first place, and by the other parties and their supporters who wanted to see Harper toppled. And in retrospect, that offered the NDP exactly the opening it needed to establish itself as the true opposition to the Cons in seat count as well as in principle.
Of course, the NDP deserves in taking advantage of the opening. But it's hard not to see the Libs' fall as the product of Ignatieff's original sin. And while there's some reason to hope the long-term result will be a political system that better reflects the values of progressive Canadians, it's still worth a reminder which party blew its opportunity to change the Harper-ruled status quo.
When Michael Ignatieff decided he preferred keeping Stephen Harper in power to working with a progressive coalition in 2009, his operating assumption seems to have been that the Libs simply needed to bide their time in order to become the next government down the road. But what he seems to have missed was that the coalition itself offered an opportunity to entrench a set of party rankings that worked in the Libs' favour.
Indeed, there isn't a single plausible outcome of Ignatieff seeking to take power under a coalition that wouldn't have been a far better result for the Libs than where they ended up instead.
At best for the Libs, Ignatieff would have had a chance to govern for a year and a half with an NDP coalition partner and Bloc support - not only effectively neutralizing any criticism from any other party to the left of the Cons, but ensuring that the comparative popularity of Jack Layton and Gilles Duceppe served to reinforce the argument that the Libs belonged in power after a subsequent election. And if the coalition had held together, the likely result would have been either a change in leadership for the Cons, or at least a serious loosening of Stephen Harper's hold on his party - weakening the Libs' strongest opponent at the time while strengthening their own hand.
What's more, even the less desirable outcomes from Ignatieff's standpoint would figure to have positioned the Libs in a secure second place for the foreseeable future. If the coalition had taken power but its underlying support structure had fallen apart, the Libs would have been able to blame whichever party withdrew its support for breaking a deal to keep the Cons out of office - which would have given them a particular opportunity to rebuild in Quebec where the coalition was most popular. And if a coalition had been stopped in its tracks by defections to the Cons or by a snap election that resulted in a Con majority, the Libs would figure to have had no trouble at least locking in their second-party standing for the duration of the majority mandate.
Instead, by deciding that he couldn't stand to rule with another party at the cabinet table, Ignatieff sharpened distinctions which played to the NDP's advantage - while ensuring that the Libs would be seen as enemies both by the Cons for agreeing to the coalition in the first place, and by the other parties and their supporters who wanted to see Harper toppled. And in retrospect, that offered the NDP exactly the opening it needed to establish itself as the true opposition to the Cons in seat count as well as in principle.
Of course, the NDP deserves in taking advantage of the opening. But it's hard not to see the Libs' fall as the product of Ignatieff's original sin. And while there's some reason to hope the long-term result will be a political system that better reflects the values of progressive Canadians, it's still worth a reminder which party blew its opportunity to change the Harper-ruled status quo.
Sunday Morning Links
Assorted content for your weekend reading.
- Tom Mills challenges the Cons to show any job creation whatsoever as a result of their non-stop corporate tax slashing:
- Meanwhile, Carol Hughes rightly points out that two NDP opposition day motions passed unanimously in the House of Commons - meaning that there's every reason to put pressure on the Cons to translate their support in principle into real policy changes.
- Finally, I'll look at a couple of Alice's observations in more detail later. But for now, her post includes plenty of noteworthy tidbits on where Canada's political parties were in 2010, as well as where they're going in the years to come.
- Tom Mills challenges the Cons to show any job creation whatsoever as a result of their non-stop corporate tax slashing:
The thing is, if corporate tax cuts really do create jobs, Flaherty should be able to demonstrate it by now with something a little more substantial than theories.- After a week of party operatives and media sources outside Quebec begging every NDP supporter they can find for some evidence of internal dissent angle to keep Nycole Turmel in the headlines, the big "gotcha" is...Adrian Dix' continued support for Turmel.
Canada's corporate tax rate has dropped incrementally from 22.1% in 2005-06 to 16.5% today. The government should be able to track what jobs this has created.
Show us the jobs, I'd say. And show us full-time industrial jobs, not part-time service ones. Private sector, not civil service.
Otherwise, maybe we should give trickle-up economics a try.
- Meanwhile, Carol Hughes rightly points out that two NDP opposition day motions passed unanimously in the House of Commons - meaning that there's every reason to put pressure on the Cons to translate their support in principle into real policy changes.
- Finally, I'll look at a couple of Alice's observations in more detail later. But for now, her post includes plenty of noteworthy tidbits on where Canada's political parties were in 2010, as well as where they're going in the years to come.
Saturday, August 06, 2011
On warning signs
Shorter Jim Flaherty:
Of course economic trouble elsewhere in the world will have negative consequences for Canada. But we won't let that stop us from pushing the same bad advice that's done so much to cause it.
Of course economic trouble elsewhere in the world will have negative consequences for Canada. But we won't let that stop us from pushing the same bad advice that's done so much to cause it.
Saturday Morning Links
Assorted content for your weekend reading.
- L. Aaron Wright nicely contrasts the fabricated hysteria over Nycole Turmel against the choices of the Libs and Cons:
- L. Aaron Wright nicely contrasts the fabricated hysteria over Nycole Turmel against the choices of the Libs and Cons:
Where was the outrage when Stephen Harper tried to recruit Mario Dumont of the ADQ in Quebec, a leader of the Yes side in the 1995 referendum?- Kevin Drum serves up some numbers on why unions matter - reminding us why the corporatist right so fears both:
Where is the outrage at Maxime Bernier, a Tory cabinet minister, who worked for the Parti Quebecois government as an adviser to then Quebec finance minister Bernard Landry?
I don’t recall any outrage when the Liberals welcomed Jean Lapierre back into their fold. He was made minister of Transport. Mr. Lapierre was not just a former Bloc MP, but also a Bloc co-founder.
All of these politicians supported Quebec sovereignty. Ms. Turmel never has. She is a federalist.
Among men, if you account only for the effect of individual membership in unions, (inequality) would be about a fifth lower (at 1973 unionization rates), which agrees pretty well with previous estimates. But if you also account for the effect of unions on surrounding nonunion employers (who often raised wages to compete with union employers and to avert the threat of unionization in their own workplace), the effect is larger: Unionization at 1973 levels would decrease income inequality by a full third...- Meanwhile, Ken Lewenza points out another corporate scam that's transferring money to the least scrupulous businesses at the expense of workers, as corporations are making a habit of simply shutting down without warning and leaving their employees out in the cold when it comes to money already earned:
The effect of unionization on women is less dramatic because women were never unionized at the same rate as men. For them, increasing returns to education are a bigger factor in rising income inequality than deunionization. For men, however, deunionization has had a huge impact...
(D)eunionization has allowed income inequality to rise partly because unions are negotiating wages for fewer people than they used to, and partly because unions no longer have the power to force the political system to pay attention to the needs of the middle class.
The abrupt closure of three IQT call-centre operations in Oshawa, Trois-Rivières and Laval has left 1,200 workers reeling, and government agencies scratching their heads. How can a company (in this case a multi-million dollar, multi-national telecommunications contractor) simply pack up and leave, literally overnight? How can they walk away from legal obligations, washing their hands of back pay and severance? Seriously, how?- Finally, the National Post rightly notes that recognition of both human rights and the negative consequences of gratuitously draconian policy is particularly important in dealing with targets who lack any public defenders. But it'll take plenty of reminders on that point to counteract the Cons' deliberate moves to shield themselves from criticism for analogous actions by declaring that nobody should care about the victims anyway.
Weeks have gone by but no one, as of yet, has any real answers to these questions.
Governments appear incapable of even tracking down basic information about the company, who’s in charge and whether or not they’re actually bankrupt.
There’s an assumption among Canadians that there must be rules and regulations holding corporations to account. But this latest fiasco is a rude awakening.
Indeed, we’ve seen this storyline many times before. In 2009, 2,400 non-union auto parts workers at Progressive Moulded Products (PMP) in Toronto faced a similar ordeal — returning from vacation only to learn that their employer had fled town, taking their separation payments with them. CAW members have seen it first-hand, too, at companies like Collins & Aikman in Scarborough, Aradco and Aramco in Windsor, and others.
Each case prompted a public outcry and a spontaneous fight back. Workers demanded what was legally owed to them. But after fighting long and hard, they inevitably end up with less than they are owed.
...
It is both immoral and economically counterproductive to allow deadbeat corporations like IQT to commit these wrongs with impunity. As a society, we must take a hard line with employers who think they’re beyond the greater good.
Friday, August 05, 2011
Friday Afternoon Links
Assorted content to end your week.
- Gerald Caplan calls out the non-stop and substance-free gotcha politics facing the NDP since the public started recognizing that it had a legitimate chance to form government:
- Finally, as Aaron Wherry notes, Canadians for Tax Fairness are making the case as to why we should feel good about paying the reasonable price of civilization.
- Gerald Caplan calls out the non-stop and substance-free gotcha politics facing the NDP since the public started recognizing that it had a legitimate chance to form government:
It never stops and never will. The moment the NDP seems even close to power, the knives come out.- And T.C. Norris also weighs in on Turmel:
The election was May 2. The NDP's rise began barely two weeks prior. Here's what it faced in these past three months:
"MassageGate." Suddenly, just before the election, it became necessary for the Sun media to smear Jack Layton over a massage he had 15 years earlier, and for Christie Blatchford to repeat the smear, even agreeing it was a smear.
"LasVegasGate." The NDP makes history in the election. It sweeps Quebec and emerges as Official Opposition. But its new MPs are immediately dismissed as a joke. Like a gang of bullies picking on someone who can't defend herself, reporters fall all over themselves to mock a candidate who spent part of the election in Las Vegas. She becomes a symbol of the immaturity of the new NDP MPs, even though few reporters had ever spoken to a single one of them. Having finally met them, these stories abruptly ceased.
"Jack'sCancerGate." Within seconds of Mr. Layton's announcement that he was temporarily stepping aside because of a new cancer but intended to return in the fall, the burial of the NDP began. The NDP was finished without Mr. Layton, even though he hadn't resigned. He was irreplaceable. Day after day for an entire week, the rhetorical question got asked and re-asked: Can the NDP make it Jack-less? The answer was seen to be self-evident.
"ComeCleanAboutCancerGate." Out of nowhere, the cry goes up that Mr. Layton must divulge everything about his cancer. What was he hiding? The world had a right and a need to know every single detail. Soon the rest of the pack picked it up. Everyone wanted to know something that was none of their business and of no conceivable use if they did know.
And now, finally, "TurmelGate"...
It's only a matter of time until Quebec realizes the province and its interests are no longer a priority for much of Canada, especially for a right-wing government that Québécois repudiated and where the west and Ontario dominate. For all of us who can't envision a Canada sans Quebec, there is dangerous potential here. Unexpectedly, the NDP has emerged as the best federalist bridge between Quebec and the rest of Canada. Jack Layton and Nycole Turmel are the embodiment of that bridge.
(N)ot only did Turmel spurn the Bloc, she did so to run for a party that historically had never had much electoral success in Quebec. So she supported a federalist party in a circumstance where she might have reasonably expected that to be a political liability.- Meanwhile, Caplan's list takes on an even darker tone when juxtaposed with the Cons' latest abuse of Abousfian Abdelrazik - as the declaration that Canadians should mindlessly trust their government's spin as to which undesirables should be arbitrarily stripped of all rights seems far too easily transferable to the Cons' willingness to play up any issue they can for political gain.
The fact that many in Quebec such as Turmel spurned the pro-independence party for a federalist party should be celebrated not mocked. Turmel is a long-time NDP member and supporter, her true allegiance. Her opponents in any case include many with previous sovereignist backgrounds: Liberal Jean Lapierre, who served in Martin's cabinet, was a co-founder of the Bloc, and Maxime Bernier, who is now back in Harper's cabinet, worked for PQ Premier Bernard Landry, a very serious supporter of Quebec independence.
Turmel represents exactly what we want to see Quebecers do about federalism, Mr. Rae, embrace it.
- Finally, as Aaron Wherry notes, Canadians for Tax Fairness are making the case as to why we should feel good about paying the reasonable price of civilization.
Friday Morning Links
Assorted and environmentally-themed content to end your week.
- Lloyd Alter highlights the Cons' contrasting treatment of environmental scientists (who are being fired in droves) and oil lobbyists (who figure never to lack for work).
- And allies around the world are starting to take notice of the Cons' dirty reputation.
- Fortunately, though, the oil lobby's advantage in money seems to be compensated for in creativity. While the tar sands lobby engages in clumsy manipulations to try to sell its case publicly, the Yes Men managed a slick PR move to smoke out the difference between anybody concerned with truly "ethical oil" and those who just want to paper over the entire industry's abuses.
- And finally, Susan Riley notes that we've managed to make strides on at least some environmental issues such as smog:
- Lloyd Alter highlights the Cons' contrasting treatment of environmental scientists (who are being fired in droves) and oil lobbyists (who figure never to lack for work).
- And allies around the world are starting to take notice of the Cons' dirty reputation.
- Fortunately, though, the oil lobby's advantage in money seems to be compensated for in creativity. While the tar sands lobby engages in clumsy manipulations to try to sell its case publicly, the Yes Men managed a slick PR move to smoke out the difference between anybody concerned with truly "ethical oil" and those who just want to paper over the entire industry's abuses.
- And finally, Susan Riley notes that we've managed to make strides on at least some environmental issues such as smog:
There is another factor at play, although it is often downplayed: the cumulative impact of government regulation. Starting in 1991, with the signature of a Canada-U.S. acid rain accord, there has been a steady decline in various pollutants in central Canadian air, not only those linked to acidification of lakes.
Last March, on the 20th anniversary of the pact signed by Brian Mulroney and Ronald Reagan, Environment Canada released an update, trumpeting a one-third reduction in smog-related pollutants and elimination of 50 per cent of sulphur dioxide since the accord was signed, along with declines in nitrous oxide and particulate emissions.
...
We have, figuratively and literally, breathing space this summer. But clean air shouldn't depend on prevailing winds. It will also take politicians blessed with the foresight of their predecessors - including their conservative predecessors.
Thursday, August 04, 2011
Thursday Afternoon Links
This and that for your Thursday reading.
- No, we shouldn't be surprised that Clark-era PCs disagree with the Harper Cons given that their leader long since jumped ship as well. But Peter Blaikie's take on the Cons' dumb-on-crime policies is still worth a read:
- While I don't agree with Sixth Estate's hostility toward economists generally, this much is well worth emphasizing:
- No, we shouldn't be surprised that Clark-era PCs disagree with the Harper Cons given that their leader long since jumped ship as well. But Peter Blaikie's take on the Cons' dumb-on-crime policies is still worth a read:
A civilized, effective system of justice should have two overriding objectives: to protect society, perhaps forever, from the truly dangerous and, while punishing the others, using every possible effort to rehabilitate them, turning them into productive citizens.- Louisa Taylor notes that accuracy seems to be of no particular concern in the Cons' efforts to fearmonger about immigrants, as at least one member of their publicly-flaunted list of war criminals seems to be completely unknown to human rights groups who would have every reason to know if he was under any reasonable suspicion.
The government’s approach, in effect and almost certainly in intention, reverses these objectives. It is all stick and no carrot. It even abandons the highly successful, self-sustaining, century-old program of prison farms, which taught generations of inmates critical life skills.
...
In addition to the human cost of the tough-on-crime policy, the financial costs will be enormous, involving many billions of taxpayers’ dollars annually. Either the Harper government has no idea what the additional cost of more prisons, more inmates and longer jail terms will be, in which case it is incompetent, or, equally disrespectful of Canadians, it does know and refuses to admit them, thereby being dishonest.
- While I don't agree with Sixth Estate's hostility toward economists generally, this much is well worth emphasizing:
What is being advanced by mainstream economists is not (despite what their fake Nobel Prize says they’re doing) a science of the markets, so much as a theology of the markets. The economy written about in pieces like these is a raging beast beyond our control. It’s easy to forget that “the free market,” as such, doesn’t even exist. It’s an academic abstraction for a certain range of ways in which people interact, carefully bounded by laws and regulations. In their headlong rush to build a “science” worthy of the name, economists have built a god of their own making and are attempting to drag us down into the same mud they’re mired in. Depressions aren’t caused by greedy fraudulent bankers and their pet politicians stripping away law enforcement and regulation, and plunging into absurd schemes from which they know taxpayers will grudgingly bail them out — they’re caused by a long-term economic process that just “happens,” every 70 or 80 years, to cause a major contraction.- Finally, it's well worth noting when Barrie McKenna takes note of progressive economics on his normally corporatist blog:
Like all gods, the market appears to exist outside of human control, but at the end of the day it is our creation, and it is not a necessary one. We don’t need to allow preachers, or economists, to operate outside of the usual standards of logic and empiricism. We don’t need to run to either of these priesthoods whenever there’s a problem so they can prescribe meaningless fixes. We choose to create markets. And we choose to allow banks to operate as Ponzi schemes.
Canadian Labour Congress chief economist Andrew Jackson, on the other hand, sees Canada’s G7-leading finances as an opportunity to do a lot more to help the recovery and promote job growth.
“The major economic problem faced by Canadians is a very slow recovery and weak job market, not government deficits or rising debt,” Mr. Jackson argues in a blog post.
...
Canada’s finances are in relatively good shape, at least compared to other wealthy countries, Mr. Jackson points out. Total net government debt stands at 33.7 per cent of GDP in 2011, compared to the OECD average of 62.6 per cent. Total Canadian government deficits stand at 4.9 per cent of GDP, versus a 6.7 per cent average in the OECD. And interest costs on the debt are eating up 0.7 per cent of GDP, compared to a 1.9 per cent average in the OECD.
And yet Mr. Jackson said Canada is embracing more austerity than most of its rivals in the world by “artificially speeding” the pace of deficit reduction.
“Why are we taking the lead in imposing austerity, even though our economy is weak, and even though our deficit and debt is superior to most other countries?,” he wondered.
On equalization
One more note on today's fund-raising news which is best seen in Alice's historical quarterly data.
For 2011 Q2, total fund-raising for the NDP, Libs, Bloc and Greens was $7,918,876.12 - while for the Cons, it was $8,205,078.88. Which looks to mark a long-awaited return to parity between the Cons and their collective political opposition - as aside from a couple of easily-dismissed blips (2009 Q2 during Michael Ignatieff's honeymoon period and 2006 Q4 during the Libs' leadership convention), the Cons had managed to handily exceed all other parties' fund-raising combined since they took power in 2006.
Of course, one can't assume that dollars are readily transferrable among parties any more than votes. But at the very least, the past quarter offers some basis for optimism that in a more polarized system, there's indeed enough donor cash available for a united opponent to match the Cons' war chest - and that the opposition parties are moving closer to bringing in those donations.
For 2011 Q2, total fund-raising for the NDP, Libs, Bloc and Greens was $7,918,876.12 - while for the Cons, it was $8,205,078.88. Which looks to mark a long-awaited return to parity between the Cons and their collective political opposition - as aside from a couple of easily-dismissed blips (2009 Q2 during Michael Ignatieff's honeymoon period and 2006 Q4 during the Libs' leadership convention), the Cons had managed to handily exceed all other parties' fund-raising combined since they took power in 2006.
Of course, one can't assume that dollars are readily transferrable among parties any more than votes. But at the very least, the past quarter offers some basis for optimism that in a more polarized system, there's indeed enough donor cash available for a united opponent to match the Cons' war chest - and that the opposition parties are moving closer to bringing in those donations.
Not quite comparable
Alice notes that all three official parties in Parliament amassed record fund-raising totals during the course of this spring's election campaign. But it's worth adding one asterisk to the raw numbers.
While both the Cons and the NDP mostly raised money within the context of their broader electoral campaigns, the Libs' numbers include two major pushes where they elevated fund-raising above all other concerns - including a blitz at the start of the campaign, and then an effort to tap the party's bigger donors before election day (which coincided with the Libs' decision not to spend to the national limit in an attempt to pinch pennies). And while that difference doesn't mean the Libs have any less money to show for the campaign, it serves as reason for caution in presuming they can keep up the pace.
While both the Cons and the NDP mostly raised money within the context of their broader electoral campaigns, the Libs' numbers include two major pushes where they elevated fund-raising above all other concerns - including a blitz at the start of the campaign, and then an effort to tap the party's bigger donors before election day (which coincided with the Libs' decision not to spend to the national limit in an attempt to pinch pennies). And while that difference doesn't mean the Libs have any less money to show for the campaign, it serves as reason for caution in presuming they can keep up the pace.
New column day
Here, on the silliness of this week's hullabaloo over Nycole Turmel's past Bloc membership - and the lessons we can stand to learn about Quebec politics in response.
For further reading...
- Marianne White also treats this week's news as a teachable moment rather than an opportunity to scold the NDP for other parties' false spin.
- Brian Topp points out that the reaction from the Cons and Libs is all about fearmongering rather than any genuine concern about national unity.
- And Don Lenihan notes that identity conflicts are an entirely normal part of the Canadian experience.
For further reading...
- Marianne White also treats this week's news as a teachable moment rather than an opportunity to scold the NDP for other parties' false spin.
- Brian Topp points out that the reaction from the Cons and Libs is all about fearmongering rather than any genuine concern about national unity.
- And Don Lenihan notes that identity conflicts are an entirely normal part of the Canadian experience.
Wednesday, August 03, 2011
Juxtaposition
Kenneth Rogoff describes the type of policy needed to push developed economies out of their current slump:
too many policy-makers have relied on the belief that, at the end of the day, this is just a deep recession that can be subdued by a generous helping of conventional policy tools, whether fiscal policy or massive bailouts.So what are we getting instead? Let's ask Paul Krugman once again:
But the real problem is that the global economy is badly overleveraged, and there’s no quick escape without a scheme to transfer wealth from creditors to debtors, either through defaults, financial repression or inflation.
...
Is there any alternative to years of political gyrations and indecision?
I have argued that the only practical way to shorten the coming period of deleveraging and slow growth would be a sustained burst of moderate inflation, say, 4 per cent to 6 per cent for several years. Of course, inflation is an unfair and arbitrary transfer of income from savers to debtors. But such a transfer is the most direct approach to faster recovery. Eventually, it will take place one way or another, as Europe is painfully learning.
Consciously or not, policy makers are catering almost exclusively to the interests of rentiers — those who derive lots of income from assets, who lent large sums of money in the past, often unwisely, but are now being protected from loss at everyone else’s expense.
...
While the ostensible reasons for inflicting pain keep changing,...the policy prescriptions of the Pain Caucus all have one thing in common: They protect the interests of creditors, no matter the cost. Deficit spending could put the unemployed to work — but it might hurt the interests of existing bondholders. More aggressive action by the Fed could help boost us out of this slump — in fact, even Republican economists have argued that a bit of inflation might be exactly what the doctor ordered — but deflation, not inflation, serves the interests of creditors. And, of course, there’s fierce opposition to anything smacking of debt relief.
...
No, the only real beneficiaries of Pain Caucus policies (aside from the Chinese government) are the rentiers: bankers and wealthy individuals with lots of bonds in their portfolios.
Wednesday Afternoon Links
Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.
- Martin Patriquin offers up the definitive response to the pearl-clutching over Nycole Turmel's Bloc membership (italics in original, bold added):
- No, it's not news that right-wingers see deficits as an excuse to slash public services rather than having any actual interest in addressing them. But a reminder can never hurt.
- Nor is it particularly surprising that they're fully dedicated to ramping up a needless security state, and that cost evaluations and public consultations are no object in the effort.
- Finally, it's well worth joining the effort to share what looks to have been one of the few redeeming stories to come out of Anders Behrin Breivik's anti-left and anti-Muslim rampage.
- Martin Patriquin offers up the definitive response to the pearl-clutching over Nycole Turmel's Bloc membership (italics in original, bold added):
(H)ere’s the wee nuance that seems lost on the rest of the county, and one that is particularly important in the case of Turmel: the members of (sovereigntist) parties, whether they are on the left or the right, endorse this supposedly bedrock belief to varying degrees. The Bloc is/was made up of people like Jean Dorion, former president of the endlessly entertaining Société St Jean Baptiste; it’s also the former home of Jean Lapierre, who after co-founding the sovereignist party went on to be a cabinet minister in Paul Martin’s “home of the Clarity Act” Liberal government. Many, many members of the Bloc, along with the Parti Québécois and Québec Solidaire, are happy to live with Quebec’s current status as a province within a larger country. It’s a fact that vexes hardcore sovereignists and federalists alike.- Bill Tieleman points out that Canadians are poorer than they think by comparing soaring utility costs to stagnant wages.
And let’s have a look at Nycole Turmel’s record, shall we? First off, she was a member of the Bloc since 2006, long after BQ leader Gilles Duceppe had transitioned the Bloc from its original sovereigntist shock troop status to a hazy lefty bastion that, while ostensibly sovereignist in message, was more concerned with “defending Quebec’s interests in Ottawa.” Exhibit two: Turmel was member not of Parti Québécois—which is decidedly less whimsical on the issue of Quebec separation—but of Québec Solidaire, a left-first party whose own co-leader told me last year that “we are caught in the prison of the national question.”
Finally, and it’s amazing how few people have clued into this headsmackingly obvious point, but Turmel willingly ripped up her Bloc Québécois membership card to run for a dyed-in-orange federalist party. That alone should be evidence enough that her sovereignist credentials weren’t quite Parizeau-calibre. If anything, Turmel’s (temporary) ascension to the head of the party, like the NDP’s overwhelming victory in May, is proof positive that detaching the left from the sovereignist movement isn’t as impossible as it once was. How far we’ve come.
- No, it's not news that right-wingers see deficits as an excuse to slash public services rather than having any actual interest in addressing them. But a reminder can never hurt.
- Nor is it particularly surprising that they're fully dedicated to ramping up a needless security state, and that cost evaluations and public consultations are no object in the effort.
- Finally, it's well worth joining the effort to share what looks to have been one of the few redeeming stories to come out of Anders Behrin Breivik's anti-left and anti-Muslim rampage.
On hollow victories
Sean Holman raises the possibility that Christy Clark and the B.C. Libs may be no better off if they manage to hang onto the HST in the province's ongoing referendum than if they lose the vote. But I wonder whether it's worth going a step further.
If the vote to axe the HST succeeds despite any manipulations on the part of the government, then it seems at least vaguely plausible that the province might see itself as having sufficiently punished Clark and the Libs for their sins - and thus pay somewhat less attention as future revelations surface. But if Clark uses large amounts of public money and other resources to get her way on the HST, then every bit of news figures to feed into a sense that the Libs have escaped unpunished - making it easier for the NDP to build the case that the next election needs to do the job instead.
If the vote to axe the HST succeeds despite any manipulations on the part of the government, then it seems at least vaguely plausible that the province might see itself as having sufficiently punished Clark and the Libs for their sins - and thus pay somewhat less attention as future revelations surface. But if Clark uses large amounts of public money and other resources to get her way on the HST, then every bit of news figures to feed into a sense that the Libs have escaped unpunished - making it easier for the NDP to build the case that the next election needs to do the job instead.
Tuesday, August 02, 2011
Telling
No, Tim Harper's take on the latest news about Nycole Turmel isn't any better than most of the media's coverage. But it does at least include one rather telling contrast:
But as far as Harper is concerned, that's not a problem to be remedied, but an excuse to bash the party which has successfully responded to that reality.
[Edit: fixed wording.]
Inside Quebec, the Turmel revelation will likely cause little damage.So thanks in part to the Cons' anti-coalition spin, much of Canada - including the vast majority of the media commenting on Turmel - is utterly ignorant as to what membership in the Bloc actually signifies in the province where the party operates. And indeed, even some commentators who normally rank among the most astute in the country have gone out of their way to be entirely oblivious to the possibility that any reasonable person could ever have supported the Bloc based on social issues, rather than out of separatist fervour.
It is understood in that province that one can be a federalist while supporting the social policies of the Bloc.
Outside Quebec, sensibilities are far different.
But as far as Harper is concerned, that's not a problem to be remedied, but an excuse to bash the party which has successfully responded to that reality.
[Edit: fixed wording.]
On building opportunities
There's no doubt that the trumped-up story about Nycole Turmel's one-time Bloc membership reflects the inevitable first real pile-on against the NDP in its new role as Official Opposition. But it's worth noting that the NDP also has an opportunity to turn that challenge in its favour - and the indications look to be positive so far.
For now, the main danger for the NDP isn't so much the certainty that the Cons and Libs will look to slam it at every turn as the danger of an intra-party split damaging its ability to fight back. And there's no doubt that concern trolls across the country will try to goad NDP members into contributing to just that type of internal breakdown.
But so far, there seems to be little indication that they're succeeding. And the more the NDP can keep a united front in the face of the other parties' contrived attacks, the more accustomed its new MPs will get to holding together - resulting in a stronger coalition once the siege ends. (Which may make the attacks all the more desperate as time goes by.)
What's more, there may even be an opportunity to shore up what might have been one of the greater risks for the party. While the NDP's Quebec sweep came largely at the expense of the Bloc, it's currently an open question as to whether the party can defend its seats against Lib and Con challengers without a seemingly strong Bloc in the picture. But the more energy the Cons and Libs dedicate to declaring that the bulk of Quebec's voters are unfit to participate in Canada's public debate by virtue of any past affinity for the province's once-dominant political party, the tougher they'll find it to win over those voters in the future - serving only to improve the NDP's chances of building on this year's electoral result.
That is, provided the NDP itself can hold firm and defend its newly-built coalition. But so far, all indications look to be positive on that front - meaning that there's ample reason for hope once the current storm passes.
For now, the main danger for the NDP isn't so much the certainty that the Cons and Libs will look to slam it at every turn as the danger of an intra-party split damaging its ability to fight back. And there's no doubt that concern trolls across the country will try to goad NDP members into contributing to just that type of internal breakdown.
But so far, there seems to be little indication that they're succeeding. And the more the NDP can keep a united front in the face of the other parties' contrived attacks, the more accustomed its new MPs will get to holding together - resulting in a stronger coalition once the siege ends. (Which may make the attacks all the more desperate as time goes by.)
What's more, there may even be an opportunity to shore up what might have been one of the greater risks for the party. While the NDP's Quebec sweep came largely at the expense of the Bloc, it's currently an open question as to whether the party can defend its seats against Lib and Con challengers without a seemingly strong Bloc in the picture. But the more energy the Cons and Libs dedicate to declaring that the bulk of Quebec's voters are unfit to participate in Canada's public debate by virtue of any past affinity for the province's once-dominant political party, the tougher they'll find it to win over those voters in the future - serving only to improve the NDP's chances of building on this year's electoral result.
That is, provided the NDP itself can hold firm and defend its newly-built coalition. But so far, all indications look to be positive on that front - meaning that there's ample reason for hope once the current storm passes.
Tuesday Morning Links
This and that for your Tuesday reading.
- Linda McQuaig notes that the same financial actors who caused the global economic meltdown that's being used as an excuse for austerity measures around the world are themselves making out like bandits - even though the public strongly favours requiring them to at least pay their share:
- Duncan Cameron comments on some of the factors which make Nycole Turmel an ideal interim choice to lead the NDP's charge, as well as what the NDP needs to do next:
- Linda McQuaig notes that the same financial actors who caused the global economic meltdown that's being used as an excuse for austerity measures around the world are themselves making out like bandits - even though the public strongly favours requiring them to at least pay their share:
For the past two years, Americans have repeatedly told pollsters that they support higher taxes on the rich as a way to reduce the deficit. A Washington Post poll last month, for instance, found 72 per cent supported raising taxes on those earning more than $250,000.- Alison rightly points out that many of the Canadian political media figures enlisted to declare that an incestuous system of the type which spawned the U.K.'s News of the World scandal are also the same people going out of their way to set up exactly that.
...
But a radical rump of Republicans, threatening to pull the trigger, succeeded in forcing Democrats to abandon tax increases on the wealthy — at a time when America’s wealthy are as rich as the tycoons of the Gilded Age. Feeling the gun at their temples, the Democrats joined the Republicans in the quest for deeper spending cuts — which will only make the disastrous U.S. unemployment situation worse.
So while programs helping students, the elderly and the poor have been picked over with surgical precision, hedge fund managers can get back to work destabilizing financial markets with full peace of mind, knowing they’ll continue to enjoy a tax rate lower than the mechanics who service their private jets.
- Duncan Cameron comments on some of the factors which make Nycole Turmel an ideal interim choice to lead the NDP's charge, as well as what the NDP needs to do next:
The issues that matter to Canadians are jobs and incomes, access to public services, healthcare in particular, environmental protection, and availability of recreation and cultural facilities for family members. These are issues addressed by public sector unions every day. As a noted public sector union leader, Nycole Turmel is well placed to articulate the concerns of Canadians for the future, which is why her appointment was so widely supported by New Democrats.- Finally, let's close with at least some good news, as Les Whittington's report on Competition Commissioner Melanie Aitken highlights the fact that there's at least one watchdog showing some bite in dealing with corporate abuses.
...
In the next six weeks, caucus members will be canvassing Canadians in order to draw up lists of party priorities for the fall. NDP members of Parliament will first want to know how much support there is for Conservative policies. How many Canadians feel spending billions on new fighter jets makes a lot of sense? What degree of support is there for sending giant tanker ships through the coastal waters of British Columbia? How do Canadians feel about retiring on public pensions that will leave many of them below the poverty line?
To the extent they are known, Conservative policies are not popular with Canadians. The problem is that the public does not have a good picture of what the Conservatives are up to. So the Official Opposition needs to publicize widely what the Conservatives are actually doing. How well the NDP is able to fulfill that task -- without being able to count on media co-operation -- will determine how well it serves the public interest.
On incomplete pictures
One might think that an expose into Nycole Turmel's political involvement would go back further than the past five years. But surely Daniel Leblanc wouldn't have cut anything important out of the story...
Unfortunately, Leblanc instead seems to want to be the first to present the anti-NDP spin to come, while leaving out any details which might provide an accurate picture of Turmel's professional and political history. And it's not hard to see a zombie lie in the making as a result.
Update: Dr. Dawg has more:
“I’ve been at this for decades,” Turmel said. “In the 1990s, I chaired cross-country NDP panels that consulted Canadians on their ideas about progressive government. I served as associate party president under (former leader) Alexa McDonough and moderated the leadership process that saw Jack Layton elected (in 2003).”Of course, there's a separate issue with the meme (now being spread to smear Turmel) that past support for the Bloc should disqualify a plurality of Quebeckers from having any say in how Canada is governed. Even applying that glaringly flawed standard, though, one would think that an individual's previous decades of intensive involvement with a federalist party might serve as a rather important bit of context.
Unfortunately, Leblanc instead seems to want to be the first to present the anti-NDP spin to come, while leaving out any details which might provide an accurate picture of Turmel's professional and political history. And it's not hard to see a zombie lie in the making as a result.
Update: Dr. Dawg has more:
(F)or promoting social justice (and make no mistake, that’s her main sin in the eyes of the usual suspects) (Turmel) is now coming under assault from the Right, and from Liberals hoping to leverage their way back into the public consciousness by tarring her as a closet separatist sympathizer—the exact opposite of the truth.[Edit: fixed wording.]
Monday, August 01, 2011
NDP Next Steps Roundup
Not surprisingly, plenty in the Canadian media have responded to the NDP's first big news of the summer with all kinds of discussion as to where the party will go next. But let's take a quick look at some of the particularly noteworthy coverage.
Sheila Copps' tribute to Jack Layton stands out as a show of respect from a political rival. In contrast, Tim Powers engaged in some concern trolling par excellence, warning Nycole Turmel that the Cons might not appreciate the NDP's principled opposition. But fortunately, Turmel doesn't seem to be taking Powers' advice.
Speaking of whom, Susan Delacourt profiled Turmel in her new leadership role. Bea Vongdouangchanh did the same for Brian Topp as the initial face of Layton's announcement. And Joanna Smith looked in depth at the NDP's team which has helped to propel the party to its Official Opposition status.
Daniel Leblanc and Gloria Galloway covered some of what might come next for the NDP - albeit with some stunningly obvious commentary (does anybody need to be told that the NDP should promote its own values rather than the Bloc's?) mixed in. Andy Blatchford noted that Layton's absence may make for an ideal opportunity for the NDP's younger and newer MPs to grow into their roles.
And finally, Gerald Caplan served up a reminder that the party isn't over no matter what.
Sheila Copps' tribute to Jack Layton stands out as a show of respect from a political rival. In contrast, Tim Powers engaged in some concern trolling par excellence, warning Nycole Turmel that the Cons might not appreciate the NDP's principled opposition. But fortunately, Turmel doesn't seem to be taking Powers' advice.
Speaking of whom, Susan Delacourt profiled Turmel in her new leadership role. Bea Vongdouangchanh did the same for Brian Topp as the initial face of Layton's announcement. And Joanna Smith looked in depth at the NDP's team which has helped to propel the party to its Official Opposition status.
Daniel Leblanc and Gloria Galloway covered some of what might come next for the NDP - albeit with some stunningly obvious commentary (does anybody need to be told that the NDP should promote its own values rather than the Bloc's?) mixed in. Andy Blatchford noted that Layton's absence may make for an ideal opportunity for the NDP's younger and newer MPs to grow into their roles.
And finally, Gerald Caplan served up a reminder that the party isn't over no matter what.
Monday Morning Links
This and that for your long weekend reading.
- I'm not ordinarily a huge fan of spending much time in the present focusing on the past. But Dan Gardner's suggested label for today's holiday looks to be well worth adopting - if nothing else as a reminder that even prior to Confederation, Canada's history includes a place at the forefront of the development of human rights.
- Kudos to the Hill Times' Chris Plecash and Darcy McDonnell for staking out the Cons' hidden cabinet meetings last week and reporting on the secrecy surrounding them. And if they and others keep up the effort, it may well be possible to force the Harper government to be at least slightly less secretive.
- Ian Welsh lists some of the lessons from the U.S.' trumped-up debt ceiling crisis and subsequent capitulation by the Democrats.
- Meanwhile, Paul Krugman nicely sums up exactly what figures to happen as a result of the deal. And as usual, he's criticized as being "completely unhinged" in the absence of any plausible basis to suggest that he's wrong.
- Finally, Erin catches right-wing mouthpiece Jason Clemens talking out of both sides of his mouth in describing the fiscal policy of the Harper Cons - as the same commentator who regularly bashes the Cons for having in fact expanded the size of government is trying to paint nonexistent cuts (rather than less reckless financial regulations) as the basic difference between Canada and the U.S. for consumption south of the border.
- I'm not ordinarily a huge fan of spending much time in the present focusing on the past. But Dan Gardner's suggested label for today's holiday looks to be well worth adopting - if nothing else as a reminder that even prior to Confederation, Canada's history includes a place at the forefront of the development of human rights.
- Kudos to the Hill Times' Chris Plecash and Darcy McDonnell for staking out the Cons' hidden cabinet meetings last week and reporting on the secrecy surrounding them. And if they and others keep up the effort, it may well be possible to force the Harper government to be at least slightly less secretive.
- Ian Welsh lists some of the lessons from the U.S.' trumped-up debt ceiling crisis and subsequent capitulation by the Democrats.
- Meanwhile, Paul Krugman nicely sums up exactly what figures to happen as a result of the deal. And as usual, he's criticized as being "completely unhinged" in the absence of any plausible basis to suggest that he's wrong.
- Finally, Erin catches right-wing mouthpiece Jason Clemens talking out of both sides of his mouth in describing the fiscal policy of the Harper Cons - as the same commentator who regularly bashes the Cons for having in fact expanded the size of government is trying to paint nonexistent cuts (rather than less reckless financial regulations) as the basic difference between Canada and the U.S. for consumption south of the border.
Sunday, July 31, 2011
Sunday Morning 'Rider Blogging
It's disappointing enough for the 'Riders to lose to Calgary at home. But it's doubly so to manage the feat while playing about as well as could possibly be expected in two phases of the game - leaving huge questions about an offensive unit which was supposed to be the team's strength.
On the bright side, Saskatchewan's defence was superb until the middle of the fourth quarter. In effect, the secondary looks to have taken a page out of the Stamps' playbook, pressuring receivers and jumping routes at every turn while making sure tackles when the ball did arrive. Meanwhile, the defensive line kept consistent pressure on Henry Burris. And the result was another game where one of the CFL's top offences was prevented both from finishing long drives, and from beating the 'Riders with big plays.
Meanwhile, the special teams finally seem to be performing consistently. Brandon West had the top single runback of the day, but both he and Tristan Jackson regularly generated positive yardage on kick returns. And Eddie Johnson's combination of booming kicks and frequent trips downfield to try to recover the ball figure to have given him a strong chance to hold onto his job even if Luca Congi returns healthy (particularly if the 'Riders do in fact prefer having one player handle kickoffs, punts and field goals).
But then there was the offence.
Yes, the 'Riders managed a few scattered big plays, and looked fairly decent by the numbers. But even when they were able to put points on the board, they did it more through stunts and lucky breaks than through any sustained control over the ball. And perhaps most problematically, the biggest issue facing the 'Riders this season still seems to be entirely unresolved.
There was never much doubt that Weston Dressler would be Saskatchewan's key receiver this season, and he's more than lived up to the title. But the 'Riders seem no closer to deciding who should join him as a go-to pass-catcher than they were at the start of the year. And with Jason Clermont moving far too slowly to get separation from most defenders, Terrence Nunn dropping what should have been a momentum-builder early in the game, Efrem Hill again pairing a single solid catch-and-run with a damaging penalty and Chris Getzlaf still looking inconsistent, the answer looks more and more to be that the 'Riders won't find what they're looking for on their current roster.
Fortunately, the end of the NFL's lockout raises the prospect of a Fantuz return and/or an influx of talent from south of the border before the CFL season is done. But if the offence can't figure out how to produce more consistently in the meantime, the 'Riders will have a huge hole to dig themselves out of once that talent arrives.
[Edit: fixed typo.]
On the bright side, Saskatchewan's defence was superb until the middle of the fourth quarter. In effect, the secondary looks to have taken a page out of the Stamps' playbook, pressuring receivers and jumping routes at every turn while making sure tackles when the ball did arrive. Meanwhile, the defensive line kept consistent pressure on Henry Burris. And the result was another game where one of the CFL's top offences was prevented both from finishing long drives, and from beating the 'Riders with big plays.
Meanwhile, the special teams finally seem to be performing consistently. Brandon West had the top single runback of the day, but both he and Tristan Jackson regularly generated positive yardage on kick returns. And Eddie Johnson's combination of booming kicks and frequent trips downfield to try to recover the ball figure to have given him a strong chance to hold onto his job even if Luca Congi returns healthy (particularly if the 'Riders do in fact prefer having one player handle kickoffs, punts and field goals).
But then there was the offence.
Yes, the 'Riders managed a few scattered big plays, and looked fairly decent by the numbers. But even when they were able to put points on the board, they did it more through stunts and lucky breaks than through any sustained control over the ball. And perhaps most problematically, the biggest issue facing the 'Riders this season still seems to be entirely unresolved.
There was never much doubt that Weston Dressler would be Saskatchewan's key receiver this season, and he's more than lived up to the title. But the 'Riders seem no closer to deciding who should join him as a go-to pass-catcher than they were at the start of the year. And with Jason Clermont moving far too slowly to get separation from most defenders, Terrence Nunn dropping what should have been a momentum-builder early in the game, Efrem Hill again pairing a single solid catch-and-run with a damaging penalty and Chris Getzlaf still looking inconsistent, the answer looks more and more to be that the 'Riders won't find what they're looking for on their current roster.
Fortunately, the end of the NFL's lockout raises the prospect of a Fantuz return and/or an influx of talent from south of the border before the CFL season is done. But if the offence can't figure out how to produce more consistently in the meantime, the 'Riders will have a huge hole to dig themselves out of once that talent arrives.
[Edit: fixed typo.]
Sunday Morning Links
Miscellaneous material for your long weekend.
- I'll agree with pogge that Tabatha Southey's latest is well worth a read. But while it's worth recognizing the differences between the respective priorities involved in managing a country as opposed to a family, there's one point hinted at by Southey which should be seen more as a similarity than it actually is:
- Antonia Zerbisias points out that we can't take a safesupply of water for granted. Sadly, Regina offers a case in point.
- The Cons make up poor excuses for their decision to prevent NDP MP Ryan Cleary from visiting the 9 Wing Gander air base. CC calls BS.
- Finally, Origins of Politics points out how Sun Media is giving far more reach and exposure to bigotry on the Canadian political scene.
- I'll agree with pogge that Tabatha Southey's latest is well worth a read. But while it's worth recognizing the differences between the respective priorities involved in managing a country as opposed to a family, there's one point hinted at by Southey which should be seen more as a similarity than it actually is:
(W)hile living within one's means is a noble goal, few people, and very few businesses, balance their budgets on a year-to-year basis. They have mortgages, for example, or loans taken out to expand investment, or because of unforeseen strife.Of course, part of the problem is that parties on the right tend to be averse to public ownership in the first place. But for the rest of us, it's well worth keeping in mind the value of owning assets publicly - and ensuring that value isn't lost to corporate-focused P3 or privatization schemes in deciding what to do with public resources.
But then they also have assets. So debt is also investment.
It's easy to alarm people over a deficit. It's a high number and people are forever being told that it's theirs and their children's debt and specifically how much of it is theirs, per capita.
But no one ever tells them how much highway they own, per capita, or what section of the Grand Canyon is theirs. It's a very one-sided, frequently opportunistic way of expressing the situation.
- Antonia Zerbisias points out that we can't take a safesupply of water for granted. Sadly, Regina offers a case in point.
- The Cons make up poor excuses for their decision to prevent NDP MP Ryan Cleary from visiting the 9 Wing Gander air base. CC calls BS.
- Finally, Origins of Politics points out how Sun Media is giving far more reach and exposure to bigotry on the Canadian political scene.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)