Federal Election 2008

Election blahs

It is difficult to get hyped up about this election.

We had a municipal election in 2006, a provincial election in the fall of 2007 and now we’re faced with another election less than three weeks from now. Can you blame anyone for suffering from election fatigue?

And should Harper get in with another minority, will he call an election again next year?

We’re just winding down from a busy summer, students are settling back into their school routines and the rest of us are busy collecting our nuts and preparing for winter. We’re concerned about the economy, utility costs, weird weather and gas prices and are really in no mood for the quick-fix solutions politicians are trying to bribe us with. Election fatigue is so great nobody is even fazed by the garbage campaign handlers seem to be spinning. We don’t care about who’s smoking pot, we don’t care about who’s too stupid to think before they speak, and frankly, we’re finding it rather difficult to get excited about this campaign.

Perhaps it is because many find the prospect of setting Stephen Harper’s government loose with a majority somewhat disquieting. And others who traditionally vote Liberal are wishing Stephane Dion could find a little more gumption. Perhaps the only way to get through this election pain is to think locally.

Which representative will help bring the most infrastructure and service funding to this area? And which party is more in tune with this community and its needs?

While Tony Clement brought the G8 Summit and worked hard to help facilitate funding for Muskoka, he is only as good as the government in power.  We’ve learned from experience that having an MP from one of the main opposition parties doesn’t pay. Somehow, the party in power frowns on you and passes you by when doling out the candy. Even an MP from the NDP or Green party would fare better if either the Grits or Tories are in power, since these parties would view their election as a way to cajole their way into this riding the next time around.

Well, folks, let the cajoling begin. We have three weeks of decision-making and courting before the forced marriage begins. Thank you, Mr. Harper.

  T.d.V.

Think back

Think back to your elementary school days.

Depending on where and when we all grew up, many of us probably have some recollection of elections for class president. These are, or at least were in our childhood, far less formal than the student council elections of high school, and often held more for the election itself than for any kind of real student government. A few kids would get nominated and engage in a campaign that might have involved speeches, rallies on the playground or paper campaign buttons pinned to clothing, but almost certainly featured a multitude of hand-drawn campaign posters.

Indeed, a race for class president could potentially revolve around the posters, creatively drawn, with clever slogans like “Vote for Billy.” It didn’t matter that there were only maybe 20 to 30 voters in the class and a third of them were running. It didn’t matter that everybody already knew everybody else. It didn’t matter that the posters provided no information, or that they spread out through the school, presumably for the benefit of the kids who weren’t in the class and had no interest whatsoever.

None of these things mattered. It was an election. In an election, you put up signs. That’s what the grown-ups do. It wouldn’t look like a real election without the signs.

Besides, few aspects of a campaign are as much fun. You don’t see kids running home to tell their parents “Mom! Dad! I got to be a scrutineer!”

But as much as we would like to chuckle at examples of kids imitating their elders, there is little to suggest that their elders are much more sophisticated in their motivation. Why do we put up election signs? What do they accomplish?

Well, they let you know the names of the candidates and the parties they represent. That could be very useful if you missed the news reports, the pile of flyers stuffed in your mailbox, the people knocking on your door and calling you up on the phone, the radio and TV spots and the conversation around town. If you and everyone you know happened to miss all that, how would you know what the choices are?

Indeed, signs are a valuable tool for spreading information. As with all of the other methods mentioned, the signs tell you a lot about the candidate and the party…like…uh…the candidate’s name and…uh…party affiliation. OK, so maybe they don’t provide as much information as the other methods, but they are a means of showing support for a candidate.

So, why are they in ditches and on street corners? What do several signs at a location accomplish that one does not?

They do let motorists know when they’ve passed from one riding into another, although that’s not exactly useful to a campaign. Heck, it’s only mildly interesting to the motorist.

Is it just a matter of putting your name in front of people as much as possible? Are there that many voters dumb enough to vote based on the most familiar name? We should sincerely hope not.

So let’s take the signs out of the ditches and only put them on private property. We still have to question what good they do.

They show support. Fine. To what end?

We can’t help but feel cheated

The federal election is now well into its second week, but already, we can’t help but feel cheated out of a good, old-fashioned fight for Parliamentary power.

While Parry Sound-Muskoka was widely seen as a “swing” riding during the last federal election, it’s hard to envision such a cut-throat battle for victory this time around.

We, like many others, feel justified in blaming the federal Liberal Party for our current disillusions.

The party, once a revered, almost invincible organization that governed Canada for the majority of the past century, now can’t seem to figure out which way is up.

While deputy Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff’s recent stop in Gravenhurst to support candidate Jamie McGarvey should have been a highpoint of this campaign, his premier message to residents likely erased any great voter sway to the left-of-centre.

Ignatieff’s pledge to not cancel the 2010 G8 Summit should the Liberals return to power shows how desperate the Grits really are for fresh campaign material.

If the biggest carrot they can offer this riding is a promise to not destroy our big chance at an economic turn around, they had better go back to the drawing board.

McGarvey is not blame for this fiasco. He is, by all accounts, sincerely seeking to serve constituents and fight for progressive change at the federal level.

It’s too bad his leader, Stephane Dion, is making his job so hard.

While Tony Clement was quick to point out the obvious shortcomings of Ignatieff’s visit, he, too, may want to rethink his current campaign strategy.

While funding announcements likely never hurt Clement’s chances at re-election, remembering to stay in touch with average people is a key part of this campaign.

Flip-flopping on requests from students to attend high school forums, and failing to properly communicate with reporters aiming to profile his political performance is not going to earn the Minister any favourable reviews in our books.

Whether Clement or his new campaign strategist is to blame for this breakdown in communication is debatable.

Regardless, these recent gaffes leave us with suspicions that Clement’s camp, too, believes this current campaign may not be the endurance test that was Election 2004.

We certainly hope this isn’t the case.

Because after all, our predictions about the Liberals could be wrong.

Indeed, the pendulum of popular opinion may start to swing a little further to the left in Parry Sound-Muskoka should Clement become any more inaccessible to voters.

Environment has become a major concern

Over the past decade, the environment has become a major concern for many Canadians. From anxieties over climate change to concerns about the eradication of at-risk species, Canadians have taken up the cause and made it apparent that preserving our environment should be priority No.1 for government.

It’s too bad that some members of Bracebridge town council still aren’t getting the message.

In recent weeks, residents have seen several examples of council’s flagrant disregard for our environment.

The news about the current condition of the Henry Road marsh shows just how badly council is dropping the ball on this issue.

The marsh, once a vibrant ecosystem teeming with plants and animals, is now nothing more than a dried up wasteland.  While Mayor Don Coates contends that the marsh is private property and council cannot stop its destruction, his comments provide little comfort to the many that once enjoyed the natural beauty of the wetland property. His unapologetic response to concerns about ecosystem preservation speaks volumes about his personal affinities for such environmentally sensitive sites.

Once again, council – under Coates’ leadership – has taken a pro-development approach to planning that has sacrificed a priceless piece of Muskoka landscape to the almighty dollar.

While we had hoped the Mayor learned his lesson about the importance of the environment following the clear-cuttings incidents of 2007, this is obviously not the case.

The Mayor’s lack of concern for environmental degradation clearly continues. It was further demonstrated this week in his indifference to the planned destruction of the vegetation along Kimberley Avenue.

While residents along the road have petitioned to preserve the street’s tree-lined appearance, an obvious asset to the character of the downtown, Coates’ desire to get on with the road’s reconstruction may see half a dozen aging maples uprooted in favour of a widened roadway.

True, trees are removed everyday and do grow back.

But the issue here is not about six maples trees, or even a marsh. It’s about Coates’ continual disregard for Muskoka’s valuable, natural surroundings.

It is high time he realized residents care deeply about preserving the environment, and his attitude toward these concerns is hurting not only our landscape, but the public’s perception of the Mayor.

J.L

Obsession with image

Image has always played an important role in public life.

But never more than today has having appeal with the masses played such a critical role, particularly in the lives of politicians.

One only has to look to the nightly news to know that the need for public acceptance has trumped the value of hard work and political experience in the mind of many of our elected officials.

This obsession with image and approval is a major detriment to sound, and solid governance.

The rebranding of our leaders is taking place before our eyes, and sadly, some Canadians will buy in.

Advertisements now fill the airwaves broadcasting the “new” Stephen Harper, a loving, attentive father with a warm, almost affectionate disposition.

Then there’s the new Liberal leader Stephane Dion, featured in an online video as an adventurous, feisty, yet common man, who cares about the needs of average Canadians.

Gone is the cold, hard, image of the Prime Minster, who shakes his children’s hands on their way into school. Done away with is the awkward, professor-like persona of the Opposition leader.

Yes, the new Harper and Dion will better serve Canadians, and be more adequately equipped to manage the affairs of the county.

If this sounds ridiculous, that’s because it is. But unfortunately, in a world where image is everything, not having one just doesn’t cut it on the national political stage.

Perhaps our leaders have taken a cue from south of the border, where the popularity contest is fierce, and only those suave and gracious enough will be elevated to the office of president.

Americans politics, though always bordering on the absurd, has taken on an all time low. One wonders, when watching the current campaign, if CNN hasn’t mysteriously morphed into MTV, with music videos, dancing crowds, and Hollywood-style endorsements.

Barack Obama, though admired for his impassioned orations on change, has little substance, and even less experience when it comes to leading the world’s richest and most powerful nation. Still, his smooth words and superstar status have likely earned him the presidency.

John McCain, the aging Republican candidate criticized for his political compatibility to George W. Bush, can only compete by choosing a young, hip running mate in high-heels.

Sarah “Barracuda,” Palin, is shaking things up, and driving up the polls with her trendy, youthful outlook on life.  Never mind that Palin has little experience on the national stage, or that her staunchly conservative policies do not jive with many Americans.

It’s about image, and Palin’s got that part down pat.

It is a sad day indeed when a mini-skirt and beehive will win you the popular vote.

Sadder still is the realization that we all have a part to play in the extraordinary amount of attention being paid to both of these unfolding political dramas.

Our appetite for youth, beauty and perfection has come at a very high cost.

How high, exactly, should be evident in about four years time.

Seen and heard

Parry Sound Beacon Star, September 12, 2008

When Conservative MP Tony Clement ran for this riding's federal seat in 2006, there was plenty of criticism that he wasn't really from here.

Although he owns a Port Sydney property, opponents called him a "parachute candidate", sent in to win a remote riding, defeat a Liberal member, and join the new Conservative government with his experience as Ontario's health minister in hand. Critics suggested Mr. Clement would not be able to do what the MP at the time, Liberal Andy Mitchell, did. After all, how likely was it that a candidate parachuted in, who didn't earn a living here and whose children didn't go to school here, would really hang around in the Parry Sound–Muskoka riding? What chance was there that he would attend family reunions, listen to constituents one-on-one, or fight in Parliament for Muskoka and Parry Sound issues?

Despite the criticism, amid allegations of federal scandal that tore at Liberal support across the country, Mr. Clement defeated the well-liked Andy Mitchell by 28 votes.

Since then, he has silenced those critics.

Depending on your perspective, there are reasons not to vote for Mr. Clement, as Canada's health minister, on October 14. You might not vote for Mr. Clement if you disagree with his opposition to safe injection sites for drug users, if you think he should have been in Canada during the listeriosis outbreak instead of at the U.S. Democratic convention, or if you think the Canadian government should have stood up when it mattered during last year's world AIDS conference. There are also reasons voters might not want to vote Conservative – such as if you think a stronger approach to reducing emissions is needed, you resent recent cuts in arts funding, or you disagree with Prime Minister Stephen Harper's heavy-handed approach to running the country.

But nobody can claim Mr. Clement failed to represent Parry Sound-Muskoka constituents.

He has been as visible as any other members of provincial or federal Parliaments have in the riding. He's attended anniversaries, openings, dedications and events throughout the riding, missing few and passing on condolences or congratulations when his Ottawa duties meant he couldn't make it. He has brought money into the area, lots of money, for infrastructure including bridges, water systems, health clinics and roads. He has also announced grants for events, like the Byng Inlet 100th anniversary, and for programs. He has attended ribbon-cuttings, grand openings, 100th birthdays, bake sales, fall fairs, sporting events, charity drives and local meetings. He staunchly stood up for the riding when proposed legislation would have removed if from the federal funding agency, FedNor. He noticed the legislation would have made the riding ineligible for funding, publicized it, and forced the NDP member who introduced the bill to change it. Most recently, he brought the prime minister to Huntsville, where they announced that this riding will host the G8 Summit, an event that will bring millions of dollars into the area.

No one can deny that being represented by the federal health minister has its benefits. No one can deny that Mr. Clement has worked hard to get to know his constituents and represent his riding.

Leading up to next month's federal election, anyone who considers playing that card should just leave it in the deck, re-shuffle, and draw something else.

Make it count

Parry Sound North Star, September 10, 2008

A total of 34 days remain in the 2008 federal election. Those 34 days will pass quickly, and election day will have arrived.

In the meantime, it's important for residents to carefully consider where to place their vote. Federal elections not only shape the country, but each riding. The Parry Sound-Muskoka riding has four very capable candidates stepping up for the race.

Some wish the election was a year away, falling on the legislated October 2009 date Stephen Harper's government passed into law, but whether you're ready or not, a long list of crucial issues sit on this fall's election agenda.

Topping that list for many is the economy. After narrowly avoiding a recession, Canada's economy still teeters on the brink, with manufacturing job losses close to pushing it over the edge. Health care comes a close second among Canadians' concerns in recent polls. One of the most costly government services the country offers, the debate over whether to privatize some aspects of our national health care continues. The environment also tops voters' concerns. Perhaps, now more than ever, Canadians, and others across the globe, feel we are on the edge of a precipice we won't be able to climb out of. All federal parties admit the environment deserves some attention, but each take different approaches depending on fears over economic impact of environmental action. The question is, should we take some economic risk to avoid tumbling over a precipice? Or do we wait, while continuing to carefully weigh economics with environmental action.

Locally, being the home riding of the federal minister of health has paid off for area constituents – especially if money for infrastructure and economic development are your top priority. MP Tony Clement has worked hard and been readily available and visible across the riding. But if making a statement about other aspects of the country's future is more important, consider carefully what each party proposes by looking beyond propaganda, sound bites and finely tuned speeches. Look instead at records, party platforms and local personalities.

With Mr. Clement, Liberal candidate and Parry Sound councillor Jamie McGarvey, NDP candidate Joanne Boulding and the Green Party's Glen Hodgson, the Parry Sound-Muskoka riding is lucky to have four intelligent, well-rounded candidates to choose from.

It's important that every eligible voter knows where they want to cast their ballot on Tuesday, Oct. 14, because if you think your choice won't make a difference, consider that during the last federal election Liberal incumbent Andy Mitchell lost his seat by a mere 28 votes.

We can’t afford complacency any longer

Will he or won’t he?

That’s the question many Canadians are asking themselves this week when it comes to the possibility of a fall federal election.

Should Prime Minister Stephen Harper pull the plug on Parliament, residents will head to the polls in October to decide the fate of the current Conservative government.

If you are one of the many who are ambivalent about the possibility of an upcoming campaign, you should rethink your position.  The time is right to put the question to the public, and Canadians of all political stripes should be paying attention.

For the past year, partisan politics have largely impeded any progress by the Canadian government on important issues like the economy and the environment.

At a time when the rest of the world is strategizing its response to slumping global markets, and building long-term plans to deal with climate change, Harper and Liberal leader Stephane Dion appear more interested in scoring political points with their party faithful than solving any national crises.

An election will give both parties a clear mandate to move forward. It will also remove any excuse either has in fulfilling its commitments to Canadians.

The Liberals, in particular, need direction from the public when it comes to their role in the House of Commons.  Any true Grit should be embarrassed by a party that ducks out of Parliament every time a controversial vote is called simply to save face with members.

No matter what your political allegiance, this upcoming campaign should be closely watched by all residents of Muskoka.

While the riding has benefitted immensely from MP Tony Clement’s role in cabinet, residents should ask themselves whether the Tories are the right fit for Canada’s future.

Is our environment, the heart of our economy in Muskoka, being adequately protected for future generations? Or is there a better way?

Will the Liberal’s Green tax shift be beneficial for reducing green house gas emissions, or will it simply burden an already over-taxed rural economy?

What do the NDP and Greens have to offer, and where do they fit in when it comes to Muskoka’s economic future?

There are no easy answers when it comes to these polarizing questions.

Getting involved, however, ensures that your voice is heard by all who are vying to take the reigns of leadership on these enormously important debates.

If you need another reason to get into the game this October, consider this: Clement won his seat in Parry Sound-Muskoka by just 21 votes.

His election to Parliament has since impacted the entire country, given his current position as heath minister.

While indifference to political campaigns seems as much a part of the Canadian identity as hockey and Tim Horton’s, it is nothing to be proud of.

Our apathy could eventually cost us our coveted top spot among the world’s developed nations.

JL

Not what voters want

Parry Sound Beacon Star, August 29, 2008

Citing irreconcilable differences that are bogging down parliamentary committees to the point of dysfunction, Prime Minister Stephen Harper, it appears, plans to call for an early election this month. By doing so, he will likely lead his party to another minority leadership. He'll then have a mandate that he'll be able to hang onto for another three years, because no opposition party would dare frustrate the public by forcing another election until voter fatigue wears off.

It's clever. It's honest. It's not what voters want.

Canada's federal elections work like this:

A – the general population shows overwhelming discontent for its federal leadership, the ruling party's four-year term expires, there's an election and government changes;

B– a minority government rules until voters decide enough is enough, opposition parties make their move by overthrowing the ruling party, and voters select a new leadership; or,

C – the party in power realizes it has the majority of support among Canadians, takes advantage of it by calling an early election, and returns with a renewed mandate.

Public opinion polls show Canadians are not overwhelmed with happiness when it comes to the current Conservative government. The same polls show they are not completely disgusted either. Although a few groups, like the arts community, are extremely upset about some recent federal decisions, the majority of Canadians, with their silence, seem to approve of a minority government that has had to tread carefully in order to avoid being overthrown by the Liberals, NDP and Bloc parties. To do so, it has had to weigh decisions against the reaction of Canadians who consider themselves more left than Stephen Harper is, and strive to provide a leadership and present legislation that doesn't outrage left-leaning voters. The very partisan nature of the minority government has, in a strange twist, created a sort of subconscious, non-partisan approach.

Voters are comfortable with the idea of the country's two historically prominent parties meeting in the neutral zone, while keeping the other two opposition parties, and the voters they represent, in mind. Voters are not comfortable with the idea of an election a year before the Conservative's fixed election date of Oct. 19, 2009. They aren't happy with the idea of a costly election that simply produces the status quo. Right now, Canadians know what they want, and it's a minority government. Annoy voters by asking them to vote again when they're not ready for a change, and you run the risk of angering them and changing the makeup of, first, the country's public opinion, and second, the country's electoral divide.

It's generally a good idea to listen to the folks you hope will return you to power. In this case, they're saying wait until Oct. 19, 2009.