TDH Strategies - Solutions For Everyone

September 30, 2006 - Walking down Burrard St. to the Michael Ignatieff war room for British Columbia, only to be stopped by a huge group of people and police. I wondered...could it be Bob Rae supporters trying to make a statement of protest? Was it Joe Volpe supporters coming back to life? Nope - only in Vancouver would you have the Ignatieff building surrounded by the filming of:

Permalink

September 30, 2006 - Man, this kind of a decision just reeks of the same kind of politics that this party is supposed to be getting away from. Gerard Kennedy, you're better than that...don't allow one of Raymond Chan's typical political cattle calls cheapen your thus far clean and above board campaign.

Permalink

September 29, 2006 - I notice that many have written long diatribes extolling the virtues of their respective candidates. I am not going to do that today, and instead will wait until Monday to offer some in-depth thoughts and analysis about where the party is heading after the results of this weekend.

I will say this, though...in terms of party rebirth, turning around our current electoral prospects, fresh and exciting policy ideas, and a new way of doing politics (both internally and externally), I am unequivocally convinced that Michael Ignatieff is the best man to lead the Liberal Party of Canada.

I just want every eligible voting member to give grave consideration to the fact that we are in opposition, and without some major changes, our prospects for the future aren't very promising. I don't know about everyone else, but I want to win now, not five years down the road.

I will be back throughout the weekend with updates and interesting bits of information.

Permalink

September 29, 2006 - Not as a Liberal, nor as a partisan, but simply as a Canadian, I am so proud of this tough and principled stand taken by Prime Minister Stephen Harper at the Francophonie Summit. Both sides suffered in this conflict, and Canada was the only country that opposed the original resolution in consideration of this fact. This is what Harper said about his position:

"I hope we can all recognize the suffering of humans - men and women - and not just suffering based on people's nationality."

Very hard to argue with a statement that makes so much sense.

Permalink

September 29, 2006 - I can confirm (do not ask how) that the strategy memo written by Doug Finley was indeed real, and distributed internally to several ministerial offices in Ottawa - meaning that many Tory staff members had access to it.

One of these staffers took it to read over lunch in a shopping mall food court last week, and left it behind after he was done. From what I have been able to determine, this was done by accident, because if there was indeed an intention to leak it, there are far more effective ways to ensure that it gets into the hands of those that can turn it into a national headline.

Every Liberal should really take a read of John Ivison's brilliant column from this morning's National Post, and really consider the content before voting this weekend. Go talk to any Conservative (on the payroll or not), and ask them privately who they would rather face off against in an election - Michael Ignatieff or Bob Rae. I am confident that the answers will be pretty unified.

Permalink

September 29, 2006 - With the amount of bad hockey analogies that come out of the mouth of Ken Dryden:

"Ken Dryden - nice guy, good goalie, really admire all he's done - can't win.

Who says?

Doesn't have the "killer instinct." Politics is a rough sport, you know. Gotta go into the corners with your elbows up.

Really?

Do you know what going into the corners is really about? It's to get the puck! Go in with your elbows up, you're off for two minutes - and they get it. The best, the best, know what the prize is, then go after it, get it, then do something with it. Just like those who are the best at politics." (taken from a Dryden campaign email I just received)

"I have a goalie's mentality.
And on a team,
as you know,
there are two goalies.
But only one plays at a time.

And the problem for the goalie who isn't playing,
is that the goalie who is playing,
if he plays well enough,
the other goalie
may never see the ice again.

And you never want to leave the ice.
You never want to leave the ice.
You never want to leave the ice.
You want to stay on the ice.
And find those answers on the ice.

And stay there.
And keep staying there.
And the longer you're not there,
the longer you're not going to be there.
We need to win.

That's what holds all of this together." (delivered in a Victoria speech back in March)

I'm surprised that he doesn't show up to his campaign events like this:

The nostalgia factor alone might be enough to double his delegate count.

Permalink

September 28, 2006 - Marsha Akman, the woman behind the StopIggy website, all but outted herself back in April, making the search that I and many others went on, quite unnecessary:

"Standing in the crowded lobby of a local hotel, Marsha Akman was like a kid on a shopping spree.

"We have a meeting right now with Stephane Dion, then we're meeting Carolyn Bennett at 12, then we're going to be meeting (Ken) Dryden afterwards," said Akman, a Liberal activist in the riding of Mount Royal and a member of the party's women's commission. "We're going to start talking issues and get a feel for how they are and go from there."

Like many members of the federal party's Quebec wing, Akman does not yet know who will get her vote when Liberals meet in early December in Montreal to choose their next leader.

However, she has already scratched one candidate off her list. "It's anybody but Ignatieff," said Akman, sporting two "Stop Iggy" stickers on her shirt to protest what she sees as Michael Ignatieff's right-wing views."

Permalink

September 28, 2006 - Stéphane Dion never seemed to explain how exactly Ms. Johanne Gelinas' report helps his campaign, although he is obviously still enamoured with his flawed Project Green plan, and offered this statement to the television audience: "I want to do less, I want to do more, and that is why I am running to become Prime Minister of Canada." (paraphrased, bien sur)

Permalink

September 28, 2006 - Stéphane Dion is coming on Don Newman's Politics program to explain why criticism of the Liberals' environmental record helps his campaign. Huh? Stay tuned...

Permalink

September 28, 2006 - Watching George W. Bush try to play peacemaker between Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf and Afghan President Hamid Karzai yesterday made me wonder - why didn't he use this tact to try and divert attention away from Iraq a long time ago? Osama Bin Laden is in Pakistan, Afghanistan is where America's 9/11 reaction began, there have been 2,700 American casualties in the quagmire that is Iraq, and the Republicans are likely to take a huge hit in the mid-term elections as as result. This misguided emphasis of the Bush administration is a huge tactical error that is being corrected far too late to achieve any substantial political advantage.

I see that Jason Cherniak is trumpeting the fact that David Suzuki is enthusiastic about politicians adopting his foundation's environmental recommendations. To be fair, Michael Ignatieff's use of the work of Simon Fraser University professor Mark Jaccard, the co-author of "The Morning After: Optimal Greenhouse Gas Polices for Canada's Kyoto Obligations and Beyond" published by the C.D. Howe Institute in 2004, received much the same kind of appreciation. But my question to Jason is this: why was it so hard for the Stéphane Dion campaign to just admit that is what happened, instead of claiming that there was some kind of co-authorship? Truth be told, as the environmental agenda becomes more prominent, politicians are going to have to increasingly rely on the work of scientists and environmentalists towards developing sound policy. But why lie about this fact, when it isn't something that needs to be hidden?

To all Liberal Party of Canada members - when it comes to winnability, isn't the candidate who instils the most fear in our competition someone worthy of our support?

Finally, outside of my friend Warren Kinsella, is there anyone who roasts the media as well as Jon Stewart? I've never had such an appreciation for Wolf Blitzer as I did after watching this on The Daily Show last night. Bloody hilarious.

That's all for now...back later in the day.

Permalink

September 27, 2006 - As mentioned, I have been tagged by BCer In Toronto to talk about 5 things feminism has done for me. The whole idea started over at Progressive Bloggers in response to the Tory cuts to Status of Women Canada. So, without further ado, here are my answers:

1) Feminism has taught me that women are most definitely the stronger sex. Men will never have the poise, fortitude and endurance that our female counterparts innately possess.

2) Feminism has taught me that much of the plight that women face across the globe is caused by males. I don't know if gender equality will ever exist, but I do know that the steps needed to be taken towards that lofty goal most often reside within the capability of men who choose not to act.

3) Feminism has taught me how hard women have to battle to achieve that which we as men take for granted. And, while I will never fully understand the obstacles and barriers that women must encounter, I have become aware as to how much respect they deserve for overcoming them, one after another.

4) Feminism has taught me that the way in which a man treats a women is a good indication of the type of character that person is overall. Respect is a quality that is much broader then petty differentiation between the sexes.

5) Feminism has taught me that women have so much to offer the realm of politics, and that we really need to get to a 50/50 split in Canada, both in terms of seat distribution and cabinet representation.

There you go...short and sweet. I officially tag:

exceptforonething.blogspot.com
Warren Kinsella
Nicole Martel
Jason Morris
Derek Raymaker

Permalink

September 27, 2006 - A few quick points to make for the afternoon:

• To answer those of you who asked why I would devote any space to addressing the Belinda Stronach/Tie Domi affair, it is simple: my interest is not in the gossip, but rather the different ways in which women and men are treated within the political realm. In consideration of the Conservative budget cuts to Status of Women Canada, the online tag game that I have yet to respond to on the impact that feminism has had on me (something that I will do later on today), and the ideas and sentiments expressed in this article, I think that the issues that I raised in the commentary below are timely and relevant.

• It is true that Joe Volpe is not the first person within the Liberal party to raise concerns and complaints about racism being entrenched in the party apparatus (namely the Chair of the Standing Committee on Multiculturalism Mark Persaud). There are elements of the way that we operate that do seem to validate certain aspects of these complaints. Unfortunately for Mr. Volpe, however, none of them seem to apply to his experience and treatment through his time as an elected official.

• I am very curious as to the reactions from the Canadian military leadership in light of Paul Martin's comments on the mission in Afghanistan. Legitimately, I wonder if they believe that the 3-D approach, which defined the original intent of our country's efforts in the region, is no longer being adhered to.

• Everyone must go and read Ted Betts' amazing summary of Michael Ignatieff's just released sustainable development plan. I'm am blown away by the level of expertise that Mr. Ignatieff has been able to consult with in preparing his environmental platform planks, and firmly believe that this is one of the strongest courses of action ever proposed in the realm of Canadian environmental stewardship.

Off again to my seminar at SFU. I will be back with my response to the feminism tag game in the early evening.

Permalink

September 27, 2006 - I saw Belinda Stronach's appearance on CTV yesterday, and have one main comment.

There was an assertion made that her status as a high profile female public figure means that people often adopt free reign in delving into her private life. Now, while I sympathize with public office holders who have their personal and family affairs become fodder for gossip columns and the mainstream media (these days, the distinction between the two is difficult to rationalize), I also believe that whether you are male or female, in the spotlight or outside of it, spending so much time with a married individual is asking for negative attention (particularly at some of the most high profile media events this country has to offer).

Belinda and Tie Domi have been spotted all over Toronto, in Calgary and in New York together, and that kind of a relationship seems to go beyond the parameters of simply a close friendship. Regardless, Domi has a family, and as a spouse, I can see how Leanne Domi has every right to be upset.

It is 150% true that females are treated unfairly within politics, and have to work twice as hard to achieve the same accomplishments as their male counterparts. But in this situation, I find it very hard to feel sympathy for Ms. Stronach, whose conduct seems to warrant the kind of reaction she has received.

I would be very curious as to the opinions of TDH readers, and whether they think that my assessment is correct or not.

Permalink

September 27, 2006 - I received a couple of emails yesterday accusing me of turning a blind eye to the complaint filed against Michael Ignatieff's campaign that the memberships of 60 people had not been paid for by the individuals. I was told that it was "easy for you to sling mud at other campaigns as opposed to turning the attention onto yourself and your associates."

Not true, and here is why.

First, yesterday's rants were largely directed towards Joe Volpe's unjustified use of racism to tarnish the reputation of the Liberal Party of Canada.

Secondly, these kinds of doubts were cleared up by Ignatieff's National Director of Operations Sachin Aggarwal, who ventured to do a little digging behind the claims. Here are some excerpts from a letter sent to National Director of the Liberal Party Steve MacKinnon:

"Of the 60 memberships cited, we have confirmed that only three were signed up by the Ignatieff Campaign. The remainder either pre-date the leadership contest, were signed up through competing campaigns, or took out their memberships independent of the leadership contest. The deceased member cited joined the Party with a five-year membership in 2004, prior to Michael's involvement in Etobicoke-Lakeshore." (NOTE: A file containing a line by line accounting of each membership in question was also provided to the party.)

"The complaint also attached a number of signed statements, alleging that "fees were kindly paid for by the Michael Ignatieff leadership campaign." As you will see from an examination of the membership lists, all of these memberships pre-date the leadership contest, making it impossible for this to be the case."

"Of the three memberships signed up by the Ignatieff Campaign still at issue...I personally signed up two of these members and can confirm that they paid their own membership fees. The third is a senior woman who suggests that her membership was paid by another member of her senior's club, not the Ignatieff Campaign."

What is confusing to me is why the party did not provide a copy of the official complaint to the Ignatieff campaign, which instead received it "only at the end of the day, after media filing deadlines...[from] a third party." I find that truly unacceptable, as the media was able to craft a meassage before the Ignatieff campaign had a proper chance to address the accusations.

Such abuses, if they had been true, would have bothered me, regardless of the fact that I am supporting Mr. Ignatieff. But, as a result of a little bit of basic detective work, it is now clear that these claims are were cooked up by angry individuals trying to divert attention away from questions surrounding their own campaign.

Now, with that cleared up, I wonder if Mr. Tim Marttell will feel the need to send any other emails full of insults directed towards Mr. Ignatieff and myself.

Permalink

September 26, 2006 - Stuck in a seminar all day, I didn't see Liberal Party National Director Steve MacKinnon's appearance on CTV this afternoon. But, from what has been reported back to me, his criticisms of the Conservative government's $2 billion in spending cuts focused on the way that Paul Martin's legacy of balanced surplus spending was being squandered, and how Paul Martin's budgets had eliminated the deficit.

Here's an idea, Steve - why don't you start portraying the Liberal Party of Canada's record of accomplishments as broader than the work of one man? Oh, and just in case you forgot, Mr. Martin stepped down as leader over eight months ago.

Permalink

September 26, 2006 - One more question about Joe Volpe.

How can he justify the legitimacy of his candidacy when his aides are now openly telling reporters that the only reason he is still in the race is to stick it to Michael Ignatieff? I can confidently state that stretching back to his treasonous time in the Jean Chretien caucus, through to his power hungry run as a cabinet minister in the Paul Martin era, to his present car crash of a campaign for the Liberal leadership, Joe Volpe is the most self-serving politician I have ever witnessed in the Canadian political arena.

Permalink

September 26, 2006 - Yesterday, Joe Volpe cried foul about the leadership race, and in all his infinite wisdom, decided to play the race card. So, in honour of this tactic, I offer a little mood music for today's commentary. And, for those looking for something a little more up tempo, here is an alternative.

Out of everything that made me cringe for my Liberal Party of Canada affiliations, from the ghosts on the street,:

to the airing of old, dirty laundry by figures from the past (Eddie Goldenberg, former John Turner Communications Director Ray Heard), to the Conservatives having a field day with dead people showing up on the party's membership lists, Mr. Volpe's claims of racism are by far the most embarassing.

I am absolutely furious that Volpe has the gall to suggest that he is being treated any differently because he is Italian. Funny how we never heard similar complaints from Maurizio Bevelacqua while he was still in the race. Interesting how we haven't heard any calls of discrimination from Hedy Fry, the only visible minority candidate in the race up until her departure yesterday.

Is it Volpe's Italian heritage which convinced him that taking campaign contributions from 11 year old children was a good idea? Was it Volpe's last name that propelled him to stick the knife in the back of Jean Chretien so that he could make it into cabinet? Was it Volpe's immigrant roots that made him an absolute disaster as, ironically enough, Minister of Immigration? Or is it Joe Volpe's friendship with Alfonso Gagliano, another "discriminated" against Italian-Canadian, that convinced him that paying for people's memberships was acceptable?

Racism is a very, very serious accusation to levy against anyone, nevermind an entire party establishment. And in this case, Volpe's credibility once again falls flat with these trumped of claims of being an "outsider" who allegedly "isn't Canadian enough" to be leader of this country.

Hey Joe - if you choose to marginalize yourself as an oppressed political figure, go right ahead. But do not take the most inclusive and diverse political party in this country and tarnish its name and reputation because you have run a horribly inept campaign. Let's face facts - it wouldn't matter whether you were Indian, Chinese, Persian, Russian or Spanish - because anyway you slice it, you are a disgrace.

Permalink

September 26, 2006 - When is CTV going to wake up and understand that Scott Reid NO LONGER SPEAKS ON BEHALF OF THE LIBERAL PARTY? I know for a fact that it isn't Reid who is offered up by the leader's office, but rather CTV going directly to the source. I mean, unless the topic of conversation is potential snacks for the football game (beer, popcorn) or alternative methods to keep your kids quiet and docile (beer, popcorn), what exactly is his relevance?.

Permalink

September 25, 2006 - The following quote is from Angelo Persichilli's column in this week's edition of the Hill Times:

"In fact, in this case it is worse: the Liberal Party is the only political organization that has not been able to renew the system to elect their leaders in order to improve the democracy using new technology.

They have chosen instead to stick with an ancestral system run by people who don't have the same expertise or authority of the people in charge of the organization in the second part of the last century.

So it's a convoluted system that forces the candidates to be more concerned about complicated rules, tricks, the recruitment of new people and the financing of their supporters, than they should be about preparing and presenting new public policy issues."

This notion of antiquated attitudes reigning supreme over any inkling of substance isn't a particularly groundbreaking concept, as detailed in the following commentary I wrote back on March 21, 2006:

"This column by Jim Travers is completely on point, and should have been read by every national executive member before they imposed their shortsightedness on a wayward party without an anchor or a defined future course.

The longer Liberals try and convince themselves that Stephen Harper isn't doing well, or that he is a short-lived phenomenon that will evapourate within two years, the longer this party will remain in the barren wasteland that is the opposition benches.

It is the Liberal membership that should have had the ability to choose distinct policy directions and truly figure out where things went wrong IN ADVANCE of this hasty leadership race.

It was always so easy to adopt ideas from the left and steal a policy or ten from the right to inhabit an ideological middle that was too expansive for anyone to compete against. Unfortunately, that luxury is now gone, as the Reform split that crippled the right has now been eliminated. The centre is no longer solely Liberal territory.

And so faced with the aftermath of the worst federal campaign this country has ever seen, and a leader whose dithering took away any and all definition from a political dynasty, the Liberal braintrust fell back on the path that has become the most familiar to this party - self-indulgent leadership politics.

Every Liberal should get involved to give the party a full accounting of the diversity of voices, opinions, ideas and preferences that are housed within the Liberal tent. That being said, with the way things have been set up, the extent of internal debate and inflection in the coming months will be constrained by deep discussions on whether people want to pay for their party membership by cash, cheque or credit card."

As we are once again discovering, the irregularities surrounding memberships that this party has become infamous for are now starting to rear their ugly heads once again. So, while many are criticizing this leadership race as being too long and dragged out, I still stick to the opinion that we as Liberals should have set a course for the party, and fixed the operational mechanisms already in place, before engaging in such a contest.

Let's look at the alternative - we elect our leader in December, and then head to the polls within two to three months. And in my usual tradition of calling a spade a spade, I think that whomever takes over the reins of this party will encounter a daunting task in counteracting a Tory government that from the point of view of the general public, hasn't done too badly.

Stories of membership fraud or dirty behind the scenes dealing only serve to reinforce the negative perception of the Liberal brand that became entrenched the day that Paul Martin went on his "madder than hell" sponsorship media blitz.

What is the Liberal party's raison d'etre? I've been listening intently, and am not entirely sure if I've got a satisfactory answer thus far.

Permalink

September 25, 2006 - I am participating in a week-long grant writing seminar this week, and must be there quite early on this first day. So, only a quick thought for today.

Unlike the last leadership race, where it was inevitable that Paul Martin would win and subsequently I would leave the party (which I did temporarily), no matter who is victorious this time around, I will work my tail off to make sure that the Liberal Party of Canada returns to its past electoral glory.

That being said, I am baffled by one point made in this story from the Toronto Star this morning. Referencing a EKOS Research poll, it is stated that:

"[Michael] Ignatieff and [Bob] Rae ranked about equally on the issue of "winnability" in a general election. The poll shows Ignatieff and Rae tied at 25 per cent as top choice for leader of those surveyed, with [Stéphane] Dion garnering 17 per cent and [Gerard] Kennedy, 16 per cent."

I ask this honestly, with befuddlement rather than attack at the forefront of my mind: How can people believe that Rae will be so electable for this party? From my point of view, I can't help but entirely agree with the following sentence from this Ottawa Sun article over the weekend:

"The Tories must be praying to God you get elected Liberal leader. Your political baggage in Ontario and your piano playing on the hustings will be manna from heaven for them."

I ask readers to please send in their thoughts and responses to my query, and in the process, enlighten me. Because at this point, I really cannot see the electoral appeal of Mr. Rae as a viable alternative to the current Tory juggernaut.

Permalink

September 24, 2006 - I received a call from the Strategic Counsel about a week and a half ago, questioning me as a Liberal member who my loyalties lay with in the leadership race. I refused to answer, not knowing how they could have possibly got my personal information, and unaware of who had hired them on.

Well, this story shines a little light onto the responsible parties. I am furious that certain candidates, and namely the Stéphane Dion campaign led by Mark Marissen, could act so non-chalantly in externally distributing this kind of information to third parties. I am planning on calling the national office to register a complaint, because quite frankly, which party I choose to support is not the kind of information that should be tossed around like a political football.

Permalink

September 22, 2006 - Here are the first Libeal leadership delegate results published anywhere (well, at least that I have seen thus far).

The Aboriginal People's Commission here in British Columbia had 43 spots up for grabs, and here is the breakdown: 12 Bob Rae delegates, 11 Michael Ignatieff delegates, 5 Gerard Kennedy delegates, 5 Undeclared delegates, 3 Ken Dryden delegates, and, 3 Stéphane Dion delegates. As there were only 39 nominations for 42 spots, 3 spaces will go unoccupied.

All positions were acclaimed. The Ignatieff showing was better than expected, while from what I am told, with the amount of rumoured potential Aboriginal Commission delegates signed up by Rae's team, it is surprising he didn't dominate the process. Also, I am shocked to see that Mr. Dion was only able to secure 3 spots, considering how campaign manager Mark Marissen has essentially been at the helm of the party out here for nearly a decade, as well as the fact that one of Paul Martin's few significant achievements was the Kelowna Accord.

Speaking of the Dion team, no one from the party office, nor LPCBC president Jamie Elmhirst, has got back to me with an answer detailing why exactly Dion's BC Campaign Coordinator Meghan Pritchard was using the photocopier at the LPCBC offices after the Form 6 deadline last Friday. Their silence comes as no surprise to me, however - just part of the Liberal political landscape in British Columbia.

Permalink

September 22, 2006 - Back in Vancouver, with lots of ground to cover:

• One thing you have to say about Gerard Kennedy - he is a loyal politician, both to the people he serves, and the colleagues he works with. As I detailed on Tuesday, back in 1999, I encountered another leadership candidate from the 1996 Ontario provincial race (Joe Cordiano) who relentlessly trashed his own leader to me in a meeting where at the time I was a complete stranger. I was around at the 1999 Ontario Liberal convention, and worked on Greg Sorbara's successful campaign to become party president. Therefore, I was constantly being confronted by the individuals who were determined to undermine everything Mr. McGuinty did after losing a summer election. And, I can safely say that Kennedy never stabbed Dalton McGuinty in the back, and in fact, always stood side by side with the leader, through thick and thin. That is a quality that deserves respect (Ed. Note: Funnily enough, I do find similarity between Mr. Kennedy's loyalty to McGuinty and my vocal opposition to Paul Martin - we were both right, and many years ahead of the curve).

UPDATE: To those who have emailed and called over the past few days, let me make something perfectly clear - I still support Michael Ignatieff for leader...uneqivocally, and until the end. This does not preclude me from talking about some of the positive qualities of other candidates.

• The epitomy of both irony and sanctimony is represented in Sid Ryan, president of CUPE Ontario, making this kind of a statement:

"It is a disservice to Canadians to have healthy dialogue and discussion shut down by the banal rantings of a handful of ideologues."

This is coming from a man who manipulated a CUPE convention to pass a policy resolution that "agreed to support an "international campaign of boycott, divestment and sanctions" because of the "apartheid-like practices of the Israeli state." He also advanced brought forth the notion of renaming the Israeli security fence the "Israeli Apartheid Wall."

Sorry, but using the shame of South Africa's past to paint present-day Israel with the same racist foundation sounds a lot like the "banal rantings of a handful of ideologues" to me. No word yet on whether Ryan and his CUPE brethren are working on having the classification of "suicide-bomber" changed to "illuminated martyr."

• Yesterday's Vaughn Palmer column in the Vancouver Sun (unfortunately behind a subscription wall online) should be required reading for everyone with an opinion on the recently signed softwood lumber deal.

Now I have been one who has struggled with the issue, waivering between the positions of being furious that the Americans are keeping $1 billion of our lumber producers money, while also contemplating the possibility that $4 billion in hand is better than pie in the sky legal interpretations. I think that Mr. Palmer, however, has tipped the balance in my dilemma of opinion.

Readers should check out the BC Ministry of Finance's first quarterly report of the year, and more specifically, pages 14-16 to really understand all the unknowns that these companies still face. Bottom line? Well, let's leave it to Mr. Palmer to clear that up:

"B.C. lumber producers could find themselves paying more in taxes than they do now under the punitive combination imposed by the Americans."

With tariffs now being replaced by border taxes contingent on the fluctuating price of lumber, this potential scenario applies equally across the country - there are many loopholes in this agreement that could severely punish lumber producers for factors outside of their control.

I am now beginning to think that because the Conservatives were in such a rush to complete a deal so that politically they could tell voters "the Liberals couldn't do it, but we did," in the process the concept of shrewd negotiating was thrown out the window.

• For the sake of our party, and what is left of your reputation, resign Joe...please.

• Truth be told, I have always had a measure of respect for Rona Ambrose. She started out as a young presence in the House, which I am able to use as inspiration, and always seemed quick on her feet and ready for that next step of her political career.

That is of course, until she made it into cabinet.

With Canada supposed to be taking the lead in the next round of Kyoto negotiations (due to the fact that we hosted the 2005 conference in Montreal), this kind of indifference is troubling. Talk is cheap, and much like the rumoured AIDS prevention/treatment funding that was promised months back at the International HIV/AIDS conference in Toronto, the "Made In Canada" environmental plan still means little to anyone - nothing has been released, nothing has been defined. This isn't an "Oh I can't attend, but I'm using the wonders of video conferencing technology to make due" type of job, Ms. Ambrose, and thus far, that has been the attitude that you have espoused from the day you took over your portfolio.

It is time to let specifics communicate the message of "Canada's New Goverment." Otherwise, I can see the Conservatives finding some more scientific scapegoats to fire along the way.

• And finally, congratulations to my old buddy Adam Radwanski, who is moving on from his four year stint as national columnist, editorial board member, and music extrordinaire at the National Post, and joining Macleans to become Managing Editor for the online side of the publication. Adam is a success story of how a young up and comer with a little ingenuity and drive (he first started by creating his own political news online magazine many moons ago) can take you as far as you want to go. All the best, my friend.

That's it for now, but I will definitely be back with some more later in the day.

Permalink



Corporate Communications	Media Promotions	Professional Writing	Policy & Political Consultation	Public Relations
About TDH Archived Commentaries Past Projects FAQ Links Contact	September, 2006 Archives September 30, 2006 - Walking down Burrard St. to the Michael Ignatieff war room for British Columbia, only to be stopped by a huge group of people and police. I wondered...could it be Bob Rae supporters trying to make a statement of protest? Was it Joe Volpe supporters coming back to life? Nope - only in Vancouver would you have the Ignatieff building surrounded by the filming of: Permalink September 30, 2006 - Man, this kind of a decision just reeks of the same kind of politics that this party is supposed to be getting away from. Gerard Kennedy, you're better than that...don't allow one of Raymond Chan's typical political cattle calls cheapen your thus far clean and above board campaign. Permalink September 29, 2006 - I notice that many have written long diatribes extolling the virtues of their respective candidates. I am not going to do that today, and instead will wait until Monday to offer some in-depth thoughts and analysis about where the party is heading after the results of this weekend. I will say this, though...in terms of party rebirth, turning around our current electoral prospects, fresh and exciting policy ideas, and a new way of doing politics (both internally and externally), I am unequivocally convinced that Michael Ignatieff is the best man to lead the Liberal Party of Canada. I just want every eligible voting member to give grave consideration to the fact that we are in opposition, and without some major changes, our prospects for the future aren't very promising. I don't know about everyone else, but I want to win now, not five years down the road. I will be back throughout the weekend with updates and interesting bits of information. Permalink September 29, 2006 - Not as a Liberal, nor as a partisan, but simply as a Canadian, I am so proud of this tough and principled stand taken by Prime Minister Stephen Harper at the Francophonie Summit. Both sides suffered in this conflict, and Canada was the only country that opposed the original resolution in consideration of this fact. This is what Harper said about his position: "I hope we can all recognize the suffering of humans - men and women - and not just suffering based on people's nationality." Very hard to argue with a statement that makes so much sense. Permalink September 29, 2006 - I can confirm (do not ask how) that the strategy memo written by Doug Finley was indeed real, and distributed internally to several ministerial offices in Ottawa - meaning that many Tory staff members had access to it. One of these staffers took it to read over lunch in a shopping mall food court last week, and left it behind after he was done. From what I have been able to determine, this was done by accident, because if there was indeed an intention to leak it, there are far more effective ways to ensure that it gets into the hands of those that can turn it into a national headline. Every Liberal should really take a read of John Ivison's brilliant column from this morning's National Post, and really consider the content before voting this weekend. Go talk to any Conservative (on the payroll or not), and ask them privately who they would rather face off against in an election - Michael Ignatieff or Bob Rae. I am confident that the answers will be pretty unified. Permalink September 29, 2006 - With the amount of bad hockey analogies that come out of the mouth of Ken Dryden: "Ken Dryden - nice guy, good goalie, really admire all he's done - can't win. Who says? Doesn't have the "killer instinct." Politics is a rough sport, you know. Gotta go into the corners with your elbows up. Really? Do you know what going into the corners is really about? It's to get the puck! Go in with your elbows up, you're off for two minutes - and they get it. The best, the best, know what the prize is, then go after it, get it, then do something with it. Just like those who are the best at politics." (taken from a Dryden campaign email I just received) "I have a goalie's mentality. And on a team, as you know, there are two goalies. But only one plays at a time. And the problem for the goalie who isn't playing, is that the goalie who is playing, if he plays well enough, the other goalie may never see the ice again. And you never want to leave the ice. You never want to leave the ice. You never want to leave the ice. You want to stay on the ice. And find those answers on the ice. And stay there. And keep staying there. And the longer you're not there, the longer you're not going to be there. We need to win. That's what holds all of this together." (delivered in a Victoria speech back in March) I'm surprised that he doesn't show up to his campaign events like this: The nostalgia factor alone might be enough to double his delegate count. Permalink September 28, 2006 - Marsha Akman, the woman behind the StopIggy website, all but outted herself back in April, making the search that I and many others went on, quite unnecessary: "Standing in the crowded lobby of a local hotel, Marsha Akman was like a kid on a shopping spree. "We have a meeting right now with Stephane Dion, then we're meeting Carolyn Bennett at 12, then we're going to be meeting (Ken) Dryden afterwards," said Akman, a Liberal activist in the riding of Mount Royal and a member of the party's women's commission. "We're going to start talking issues and get a feel for how they are and go from there." Like many members of the federal party's Quebec wing, Akman does not yet know who will get her vote when Liberals meet in early December in Montreal to choose their next leader. However, she has already scratched one candidate off her list. "It's anybody but Ignatieff," said Akman, sporting two "Stop Iggy" stickers on her shirt to protest what she sees as Michael Ignatieff's right-wing views." Permalink September 28, 2006 - Stéphane Dion never seemed to explain how exactly Ms. Johanne Gelinas' report helps his campaign, although he is obviously still enamoured with his flawed Project Green plan, and offered this statement to the television audience: "I want to do less, I want to do more, and that is why I am running to become Prime Minister of Canada." (paraphrased, bien sur) Permalink September 28, 2006 - Stéphane Dion is coming on Don Newman's Politics program to explain why criticism of the Liberals' environmental record helps his campaign. Huh? Stay tuned... Permalink September 28, 2006 - Watching George W. Bush try to play peacemaker between Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf and Afghan President Hamid Karzai yesterday made me wonder - why didn't he use this tact to try and divert attention away from Iraq a long time ago? Osama Bin Laden is in Pakistan, Afghanistan is where America's 9/11 reaction began, there have been 2,700 American casualties in the quagmire that is Iraq, and the Republicans are likely to take a huge hit in the mid-term elections as as result. This misguided emphasis of the Bush administration is a huge tactical error that is being corrected far too late to achieve any substantial political advantage. I see that Jason Cherniak is trumpeting the fact that David Suzuki is enthusiastic about politicians adopting his foundation's environmental recommendations. To be fair, Michael Ignatieff's use of the work of Simon Fraser University professor Mark Jaccard, the co-author of "The Morning After: Optimal Greenhouse Gas Polices for Canada's Kyoto Obligations and Beyond" published by the C.D. Howe Institute in 2004, received much the same kind of appreciation. But my question to Jason is this: why was it so hard for the Stéphane Dion campaign to just admit that is what happened, instead of claiming that there was some kind of co-authorship? Truth be told, as the environmental agenda becomes more prominent, politicians are going to have to increasingly rely on the work of scientists and environmentalists towards developing sound policy. But why lie about this fact, when it isn't something that needs to be hidden? To all Liberal Party of Canada members - when it comes to winnability, isn't the candidate who instils the most fear in our competition someone worthy of our support? Finally, outside of my friend Warren Kinsella, is there anyone who roasts the media as well as Jon Stewart? I've never had such an appreciation for Wolf Blitzer as I did after watching this on The Daily Show last night. Bloody hilarious. That's all for now...back later in the day. Permalink September 27, 2006 - As mentioned, I have been tagged by BCer In Toronto to talk about 5 things feminism has done for me. The whole idea started over at Progressive Bloggers in response to the Tory cuts to Status of Women Canada. So, without further ado, here are my answers: 1) Feminism has taught me that women are most definitely the stronger sex. Men will never have the poise, fortitude and endurance that our female counterparts innately possess. 2) Feminism has taught me that much of the plight that women face across the globe is caused by males. I don't know if gender equality will ever exist, but I do know that the steps needed to be taken towards that lofty goal most often reside within the capability of men who choose not to act. 3) Feminism has taught me how hard women have to battle to achieve that which we as men take for granted. And, while I will never fully understand the obstacles and barriers that women must encounter, I have become aware as to how much respect they deserve for overcoming them, one after another. 4) Feminism has taught me that the way in which a man treats a women is a good indication of the type of character that person is overall. Respect is a quality that is much broader then petty differentiation between the sexes. 5) Feminism has taught me that women have so much to offer the realm of politics, and that we really need to get to a 50/50 split in Canada, both in terms of seat distribution and cabinet representation. There you go...short and sweet. I officially tag: exceptforonething.blogspot.com Warren Kinsella Nicole Martel Jason Morris Derek Raymaker Permalink September 27, 2006 - A few quick points to make for the afternoon: • To answer those of you who asked why I would devote any space to addressing the Belinda Stronach/Tie Domi affair, it is simple: my interest is not in the gossip, but rather the different ways in which women and men are treated within the political realm. In consideration of the Conservative budget cuts to Status of Women Canada, the online tag game that I have yet to respond to on the impact that feminism has had on me (something that I will do later on today), and the ideas and sentiments expressed in this article, I think that the issues that I raised in the commentary below are timely and relevant. • It is true that Joe Volpe is not the first person within the Liberal party to raise concerns and complaints about racism being entrenched in the party apparatus (namely the Chair of the Standing Committee on Multiculturalism Mark Persaud). There are elements of the way that we operate that do seem to validate certain aspects of these complaints. Unfortunately for Mr. Volpe, however, none of them seem to apply to his experience and treatment through his time as an elected official. • I am very curious as to the reactions from the Canadian military leadership in light of Paul Martin's comments on the mission in Afghanistan. Legitimately, I wonder if they believe that the 3-D approach, which defined the original intent of our country's efforts in the region, is no longer being adhered to. • Everyone must go and read Ted Betts' amazing summary of Michael Ignatieff's just released sustainable development plan. I'm am blown away by the level of expertise that Mr. Ignatieff has been able to consult with in preparing his environmental platform planks, and firmly believe that this is one of the strongest courses of action ever proposed in the realm of Canadian environmental stewardship. Off again to my seminar at SFU. I will be back with my response to the feminism tag game in the early evening. Permalink September 27, 2006 - I saw Belinda Stronach's appearance on CTV yesterday, and have one main comment. There was an assertion made that her status as a high profile female public figure means that people often adopt free reign in delving into her private life. Now, while I sympathize with public office holders who have their personal and family affairs become fodder for gossip columns and the mainstream media (these days, the distinction between the two is difficult to rationalize), I also believe that whether you are male or female, in the spotlight or outside of it, spending so much time with a married individual is asking for negative attention (particularly at some of the most high profile media events this country has to offer). Belinda and Tie Domi have been spotted all over Toronto, in Calgary and in New York together, and that kind of a relationship seems to go beyond the parameters of simply a close friendship. Regardless, Domi has a family, and as a spouse, I can see how Leanne Domi has every right to be upset. It is 150% true that females are treated unfairly within politics, and have to work twice as hard to achieve the same accomplishments as their male counterparts. But in this situation, I find it very hard to feel sympathy for Ms. Stronach, whose conduct seems to warrant the kind of reaction she has received. I would be very curious as to the opinions of TDH readers, and whether they think that my assessment is correct or not. Permalink September 27, 2006 - I received a couple of emails yesterday accusing me of turning a blind eye to the complaint filed against Michael Ignatieff's campaign that the memberships of 60 people had not been paid for by the individuals. I was told that it was "easy for you to sling mud at other campaigns as opposed to turning the attention onto yourself and your associates." Not true, and here is why. First, yesterday's rants were largely directed towards Joe Volpe's unjustified use of racism to tarnish the reputation of the Liberal Party of Canada. Secondly, these kinds of doubts were cleared up by Ignatieff's National Director of Operations Sachin Aggarwal, who ventured to do a little digging behind the claims. Here are some excerpts from a letter sent to National Director of the Liberal Party Steve MacKinnon: "Of the 60 memberships cited, we have confirmed that only three were signed up by the Ignatieff Campaign. The remainder either pre-date the leadership contest, were signed up through competing campaigns, or took out their memberships independent of the leadership contest. The deceased member cited joined the Party with a five-year membership in 2004, prior to Michael's involvement in Etobicoke-Lakeshore." (NOTE: A file containing a line by line accounting of each membership in question was also provided to the party.) "The complaint also attached a number of signed statements, alleging that "fees were kindly paid for by the Michael Ignatieff leadership campaign." As you will see from an examination of the membership lists, all of these memberships pre-date the leadership contest, making it impossible for this to be the case." "Of the three memberships signed up by the Ignatieff Campaign still at issue...I personally signed up two of these members and can confirm that they paid their own membership fees. The third is a senior woman who suggests that her membership was paid by another member of her senior's club, not the Ignatieff Campaign." What is confusing to me is why the party did not provide a copy of the official complaint to the Ignatieff campaign, which instead received it "only at the end of the day, after media filing deadlines...[from] a third party." I find that truly unacceptable, as the media was able to craft a meassage before the Ignatieff campaign had a proper chance to address the accusations. Such abuses, if they had been true, would have bothered me, regardless of the fact that I am supporting Mr. Ignatieff. But, as a result of a little bit of basic detective work, it is now clear that these claims are were cooked up by angry individuals trying to divert attention away from questions surrounding their own campaign. Now, with that cleared up, I wonder if Mr. Tim Marttell will feel the need to send any other emails full of insults directed towards Mr. Ignatieff and myself. Permalink September 26, 2006 - Stuck in a seminar all day, I didn't see Liberal Party National Director Steve MacKinnon's appearance on CTV this afternoon. But, from what has been reported back to me, his criticisms of the Conservative government's $2 billion in spending cuts focused on the way that Paul Martin's legacy of balanced surplus spending was being squandered, and how Paul Martin's budgets had eliminated the deficit. Here's an idea, Steve - why don't you start portraying the Liberal Party of Canada's record of accomplishments as broader than the work of one man? Oh, and just in case you forgot, Mr. Martin stepped down as leader over eight months ago. Permalink September 26, 2006 - One more question about Joe Volpe. How can he justify the legitimacy of his candidacy when his aides are now openly telling reporters that the only reason he is still in the race is to stick it to Michael Ignatieff? I can confidently state that stretching back to his treasonous time in the Jean Chretien caucus, through to his power hungry run as a cabinet minister in the Paul Martin era, to his present car crash of a campaign for the Liberal leadership, Joe Volpe is the most self-serving politician I have ever witnessed in the Canadian political arena. Permalink September 26, 2006 - Yesterday, Joe Volpe cried foul about the leadership race, and in all his infinite wisdom, decided to play the race card. So, in honour of this tactic, I offer a little mood music for today's commentary. And, for those looking for something a little more up tempo, here is an alternative. Out of everything that made me cringe for my Liberal Party of Canada affiliations, from the ghosts on the street,: to the airing of old, dirty laundry by figures from the past (Eddie Goldenberg, former John Turner Communications Director Ray Heard), to the Conservatives having a field day with dead people showing up on the party's membership lists, Mr. Volpe's claims of racism are by far the most embarassing. I am absolutely furious that Volpe has the gall to suggest that he is being treated any differently because he is Italian. Funny how we never heard similar complaints from Maurizio Bevelacqua while he was still in the race. Interesting how we haven't heard any calls of discrimination from Hedy Fry, the only visible minority candidate in the race up until her departure yesterday. Is it Volpe's Italian heritage which convinced him that taking campaign contributions from 11 year old children was a good idea? Was it Volpe's last name that propelled him to stick the knife in the back of Jean Chretien so that he could make it into cabinet? Was it Volpe's immigrant roots that made him an absolute disaster as, ironically enough, Minister of Immigration? Or is it Joe Volpe's friendship with Alfonso Gagliano, another "discriminated" against Italian-Canadian, that convinced him that paying for people's memberships was acceptable? Racism is a very, very serious accusation to levy against anyone, nevermind an entire party establishment. And in this case, Volpe's credibility once again falls flat with these trumped of claims of being an "outsider" who allegedly "isn't Canadian enough" to be leader of this country. Hey Joe - if you choose to marginalize yourself as an oppressed political figure, go right ahead. But do not take the most inclusive and diverse political party in this country and tarnish its name and reputation because you have run a horribly inept campaign. Let's face facts - it wouldn't matter whether you were Indian, Chinese, Persian, Russian or Spanish - because anyway you slice it, you are a disgrace. Permalink September 26, 2006 - When is CTV going to wake up and understand that Scott Reid NO LONGER SPEAKS ON BEHALF OF THE LIBERAL PARTY? I know for a fact that it isn't Reid who is offered up by the leader's office, but rather CTV going directly to the source. I mean, unless the topic of conversation is potential snacks for the football game (beer, popcorn) or alternative methods to keep your kids quiet and docile (beer, popcorn), what exactly is his relevance?. Permalink September 25, 2006 - The following quote is from Angelo Persichilli's column in this week's edition of the Hill Times: "In fact, in this case it is worse: the Liberal Party is the only political organization that has not been able to renew the system to elect their leaders in order to improve the democracy using new technology. They have chosen instead to stick with an ancestral system run by people who don't have the same expertise or authority of the people in charge of the organization in the second part of the last century. So it's a convoluted system that forces the candidates to be more concerned about complicated rules, tricks, the recruitment of new people and the financing of their supporters, than they should be about preparing and presenting new public policy issues." This notion of antiquated attitudes reigning supreme over any inkling of substance isn't a particularly groundbreaking concept, as detailed in the following commentary I wrote back on March 21, 2006: "This column by Jim Travers is completely on point, and should have been read by every national executive member before they imposed their shortsightedness on a wayward party without an anchor or a defined future course. The longer Liberals try and convince themselves that Stephen Harper isn't doing well, or that he is a short-lived phenomenon that will evapourate within two years, the longer this party will remain in the barren wasteland that is the opposition benches. It is the Liberal membership that should have had the ability to choose distinct policy directions and truly figure out where things went wrong IN ADVANCE of this hasty leadership race. It was always so easy to adopt ideas from the left and steal a policy or ten from the right to inhabit an ideological middle that was too expansive for anyone to compete against. Unfortunately, that luxury is now gone, as the Reform split that crippled the right has now been eliminated. The centre is no longer solely Liberal territory. And so faced with the aftermath of the worst federal campaign this country has ever seen, and a leader whose dithering took away any and all definition from a political dynasty, the Liberal braintrust fell back on the path that has become the most familiar to this party - self-indulgent leadership politics. Every Liberal should get involved to give the party a full accounting of the diversity of voices, opinions, ideas and preferences that are housed within the Liberal tent. That being said, with the way things have been set up, the extent of internal debate and inflection in the coming months will be constrained by deep discussions on whether people want to pay for their party membership by cash, cheque or credit card." As we are once again discovering, the irregularities surrounding memberships that this party has become infamous for are now starting to rear their ugly heads once again. So, while many are criticizing this leadership race as being too long and dragged out, I still stick to the opinion that we as Liberals should have set a course for the party, and fixed the operational mechanisms already in place, before engaging in such a contest. Let's look at the alternative - we elect our leader in December, and then head to the polls within two to three months. And in my usual tradition of calling a spade a spade, I think that whomever takes over the reins of this party will encounter a daunting task in counteracting a Tory government that from the point of view of the general public, hasn't done too badly. Stories of membership fraud or dirty behind the scenes dealing only serve to reinforce the negative perception of the Liberal brand that became entrenched the day that Paul Martin went on his "madder than hell" sponsorship media blitz. What is the Liberal party's raison d'etre? I've been listening intently, and am not entirely sure if I've got a satisfactory answer thus far. Permalink September 25, 2006 - I am participating in a week-long grant writing seminar this week, and must be there quite early on this first day. So, only a quick thought for today. Unlike the last leadership race, where it was inevitable that Paul Martin would win and subsequently I would leave the party (which I did temporarily), no matter who is victorious this time around, I will work my tail off to make sure that the Liberal Party of Canada returns to its past electoral glory. That being said, I am baffled by one point made in this story from the Toronto Star this morning. Referencing a EKOS Research poll, it is stated that: "[Michael] Ignatieff and [Bob] Rae ranked about equally on the issue of "winnability" in a general election. The poll shows Ignatieff and Rae tied at 25 per cent as top choice for leader of those surveyed, with [Stéphane] Dion garnering 17 per cent and [Gerard] Kennedy, 16 per cent." I ask this honestly, with befuddlement rather than attack at the forefront of my mind: How can people believe that Rae will be so electable for this party? From my point of view, I can't help but entirely agree with the following sentence from this Ottawa Sun article over the weekend: "The Tories must be praying to God you get elected Liberal leader. Your political baggage in Ontario and your piano playing on the hustings will be manna from heaven for them." I ask readers to please send in their thoughts and responses to my query, and in the process, enlighten me. Because at this point, I really cannot see the electoral appeal of Mr. Rae as a viable alternative to the current Tory juggernaut. Permalink September 24, 2006 - I received a call from the Strategic Counsel about a week and a half ago, questioning me as a Liberal member who my loyalties lay with in the leadership race. I refused to answer, not knowing how they could have possibly got my personal information, and unaware of who had hired them on. Well, this story shines a little light onto the responsible parties. I am furious that certain candidates, and namely the Stéphane Dion campaign led by Mark Marissen, could act so non-chalantly in externally distributing this kind of information to third parties. I am planning on calling the national office to register a complaint, because quite frankly, which party I choose to support is not the kind of information that should be tossed around like a political football. Permalink September 22, 2006 - Here are the first Libeal leadership delegate results published anywhere (well, at least that I have seen thus far). The Aboriginal People's Commission here in British Columbia had 43 spots up for grabs, and here is the breakdown: 12 Bob Rae delegates, 11 Michael Ignatieff delegates, 5 Gerard Kennedy delegates, 5 Undeclared delegates, 3 Ken Dryden delegates, and, 3 Stéphane Dion delegates. As there were only 39 nominations for 42 spots, 3 spaces will go unoccupied. All positions were acclaimed. The Ignatieff showing was better than expected, while from what I am told, with the amount of rumoured potential Aboriginal Commission delegates signed up by Rae's team, it is surprising he didn't dominate the process. Also, I am shocked to see that Mr. Dion was only able to secure 3 spots, considering how campaign manager Mark Marissen has essentially been at the helm of the party out here for nearly a decade, as well as the fact that one of Paul Martin's few significant achievements was the Kelowna Accord. Speaking of the Dion team, no one from the party office, nor LPCBC president Jamie Elmhirst, has got back to me with an answer detailing why exactly Dion's BC Campaign Coordinator Meghan Pritchard was using the photocopier at the LPCBC offices after the Form 6 deadline last Friday. Their silence comes as no surprise to me, however - just part of the Liberal political landscape in British Columbia. Permalink September 22, 2006 - Back in Vancouver, with lots of ground to cover: • One thing you have to say about Gerard Kennedy - he is a loyal politician, both to the people he serves, and the colleagues he works with. As I detailed on Tuesday, back in 1999, I encountered another leadership candidate from the 1996 Ontario provincial race (Joe Cordiano) who relentlessly trashed his own leader to me in a meeting where at the time I was a complete stranger. I was around at the 1999 Ontario Liberal convention, and worked on Greg Sorbara's successful campaign to become party president. Therefore, I was constantly being confronted by the individuals who were determined to undermine everything Mr. McGuinty did after losing a summer election. And, I can safely say that Kennedy never stabbed Dalton McGuinty in the back, and in fact, always stood side by side with the leader, through thick and thin. That is a quality that deserves respect (Ed. Note: Funnily enough, I do find similarity between Mr. Kennedy's loyalty to McGuinty and my vocal opposition to Paul Martin - we were both right, and many years ahead of the curve). UPDATE: To those who have emailed and called over the past few days, let me make something perfectly clear - I still support Michael Ignatieff for leader...uneqivocally, and until the end. This does not preclude me from talking about some of the positive qualities of other candidates. • The epitomy of both irony and sanctimony is represented in Sid Ryan, president of CUPE Ontario, making this kind of a statement: "It is a disservice to Canadians to have healthy dialogue and discussion shut down by the banal rantings of a handful of ideologues." This is coming from a man who manipulated a CUPE convention to pass a policy resolution that "agreed to support an "international campaign of boycott, divestment and sanctions" because of the "apartheid-like practices of the Israeli state." He also advanced brought forth the notion of renaming the Israeli security fence the "Israeli Apartheid Wall." Sorry, but using the shame of South Africa's past to paint present-day Israel with the same racist foundation sounds a lot like the "banal rantings of a handful of ideologues" to me. No word yet on whether Ryan and his CUPE brethren are working on having the classification of "suicide-bomber" changed to "illuminated martyr." • Yesterday's Vaughn Palmer column in the Vancouver Sun (unfortunately behind a subscription wall online) should be required reading for everyone with an opinion on the recently signed softwood lumber deal. Now I have been one who has struggled with the issue, waivering between the positions of being furious that the Americans are keeping $1 billion of our lumber producers money, while also contemplating the possibility that $4 billion in hand is better than pie in the sky legal interpretations. I think that Mr. Palmer, however, has tipped the balance in my dilemma of opinion. Readers should check out the BC Ministry of Finance's first quarterly report of the year, and more specifically, pages 14-16 to really understand all the unknowns that these companies still face. Bottom line? Well, let's leave it to Mr. Palmer to clear that up: "B.C. lumber producers could find themselves paying more in taxes than they do now under the punitive combination imposed by the Americans." With tariffs now being replaced by border taxes contingent on the fluctuating price of lumber, this potential scenario applies equally across the country - there are many loopholes in this agreement that could severely punish lumber producers for factors outside of their control. I am now beginning to think that because the Conservatives were in such a rush to complete a deal so that politically they could tell voters "the Liberals couldn't do it, but we did," in the process the concept of shrewd negotiating was thrown out the window. • For the sake of our party, and what is left of your reputation, resign Joe...please. • Truth be told, I have always had a measure of respect for Rona Ambrose. She started out as a young presence in the House, which I am able to use as inspiration, and always seemed quick on her feet and ready for that next step of her political career. That is of course, until she made it into cabinet. With Canada supposed to be taking the lead in the next round of Kyoto negotiations (due to the fact that we hosted the 2005 conference in Montreal), this kind of indifference is troubling. Talk is cheap, and much like the rumoured AIDS prevention/treatment funding that was promised months back at the International HIV/AIDS conference in Toronto, the "Made In Canada" environmental plan still means little to anyone - nothing has been released, nothing has been defined. This isn't an "Oh I can't attend, but I'm using the wonders of video conferencing technology to make due" type of job, Ms. Ambrose, and thus far, that has been the attitude that you have espoused from the day you took over your portfolio. It is time to let specifics communicate the message of "Canada's New Goverment." Otherwise, I can see the Conservatives finding some more scientific scapegoats to fire along the way. • And finally, congratulations to my old buddy Adam Radwanski, who is moving on from his four year stint as national columnist, editorial board member, and music extrordinaire at the National Post, and joining Macleans to become Managing Editor for the online side of the publication. Adam is a success story of how a young up and comer with a little ingenuity and drive (he first started by creating his own political news online magazine many moons ago) can take you as far as you want to go. All the best, my friend. That's it for now, but I will definitely be back with some more later in the day. Permalink