About TDH

Archived
Commentaries

Past Projects

FAQ

Links

Contact

June, 2005 Archives

June 30, 2005 - Paul Martin's Q&A with reporters yesterday gave the impression that for the first time since January, 2004 (the month before the AG's sponsorship investigation was released), the Prime Minister finally feels solid ground under his feet.

Meanwhile, the mass exodus from around Stephen Harper continues, as Geoff Norquay, director of communications, and Yaroslav Baran, the strategic communications director, join their two other former colleagues in quitting their jobs in the leader's office.

The polls do not lie, and more than any successes or failures that have been experienced on the floor of the House of Commons, each leader's current fates have only to do with how the Canadian public would treat them in an election.

Martin shouldn't get too comfortable, however.  Make no mistake about it...the Liberal party has lost its way, and TDH Strategies plans on putting forward a national voice to that opinion very soon.

Stay tuned.

June 29, 2005 - In spite of what the media is now trying to portray, Michael Ignatieff is a new and even surprising candidate for the never-ending Liberal leadership race.

Has Ignatieff been on the Liberal party's radar to recruit as a star candidate?  More than likely.  This does not, however, mean that the flurry of speculation regarding his impending run to occupy 24 Sussex Drive hasn't crept up on many grassroots Grits.

Ignatieff has been living outside of this country for more than 30 years.  His entrenchment within the highest levels of global academia has far outweighed any inclinations towards political activism.  Most importantly, he has not had any prominence within the Liberal party up until his speech at the March, 2005 Biennial policy convention.

Previous to that speaking engagement, Ignatieff had been a Canadian intellectual authority from Harvard who was often sought out to comment on international affairs, and more specifically, human rights.

Kudos must be offered to Ignatieff organizers for spinning their man into a legitimate threat to Paul Martin`s tenure.

On the other hand, the ease in which the Canadian media bought into the concept is more an indication of the lacklustre nature of a race devoid of true contenders than it is the masterwork of backroom political strategists.

This is not to take anything away from a man of Ignatieff`s stature, because one day he might very well be an exciting entry into the mix.  That time, however, isn't now.

He is unproven as an elected public figure.  His policy preferences are still extremely ambiguous.  He is still only a niche personality that most Liberals are unaware of.  And yet, he has quickly moved to the top of the heap in terms of generating leadership hype.

Is the Liberal party ever again going to produce a leader that elicits inspiration?  With other names like Tobin, McKenna, Beaker, Bevilacqua, Volpe and Pettigrew floating around, the answer to that question seems pretty depressing.

June 28, 2005 -  TDH Strategies is not going to delve into the ludicrous nature of Stephen Harper's argument about the illegitimacy of legislation passed with the help of the Bloc Québécois, because Justice Minister Irwin Cotler summed it up best:

"It was all right to seek their support for measures he wanted and suddenly they're illegitimate when it comes to Bill C-38. I find that surprising and even somewhat hypocritical."

Our friend CalgaryGrit is also particularly on point this morning, demonstrating Harper's unbelievable inability to remember what he said after a 5 minute gap between utterances.

It has been a long time coming, but Bill C-38 is finally going to be passed into law today.  Congratulations to Paul Martin's government for not delaying the issue for another 6 months.

One very interesting point that is becoming more apparent with each passing day of the soap opera known as the House of Commons is the emergence of Jack Layton as a political force.  For many months, this website has held the view that Jack is finally growing into his role as leader of the NDP, and yesterday's measured and effective commentary on Harper's antics once again confirmed this belief:

"Mr. Harper is essentially saying that Quebecers' votes don't matter -- aren't on an equal par with the rest of Canadians. So he wants to deny equality to same-sex partners, and he wants to deny equality to Quebec voters."

When Layton first came to Ottawa, he was still in the mode of "Jack the City Councillor."  He was loud and snide with each remark, and didn't understand the art of tempering your responses to the question or issue at hand.  It was an act that soon relegated Jack to an ineffectual status amongst the media, and from June - December of 2004, no one took much notice of him or his party.

Fast forward to 2005, where Jack has not only maximized his 19 seat caucus to full effect (ensuring $4.6 billion in new spending within the budget, pushing the same-sex legislation to a vote, threatening to withdraw support if an Air India inquiry is not called), but has also become a statesman in approach.  He is calm, he is controlled, and most importantly, the words that come out of his mouth are carefully considered, thoughtful and provocative.

No surprise then that Jack has become a media darling in recent months.

Layton is blowing the rest of the field away, and beginning to show the promise that so many (including TDH) had for him when he assumed the reins back in 2003.   Now, the party that is likely to benefit the most from the disintegration of the Conservatives is the NDP, who in the next election will likely win their highest amount of seats since the Ed Broadbent glory days of 1988.

Everyone is talking about Stephen Harper's upcoming "image makeover."  Quietly and without fanfare, however, Jack Layton has already accomplished the feat, with spectacular results.

June 27, 2005 - 1 year to the day that the Paul Martin government squeaked out a minority government. 

The Prime Minister's performance thus far harkens back to a quote TDH had published in the Vancouver Sun on October 24, 2002:

"Paul Martin's ideas have merit.  It is just unfortunate that the man delivering the message doesn't have a leg to stand on."

At the time, the comment referred to how Martin's rhetoric never quite seemed to match up with his actions. 

Some things never change.

For a nice collection of opinions from various journalists across the country, check out Kinsella's compilation (scroll down a bit).

The bottom line is, the forces behind this website have for five years voiced opinions on Martin's inadequacy for the job - from a policy perspective, from a political perspective, and from a personality perspective.  Much of those viewpoints have been documented in print.

It is nice to be ahead of the curve.

June 27, 2005 - TDH is going to love watching this guy fumble his way through his new job:

“Everything I've learned just reinforces the fact that I'm honoured to be going to Canada.  The more I learn, the more I'm impressed with it.”

“I hope I'll have a positive impact on the view Canadians have towards the United States, if it needs improving.”

Mr. Wilkins, who served in the state legislature for about 25 years including more than a decade as speaker, is a religious conservative who raised some eyebrows in Canada when he noted in a farewell speech that God sent him a sign to take the Ottawa job.

“I did make reference to my faith.  I don't apologize for that."

Canadians, he said, are in for a dose of good old southern hospitality after he and wife Susan arrive in Ottawa.

“Susan and I will just be ourselves. I'm sure we'll develop a lot of friends there.”

You're not in Kansas anymore, Dorothy.

June 24, 2005 - Well, it's official...the Tories are hopeless.

The Liberals made them look like complete amateurs yesterday in the passing of the budget amendments.  After all the big talk of trying to bring down the government one last time, they got caught with their pants around their ankles.

And if the reaction of the vanquished is any indication of how sweet the victory is, then the Liberals will be dipped in honey for the rest of the summer:

"When push comes to shove the Liberals will make any deal with anybody." - Stephen Harper

"We have to start thinking that Hannibal Lecter is running the government and they'll do anything they have to do to win." - Peter McKay

The Conservatives lining up with the Bloc to bring down the government on multiple occasions over the past 2 months???...well, that's different of course.

Meanwhile, some Tories are still convinced that their man, Gurmant Grewal, is completely innocent:

"And I'll guarantee you that by the time the RCMP, the ethics commissioner, and now the...law societies across Canada look at this thing, he'll come out clean also."

"They tried to bribe him, period.  And I'm not worried about that issue at all." - John Reynolds

Curious, though, how not two days ago, your leader said he had no problem with someone offering a bribe:

"I don't think there's anything wrong with somebody trying to bribe you." - Stephen Harper, June 20, 2005

TDH is starting a collection to buy these guys this book...anyone want to contribute?

June 23, 2005 - TDH is taking the day off for birthday celebrations.

But one quick question must be asked:

What are these guys thinking?

Stephen Harper's mad that the Liberals broke their promise to delay passage of the same-sex marriage legislation...so the government's "punishment" is an early defeat and a summer election?

The latest polls put the Tories at 14% behind the Liberals nationally, and a laughable 3rd place in Ontario.  The Gomery Inquiry has wrapped up until the release of the final report in December, and so has the public's interest and anger.  Nobody wants to go to the polls in July.  And most importantly, Stephen Harper is still the leader of the Conservative Party of Canada.

Sounds like a recipe for a repeat of the current seat count for the government, and a loss of seats for the Tories.

Just when you think you've witnessed the work of the country's most bumbling political strategists in the form of Paul Martin's "board," along comes the backroom of the Conservatives.

June 22, 2005 - The federal government, and more specifically Paul Martin, has spoken about the foreign affairs policy review since the day the new administration assumed control of the PMO.  Now, the final product has been delivered in the form of Canada's International Policy Statement: A Role of Pride and Influence in the World.   Among the more salient points from the section on "Development" are the following statements:

"Failure to achieve significant political, economic, social and environmental progress in the developing world will have an impact on Canada in terms of both our long-term security and our prosperity."

"Combatting poverty will not only save millions of lives but also strengthen States' capacity to combat terrorism, organized crime and proliferation. Development makes everyone more secure."

"...industrialized countries such as Canada have a responsibility not only to increase the flow of development aid, but also to help expand economic opportunities for developing countries."

Yet when it comes to action, the document is massively disappointing in its prescriptions:

"In support of Canada's long-term commitment to the internationally agreed target of devoting 0.7 percent of gross national income to ODA:

• The Government is committed at a minimum to doubling (relative to 2001) our international assistance to over $5 billion per year by 2010, with an increasing focus on Africa. By 2008-09, Canada's aid to Africa will be double its 2003-04 level; and

• Today we commit to ongoing increases beyond 2010 and to accelerating the projected rate of growth in international assistance as our fiscal position continues to improve."

If Canada doubles its current rate of development assistance, we still only reach 0.54%.  Bob Geldof, organizer of Live Aid and now the Live 8 series of concerts, is applying the pressure to Martin by stating:

"There's no use in the Prime Minister coming to Scotland unless he's prepared to do this deal.  Unless he's prepared, he should stay at home.  Don't come.  You're not welcome unless you're prepared to do something finally."

To which Martin replied:

"I believe in the 0.7.   I would very much like to see Canada get there by 2015.  But I am not going to make a commitment that I am not sure the government will be able to meet.  The problem with international public policy is that too often commitments are made on the grounds of photo ops."

HUH?  SINCE WHEN HAS THAT EVER STOPPED YOU BEFORE:

"We have allowed power to become too centralized--too concentrated in the hands of a few and too remote from the influence of the many.  We have permitted a culture to arise that has been some thirty years in the making.  One that can be best summarized by the one question that everyone in Ottawa believes has become the key to getting things done: Who do you know in the PMO?"  That is unacceptable.  We must change that reality."
                           - October 21, 2002

"Essentially we are a democratic party and a democratic party says you win your nomination. There's no doubt in my mind the vast majority of the members of Parliament who have worked very hard are going to be able to hold their seats, most of them uncontested.  What we have said is obviously that there has to be a democratic opening for people and that they should be able to take it."
                           - December 4, 2003

“No longer will the culture in Ottawa be one of entitlement.  We are going to condemn to history the politics and practice of waste and mismanagement.  Nothing is more important than integrity; integrity of the individual, integrity of government.  That's why I am going to change the way Ottawa works. This is not a slogan, it's a reality. We are going to change the way Ottawa works. And we're going to do it –- come hell or high water."
                            - March 17, 2004

How about getting Canadians answers about the sponsorship scandal before going to the polls?

"I don't think we got, obviously we didn't get the answers that anybody would want.  But it's going to take a long time. It may well take longer than we would have in terms of this mandate."
                             - April 8, 2004

So don't give us this BS about not wanting to commit to promises that the government won't be able to meet.

It is time to match the rhetoric you have been preaching about international development since 1999 (when you were appointed as the inaugural chairperson of the Group of Twenty (G-20)) with appropriate action in terms of Canada's global contributions.

Your spending sprees should not always have to do with initiatives that will help you get re-elected.

June 21, 2005 - The idiocy in Ottawa continues to bubble to the surface.

First, we have the bumbling Ethics Commissioner Bernard Shapiro:

"I'm learning as I go along.  What makes sense, what doesn't make sense, what's helpful and what's not helpful. The list of those things I'd do differently gets quite long."  

"Bernard Shapiro originally insisted he had no mandate to probe Murphy's behaviour. But he now concedes his interpretation of his powers may be wrong and that he is still learning the ropes as ethics commissioner."

"Shapiro seemed unprepared for this appearance [in front of the parliamentary ethics committee]. He didn't bring copies of the lawyers' advice on the Sgro case with him. He couldn't recall how many people were being given a chance to comment on his investigation, and he couldn't tell Broadbent the job title, or role of the staff member in Sgro's office, a person Shapiro says acted inappropriately."

Then there's Stephen Harper and his brilliant assessment on the art of the bribe:

"I don't think there's anything wrong with blowing the whistle and I don't think there's anything wrong with somebody trying to bribe you.  What's wrong is if you take the bribe..."

So if there's nothing wrong with a bribe, why are you so pissed off at Tim Murphy and Ujjal Dosanjh, Stephen?  What an absolutely stupid thing to say, particularly from a "leader" who is preaching a new set of ethical guidelines should he come to power.  Consequently, Harper is wrong, as a quick read over section 119 of the Criminal Code will determine.

Finally, there is the debate over Bill C-38, the federal same-sex marriage legislation, where Mr. Dithers can't make his mind up from one day to the next:

"If the Opposition continues to filibuster, this is in their hands," Martin told reporters in Ottawa as he left cabinet's weekly meeting.  "Put this question to Mr. Harper. He's the one that's controlling this situation."

That was last week.  This week, Paul Martin is apparently back in control:

"Certainly, extending the number of days in which we sit is an option that I think we have to look at very seriously."

"We'll stay as long as it takes to get this legislation through."

With a parish priest in Martin's riding now telling the Prime Minister that he is doing the devil's work by trying to pass this bill, who knows what his position will be next week.

Please put us all out of our misery - pass this damn legislation, and prorogue for the summer. 

TDH Strategies doesn't know how much more of this we can stomach.

June 20, 2005 - The process of lobbying has the ability to create real and positive change.  Sometimes it is the skill of one individual or firm that can take the most earnest and idealistic of dreams and turn them into legislative reality.

But with the stories that surfaced during the sponsorship scandal, or now the investigation into Technology Partnerships Canada, a multibillion-dollar fund to promote research and development, lobbying has become synonymous with any other commission-based industry.

And that is just another reason why politics is thought of in such low regard these days.

TDH has been in and around government for much of the past decade, and therefore come in contact with hundreds of individuals on both sides of the lobbying equation.  Amidst these encounters, one tends to quickly understand that for many attendees at political conventions (policy, leadership, AGMs, etc.), their involvement equates to another aspect of business development, if you will.  They are there to troll for government contracts, or to build contacts up to attract more interest in their services.

Selling your friendships in politics for financial gain; running for political executive positions to further your business credibility (reference this firm); serving as little more than a professional fundraiser for companies by promising access to government funding programs; representing companies that fly in the face of the policies and beliefs of the party you are claiming to be a member of; this is smarmy politics.

TDH Strategies is a company that grounds itself in public policy.  Take a look at our Past Projects section.  We do public policy research and development.  We work on political campaigns where we support the candidate and their beliefs.  We provide political advice based on 10 years of experience.

We do not, however, sell influence, or compromise the sanctity of our passion for the political process, and all of the potential it represents.

Good on David Emerson for stating that he as Industry Minister is going to clean up TPC and end “elephant deals.”

It cannot happen fast enough, and it must represent the beginning of major government-wide reforms.

June 17, 2005 - TDH feels for Liberal MP Sarmite Bulte, whose house was burnt down by a suspected arsonist.

On the other hand, when politicians and politics are regarded as lower than dirt in the minds of so many Canadians, the speculation from the above-linked article certainly doesn't help:

"She said she has been a longtime gay marriage advocate and is known for being outspoken about it in her riding. She questions the timing of the fire, which happened the day after the confidence vote that the Liberals narrowly won. She concedes her political career makes her an easy target."

"My kids don't have enemies. My husband does not have enemies. So by process of elimination . . . . Maybe I'm being overly paranoid. I pray to God that I am."

Hey, with $200,000 worth of damage to her family's personal dwellings, she has every right to lash out.  It is just a shame that this kind of unsubstantiated accusation is just going to further peoples' opinions that politics is the dirtiest game in existence.

June 17, 2005 - Roy Romanow is speaking out against last week's Supreme Court ruling on private health insurance in Quebec, stating that:

"I would not be surprised if somebody would take the logic of the majority of the court and try to apply it to knock off the Canada Health Act."

TDH Strategies cannot help but feel that this comment is too little, too late from a man who was once looked at as a saviour for our ailing health care system.

Romanow of course headed up the Commission on the Future of Health Care in Canada, which spent 18 months traversing the country holding consultations with medical professionals, political leaders, academics and the general public to craft a report which was supposed to ensure that "our public, universal health care system works better and smarter to meet their needs."

Well, for anyone who took any time to look over the final report, it turned out to embody little more than a prescription to throw more money at the system rather than suggesting and initiating real institutional and philosophical change.

Romanow missed the best chance in a generation to create a substantial and carefully considered national debate on how to modernize and maintain our public health care system.  Instead, he chose to take the easy route, solidifying an ineffectual status in history for his commission and its recommendations.

Sorry Roy, but the issues associated with the misguided Supreme Court ruling were inevitable, making your silence on them 3 years ago a huge opportunity lost.

What a disappointment.

June 16, 2005 - "Well, there is a revolution going on in rec rooms, offices and classrooms around the world - a revolution in which 15 million people are taking part."

We sure have come a long way since this was originally broadcast. 

And yes, Peter still didn't have any hair up top.

June 16, 2005 - Full credit to our friend David for this idea.

So the inevitable question has come this way many times over the past few days - what's next for Michael Jackson?  What does he do now?

Well, TDH's communications advice included going underground for a year, focussing on taking care of his kids, and then re-emerging with a new album.

But, there is huge money and potential for repairing his reputation in going back to what he does best - performing.  Take some time to prepare mentally, make an announcement that you're going on a world-wide tour to thank your fans, and pledge that 50% of everything you earn is going towards counteracting poverty in Africa.

Check out the last line of this article - it could be his start to a new beginning.

June 16, 2005 - "He has a very good sense of humour. It's sometimes subtle and you can miss it. I think Canadians will get to like him when they get to know him," deputy leader Peter MacKay after a morning Tory caucus meeting."

"Tory MP John Reynolds said he feels after the summer's appearances by Mr. Harper, both the party and its leader will be refreshed."

"I think when Canadians get to see that, we'll come back in September looking very good in the polls."

Well, in terms of providing laughs to Canadians, the above statements taken from here are about the funniest thing TDH has heard all week. 

Maybe they are on to something...

June 14, 2005 - Pronounced on January 3, this was TDH Strategies' #1 prediction for the calendar year of 2005:

"1) If a federal election is called in 2005, the Liberals will improve on their current fortunes with a majority government."

This was #2 on the list:

"2) The Conservative Party of Canada will be in the thick of a leadership horserace again (either officially or unofficially) by the end of year.  New Brunswick premier Bernard Lord will toss his hat into the ring."

Well, this website was lambasted by many readers and followers for the first prognostication, and when the Gomery inquiry was tightening the noose around Paul Martin's neck, many also relayed their belief that it was smooth sailing ahead for Stephen Harper.

Regarding the latter forecast, this article demonstrates that the schedule for Harper's inevitable ousting has been dramatically sped up.

For the former, the Liberal government would love to go to the polls right now, because a majority government would definitely be within grasp.  This website is not exactly the biggest fan of Jim Travers over at the Toronto Star, but his column from this morning contains several tidbits of logic that TDH couldn't agree with more:

"Tonight the minority government faces a confidence vote Liberals would be happier to lose than Conservatives win."

"Until Conservatives change, many Canadians will hold their noses and vote Liberal."

"Willing again to be bought with their own money, voters aren't looking past Martin's scattered promises to worry much about cost or how the underlying helter-skelter deals push the country toward the banal vision of a community of communities."

Regardless, engineering their own defeat probably won't happen, because nobody would be excited about going the polls in the dead of summer.  The Conservatives also do not have the numbers to make it happen - Gurmant Grewal continues his stress leave, and Darrel Stinson and Dave Chatters are both stricken with cancer, rendering their attendance tonight highly unlikely.

This is the quote that Conservative whip Rob Nicholson offered regarding his party's inability to control their own fate:

"If this government falls, you can bet it will be a bunch of Liberals who have decided they have had enough with this government, and they've had enough with the corruption, or they've had enough of C-38."

This is a weak assessment of the current situation within the Liberal caucus, more along the lines of wishful thinking than a reflection of reality. 

Nicholson is right in one thing, however - at this point, the government can only fall by their own hands.  The numbers are still tight, and as yesterday's commentary clearly pointed out, Paul Martin is guided by political opportunism above all other considerations.

So in spite of Government House Leader Tony Valeri's vigorous denials that his party would attempt such a tactic, political watchers across the country can only wonder "what if?"

You never know who just might have sudden car troubles on the way to the vote this evening.

June 13, 2005 - On so many different levels, this line of attack is bizarre and upsetting.

So let TDH get this straight...Jean Lapierre, one of the founding members of the Bloc Québécois, is trying to goad the current leader of that party, Gilles Duceppe, to leave Ottawa and assume the reins of the Parti Québécois?

First, for a man who has a well-documented history of changing political parties and loyalties whenever the going gets tough, calling anyone a coward for sticking with a cause is farcical.  Particularly funny is this line delivered on CTV's Question Period program yesterday:

"...maybe he's decided that he'd rather be comfortable in Ottawa instead of fighting the real war."

By that logic, Lapierre has stopped fighting "the real war" many times over; first when he left a federalist party to form the Bloc Québécois, then when he left the Separatist cause to take a plum radio job, and finally when he left Quebec to be absorbed into Paul Martin's cabinet. 

More disturbing in this story, however, is the fact that Martin continues to rely on Lapierre to be his voice in Quebec.  And, with his selection of such a spokesperson comes the accompaniment of a strategy that looks to protect their own political hides at all costs.

As one of the weakest federalist leaders in Canadian history, Paul Martin's "vision" for Quebec has allowed Separatists to gain a huge foothold in their fight to break this country apart.

Now, he is willing to actively encourage the most popular politician in Quebec to join those same Separatists, as long as it ensures that he is able to gain more seats in the next federal election.

For Canadians who love their country, Duceppe's decision to stay in Ottawa is a massive boon to the federalist forces in Quebec.  For Paul Martin, it means that once again, he will likely be slaughtered at the polls in La Belle Province.

Clearly, that is all this desperate and uninspired man cares about at this point.

Scary stuff, folks.

June 10, 2005 - This is f'ing hilarious.  Mirroring reality, TDH thinks that Ginger Splice will soon be leaving the group to pursue a solo career.

June 10, 2005 - For a great breakdown of the Supreme Court's monumental decision on Quebec's ban on private health insurance, check out Kinsella...his prescribed fates for each party leader make a whole lot of sense.

TDH Strategies offers one question, however:

When the Supreme Court forwarded a non-binding ruling in favour of same-sex marriage back in December, there were huge cries from opponents, mainly the Conservatives, that unelected judges were usurping the power of MP's.  They argued that judges were becoming activist in their stances on important moral issues, and that the government should trot out the use of the notwithstanding clause to preserve democracy.  Of course, at that point, court rulings in Ontario, British Columbia, Quebec, Saskatchewan, Nova Scotia, Manitoba and the Yukon had already deemed same-sex marriage legal, meaning that the Supreme Court wasn't exactly going out on a limb.

Because the ruling echoed the direction the government was already headed in, Paul Martin used it as a tool to advance his push to introduce legislation to expand the definition of marriage.

Now, the Supreme Court has ruled against every fibre of the Government of Canada's, and most average Canadians', values regarding our public health care system.

So here is the dilemma:  how can Martin now go and oppose such a decision when not 6 months ago, he sided in favour of the same judicial decision-makers and their ability to affect public policy?

Don't get us wrong...TDH thinks that the decision is completely misguided, and will open the floodgates to other court challenges that could eventually tear down health care as we know it.

On the other hand, it is difficult to side with the Supreme Court on one decision that supersedes parliament (which TDH did on the same-sex marriage issue) and then pull a 180 degree turn and cut down those same same judges when a decision doesn't exactly go your way.

A very difficult quandary indeed, not surprisingly, largely due to the short-term thinking of Paul Martin's political "strategists", who can't ever seem to imagine past week's end in directing this floundering government.

June 9, 2005 - Stick a fork in him...he's done.

Liberals: 37%  Conservatives: 23%  NDP: 21%

Even worse than that, the Conservatives are now sitting in third place in Ontario, trailing the NDP.

In all of the years TDH Strategies has been monitoring politics, never before have we seen such a precipitous drop in support for a party that was allegedly on the verge of forming government.

As a result, articles like this and this are inevitably going to start surfacing on a daily basis.  TDH, however, has been writing about Stephen Harper's fate for the past 6 months:

"January 17, 2004 - First, without even considering his election prospects in la belle province, this website is convinced that Stephen Harper came about as close as he is ever going to get to 24 Sussex Drive during last June's campaign.  He squandered the opportunity of momentum, a phenomenon that doesn't come around too often for Conservatives in this country."

"January 25, 2004 - Stephen Harper is hastening his own demise within the Conservative party of Canada..."

"February 18, 2005 - Whereas previously this website thought of Stephen Harper as having lots of political potential peppered with healthy doses of ineptitude, now Mr. Harper simply goes into the category of Stockwell Day.  The Tory leader is out of step with the Canadian public, is becoming more and more offensive with every passing day, and is the biggest detriment his party has to achieving government."

"March 7, 2005 - Whereas a newly unified right of centre party combined with a scintillating sponsorship scandal represented genuine hope for the Conservatives last spring, Stephen Harper's lacklustre performance over the last year has divided his membership, and relegated Conservative values to the fringes of Canadian society."

"April 11, 2005 - If Stephen Harper can only get the fringes of his party to sit on their hands and shut their mouths, he might actually have a shot of taking this thing.  The likelihood of him being able to accomplish that, however, are few and far between, meaning that the Liberals will continue to have more than a fighting chance when matched up against such blatant intolerance."

"May 18, 2005 - Funnily enough, Belinda's defection could ultimately spell the end for Stephen Harper, as the old Progressive Conservative guard (which still represent much of the money, power and backroom dealing within the Conservative Party of Canada) has just about reached their limit with the Calgary MP's tenure as leader.  In fact, according to TDH sources back in Ottawa, many political power brokers are pushing for an election now, understanding that a loss is likely, and a subsequent leadership convention is sure to follow."

The Conservative movement in this country will always have to fight an uphill battle to gain traction with Canadians - this is just a reality of how this nation is constituted.  So, without the anchor of a strong, passionate, engaging and exciting leader, Conservatives are poised to sit in the opposition benches for decades to come.

Is this good for the country?  Absolutely not.  We have all seen what happens to a government without the presence of an effective foil...arrogance breeds narcissism, which in turn leads to the corruption that the Liberal party began to engage in.

On the other hand, the Tories must learn a couple of key lessons if they have any realistic hope of steering the national agenda.  First, Conservatives must understand that unless they come to the middle of the ideological spectrum, they will go nowhere fast, particularly in Ontario and Quebec (this means, do not try to enshrine or legislate lifestyles or beliefs).  Second, they cannot continue to pick the best of a sorry lot as their leader, meaning that they must attract a candidate list that surprises and inspires people's imaginations (and no, that kind of a race would not include the likes of Jim Prentice).

Lastly, and most importantly, the Conservatives have to understand that getting to office is going to require a lot more than people's anger towards the government.  There is a reason that the Liberals have held power for 80% of the time since Confederation...they are the natural governing party, whether we like it or not.

The question for every member of the Conservative Party of Canada is simple: is there enough room to present a vision distinct from the Liberals yet still attractive to voters?

The answer is YES...but it will never happen within the tenure of Stephen Harper.

June 7, 2005 - After scanning the headlines:

"Belinda Stronach gave $100,000 to her opponent"

"Tory MP under ethics probe comes home on stress leave"

"Critics call on senator to quit or back out of rent deal"

"Senator alleges she was assaulted by two colleagues, but won't name them"

it is no wonder that politicians are held in such low regard.

Public office holders can and will blame the media for such cynicism amongst the public, but if members of the fraternity continue to offer up such blatant ethical breaches on a silver platter, no one comes away unscathed.

In the minds of so many (albeit generally apathetic and uninformed) Canadians, Ottawa is a giant cesspool that continues to produce sewage for public consumption.

It is a sad state of affairs for a profession that has the potential to be honourable, fascinating, inspiring, history-making, and most surprisingly these days, worthy of praise.

So here are a couple of open question for readers (and responses are requested):

What does a young person, or anyone for that matter, do if running for public office represents their hopes and dreams to really make a difference for Canada?

Why would one put them self in a position for such scorn, ridicule and insolence?

For TDH, these questions always used to be so easy to counteract.  They aren't anymore.

June 6, 2005 - Look at these passages from Paul Martin's address to the Federation of Canadian Municipalities this past weekend in St. John's, Newfoundland:

"...the New Deal recognizes the need to bring municipal governments and their leaders to the national table – and to give them a voice as we establish the objectives of the nation."

"Now, what does that mean? It means that our government is dedicated to making local governments true partners not only in implementing the national agenda, but also in setting it."

"Make no mistake: we respect the responsibility and the role of the provinces. We have no intention of interfering in their jurisdiction. For that reason we are working in partnership with them to implement all aspects of the New Deal."

The New Deal for Cities is a good idea.  Martin is smart in understanding that the health of Canada's municipalities is the key to our country's success over the next quarter century.

It is a shame, however, that his plans haven't been better thought out.  Bringing municipal leaders to the table on national affairs is an EXTREMELY slippery slope to start climbing.  He already bends over backwards and easily acquiesces to the provinces (often to the detriment of the nation), and now he is going to try and please dozens of city mayors?

TDH once again references this Hill Times Op/Ed piece (PAGE 5) that was written a year and a half ago.  Although some broad funding commitments have now been announced, there are several questions that were asked back then that still have yet to be adequately answered.

Sorry to say, but this is just another example of Paul Martin's "Promise Big, Deliver Small" way of practicing politics.  He really has no idea of the mess he is getting himself into with such a poorly thought out strategy.

June 5, 2005 -  TDH Strategies has been tagged by Warren Kinsella in the rapidly spreading "Book Tag" game sweeping the blogosphere. 

The queries? 

1) Number of Books I Own
2) Last Book I Bought
3) Last Book I Read
4) 5 Books That Mean A Lot To Me.

So, without further ado:

All totaled, TDH owns just over 200 books or so.  Several moves over the past 3 years have culled that number down from almost double that, and so the ones that have been kept are a select few that are hoarded over with a lot of pride.

The last book TDH bought was "Sorry Everybody: an apology to the world for the re-election of George W. Bush."  Filled with hundreds of pictures of apologies from the 49% of Americans who voted against the oil tyrant, it is nice to know that not all of our neighbours to the south are mindless Republican sheep.

The last book TDH read was "A Sunday at the Pool in Kigali," a book by Canadian Gil Courtemanche detailing the experiences of a fictional Québecois film-maker as he witnesses the Rwandan genocide first hand.  Brutal, graphic, heart-wrenching and powerful.

5 books that mean a lot to TDH:  "Fingerprints of the Gods" by Graham Hancock, a truly fascinating read that turns traditional conceptions of history and human civilization on their heads (oh, and the date December 22, 2012 will forever be marked in your calendar after reading this book); "The White Boy Shuffle" by Paul Beatty, a satirical and biting urban fairy tale that is funny as hell, and has some of the most beautiful prose in contemporary writing; "Star-Spangled Canadians" by Globe and Mail columnist Jeffrey Simpson is an amazing and often infuriating window into the mentality of those who chase the money offered in the United States; "On the Road" by Jack Kerouac is the classic coming of age story about hipster youth trying to find their place traveling across post World War II America; "The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz" by Mordecai Richler is about a young Jewish man and his dreams in the heyday of Montreal, TDH's favourite city in the world.

TDH officially tags:

Ian King

David Beers

Andrew Coyne

June 3, 2005 - Want comedy?  Go take a read of this.

Boy was that hard to track down on Google...a full 20 minutes of digging, and finally TDH came up with the perfect search.  Remember the glut of press releases singing the praises of Martin's impending end to the democratic deficit?

Today one might be inclined to think that they were trying to hide such an antiquated notion.

June 2, 2005 - UPDATE!  Found the aforementioned photo on page A5 of Tuesday's Vancouver Sun:

The caption reads: "Karla Homolka with her parents, Dorothy and Karel, at Joliette earlier this year."

So when this guy answers "Someday, I guess," when asked whether he expected to have a relationship with Karla after she leaves prison, don't believe the hype.  This is a response crafted purely to foster a particular public image.

June 2, 2005 - Yes, it is true that the Homolkas also lost a daughter 15 years ago, and that they live in pain just as the French and Mahaffy families do.

On the other hand, something about this story just doesn't ring true.

First, TDH Strategies is sure that within the past few days, a photo attached to one of the many published pieces on Karla Homolka's imminent release showed a picture from prison, hand in hand and smiling with her mother and father.  We are frantically trying to track that down, and will immediately post it if found.

Secondly, things like the following snippet (taken from this article) kind of makes one wonder whether the reluctance now being shown by Karel Homolka is an act to appease an angry Canadian public:

"While some residents express sympathy for the Homolkas, many more are miffed by the annual memorial to Tammy they run in a local newspaper each Christmas.

The clipping pays tribute to their murdered daughter and is signed by all members of the family, including Karla."

This seems like a very odd action for parents who are now allegedly hesitant to have any contact with their daughter.

Anyways, regardless of whether her parents are sincere or not, the release of this monster represents one of the greatest travesties of justice in Canadian history.  A plea bargain with the devil is the proper classification for the deal that Homolka got from the Ontario Crown, considering what was contained on the video tapes found at the Bernardo/Homolka home after everything was signed.

Remember that she was also never charged in two separate attacks upon a young girl whose identity is protected by a publication ban.

Section 810 of the Criminal Code, a legal tool which applies to individuals who may commit another offence or be a danger to the public,  is what the province of Ontario is now trying to use to monitor a killer who should not be out of prison.  A valiant attempt to correct a previous mistake, but ultimately inconsequential at this late stage in the game.

With the overflow of public outrage and concern, something is bound to happen to this woman, one way or another.  And when an incident does eventually occur, it will be a sad day for the Canadian justice system if a measure of vigilantism is what it takes to make Canadians feel safer.

June 1, 2005 - Beaker's true colours can be seen in his testimony before the Maher Arar inquiry yesterday:

"For me I've got to get my citizens their right to have their employment.  The fundamental thing that I was concerned with was making sure that we reached an understanding that was going to protect Canadian interests."

The article also reveals this:

"Manley said he was "very sympathetic" to Arar's wife, Monia Mazigh when she approached him in the spring of 2003 to plead her husband's case. But he said his direct involvement in the affair was minimal, despite the fact that he was the No. 2 man in the government of then-prime minister Jean Chretien."

This is a warning to any Liberal, or any Canadian for that matter, who considers Beaker a viable leadership choice for this country.

His soft, playing footsies approach to the United States is demonstrated above, and in this horrible idea.  The almighty dollar is what drives Manley now, and it is clearly obvious that corporate interests, particularly American corporate interests, would have huge influence in a Beaker-run government.

So he was concerned about employment for Canadians, but when it came to getting involved in the Arar case, his minimal concern and involvement only began AFTER the man had been released from a Syrian prison.

He didn't even have the guts to come out and say whether the Americans had gone too far in curbing civil rights, stating instead that it was a question for others to decide.

Manley has been bought off, plain and simple.  And with his big forehead available, I'm sure there are many corporations that would be interested in branding their own Prime Ministerial candidate.