Dear Liberal Party, wtf happened? (Part 2 of 2)

Continued from Part I

After our October 2008 election loss, Dion announced that he'd stay on as Interim Leader until the next Liberal leadership convention.  This (to me) meant that he'd be taking a step back and handing the party over to the next guy.

In the November 2008 fiscal update, Flaherty (inexplicably) included the subsidy removal provision amongst other proposals.  This led to Dion, Layton, and Duceppe teaming up to form the coalition.  This also led to me losing any respect I had left for Dion.  I'm familiar with all of the arguments we like to make when our party defends the coalition.  They're all bunk, and I think most of us know that even if we don't admit it.

The coalition claimed that this was more about about the lack of stimulus and the plan to ban public service strikes, and less about the elimination of political party subsidies.  I didn't believe them.  I think it was only about the subsidies (which I'll write about later) and the rest was just fluff.

The coalition was to be between the NDP and the Liberals, with the BQ providing votes only on confidence motions.  There was a lot of hemming and hawing about how the separatists weren't really in the coalition.  For people (like myself) who despise the Bloc, this wasn't good enough.  Even if we were to put that issue aside, why were we even teaming up with the NDP?  Memo to party leaders - A lot of grits don't like the NDP, and some of us even hate them.

I know the coalition was legal, but I didn't consider it to be legitimate.  There's a big difference.  Canadians had just unequivocally rejected Stephane Dion, but here he was trying to install himself as Prime Minister.  The pundits that ragged on the electorate for not understanding our parliamentary system were focusing their attention in the wrong place.  A lot of people that understood that this was legal still didn't support it.

For all Liberals who claimed to be taking a principled stand for parliamentary democracy, let's be honest.  If the Liberals had won more seats than the Conservatives in that election and if Harper had tried pulling the same shenanigans, you would be up in arms protesting the hijacking of democracy.  I know it, you know it, and all of Canada knows it.  Stop pretending this was kosher, it wasn't fooling anyone then and it isn't fooling anyone now.

So we've gone from Chretien's 3 consecutive majorities to Mr. Dithers' minority to the Sponsorship Scandal (our loss of power) to the Green Sh*t (our trouncing) to the Coalition (a shameful moment) to Election Iggy (worrysome) to Calm Iggy (less worrysome).   Iggy's recent shift away from 'Election Now!' mode is reassuring.  Here's hoping he lasts long enough to build the party back into fighting shape.

Dear Liberal Party, wtf happened? (Part 1 of 2)

My family immigrated to Canada in the summer of 1995 when I was 12.  We have been Liberal party stalwarts ever since (with one notable exception, which I'll get to).  The 2000 federal election was the first that we were eligible to vote in (after having obtained citizenship).  My parents are big fans of Chretien, and they proudly voted Liberal.  We didn't follow politics too closely, so we were largely unaware of the shenanigans that led to Chretien's retirement and Martin's prime ministership.  We were lukewarm on Martin, but the Liberal party got our vote once again in 2004.

After the Gomery report's release, we were quite disgusted, so we voted NDP in 2006 (the Conservatives weren't even considered).  I was young, stupid, and a university student; so I became an NDP member.  I even campaigned for the NDP candidate in my riding (Etobicoke-Lakeshore, a Liberal stronghold and is currently Iggy's riding).

It didn't take long for me to become disappointed with Layton and disillusioned with the NDP.  My political philosophy was slowly edging right-wards.  Martin was turfed, and a Liberal Party leadership convention was to be held.  Filled with excitement, I returned to the party and became a member. 

The candidates were all interesting, but my support would go to either Ignatieff or Dion.  Iggy was my favourite until his support for Harper's Quebecois resolution.  Although Dion also supported this resolution, I took another look at him.  His excellent credentials on the unity file and his decent performance as environment minister were noteworthy.  I decided on Dion, but didn't think he had a snowball's chance in hell.

The convention was held almost two years ago (I remember watching the results during my birthday party).  Dion's surprise victory seemed like a great birthday present (in hindsight, I couldn't have been more wrong).  I was hoping for a policy convention that would lead to a new blueprint for the Liberal party (a la Red Book, perhaps?).  This never happened.

I first stated worrying when he decided not to run a Liberal candidate in Peter Mackay's riding to help Elizabeth May.  This would be (for me) the first in a series of wtf moments.  Not only did we not have a policy convention, we stayed in election mode for the entirety of Dion's tenure.  Watching the inflated rhetoric about the Conservatives destroying the country being followed by cowardly climbdowns during confidence votes was tiresome.  The final blow (or so I thought) came when Dion unveiled the Green Shift as the central platform of the Liberal campaign.  The economy was already shaky, and this was not going to go down well with the electorate.  For once, I was right.  The election was called and we were trounced.  I seriously thought about not voting, but I still did since every Liberal vote would count in my new riding (Trinity-Spadina, where Olivia Chow was re-elected). 

Our party dropped to its lowest vote total ever, and the Conservatives were handily re-elected.  I was demoralized.  Dion is a good guy and was a great minister, but he turned out to be a terrible leader.  We need to be honest about this and we need to stop making excuses for his (and our party's) performance.  It seemed he'd resign soon, and I had hopes that a new leader (probably Iggy) would make things better.  Then the coalition happened, which was the biggest wtf moment of all.

To be continued in part 2.

Muslims and Minarets

The Swiss voted to ban the construction of new Minarets on Sunday.  It's supporters claim it will prevent the "islamicization of Switzerland."  I really don't see how banning Minarets will do that.  Are they talking about the architectural Islamicization of Switzerland?

The comments in Globe articles are always hilarious, and this one did not disappoint (there's already over 400 comments).  A lot of them try to justify the ban by pointing out Saudi Arabia's persecution of Christians and other non-Muslims. 

Comparing Saudi Arabia and Switzerland is quite daft, to put it mildly.  On one hand we have an authoritarian, theocratic, and oppresive government.  On the other hand we have a liberal democratic country.  Switzerland is held to a higher standard, and that's fair. 

Andrew Sullivan's reaction:

It's hard to think of a gesture more useless with respect to a real problem - integration of Muslim immigrants - or clumsier as a way to provoke religious hostility and intolerance and thereby further radicalize Swiss Muslims.

I agree that the integration of Muslim immigrants is the real problem that the West faces.  Based on my experience within a segment of the Muslim community in Toronto, I believe that language and housing are the biggest impediments.  If new immigrants only talk to people that speak their language and live in areas where they only interact with people from back home, the result is cultural segregation from the mainstream.  This is a (longer) post for another day, but it's important to note.

Even though the result is disappointing,  let's remember that this was a free and fair election, and the people have made their choice.

Bad Reporting in the Globe and Mail

In this morning's Parliamentary Notebook, Jane Taber writes:

Here is the problem: on CTV’s Question Period yesterday, Chris Delaney, a senior member of the B.C. Conservative Party, said he wants the Bloc to “abstain” from the vote. “I can’t imagine what that’s going to do to national unity if we have a separatist party voting to implement a tax in British Columbia without British Columbians having a say on it.” Interesting point.

Well, no, it's not that interesting since it's wrong.  British Columbians will have a say in it because their 34 Federal MPs will vote on the same motion.  I can see why Delaney wants to create a national unity issue where none exists.  He is after all, speaking for a party that got 2.10% of the vote in the last election and for whom the HST issue is a godsend.  But, for a Globe and Mail reporter to simply parrot what he said without analyzing it (I'm not counting 'interesting' as analysis) is ridiculous.

 

The Soldier and the NGO worker

Todd Shea: American NGO worker - A short video about one man's quest to bring medical care to Pakistani Kashmir.

Ian Fisher: American Soldier - A brilliant photo essay from the Denver post covering a soldier's life from enlistment to combat, and his return.

(Hat Tip for both - Abu Muqawama)

The CRTC must be destroyed ASAP - Part 1

I've been looking forward to dumping my cell phone carrier (Rogers) for quite some time. Never mind the fact that they have the worst customer service I've ever encountered, they also have the fun habit of signing me up for things I didn't ask for (like a 3 year contract extension). Unfortunately for us Canadians, the other options (Bell and Telus) are just as bad or even worse.

The wireless spectrum auction that took place a few months ago made me quite hopeful that there might finally be more options. I was elated when I read about Wind Mobile and their planned launch for November. I even called Rogers to find out what my cancellation fee would be on my current Data Plan contract ($20 per month). I'm so fed up with Rogers that I was willing to pay this fee and jump to a new carrier.

But, lo and behold, the CRTC has blocked Wind Mobile's entry into the market. Why? Because they don't have enough Canadian ownership. My response to this was: huh?

The CRTC is enforcing foreign ownership laws in the telecoms market, but these laws are outdated.  Do most people care that Wind Mobile is owned by foreigners? I don't think so. The CRTC is simply in the business of protecting the big 3 against any serious competition.

This decision is beyond ridiculous. Imagine Toyota and Honda being told that they can't sell their vehicles to Canadians.

It's time to dismantle the CRTC once and for all. It may claim to protect Canadians, but it only protects big business and creates opportunities for them to screw Canadians.

Industry Minister Tony Clement is reviewing the decision and he does have the power to overturn it, but I doubt he'll make the right call.  Meanwhile, a company that spent half a billion dollars to bring Canadians something they want is forced to sit around and people like me are forced to stick with the shi*ty big three for a longer time.

Miller, CUPE, and Toronto

In the end, our mayor caved, just as we knew he would.

The union gets:
-6% raise over 3 years (as opposed to the 4% over 3 years offered by the city)
-To keep their flabbergasting sick day plan (henceforth known as FSDP) for current employees (that's a lot of employees, about 18,000).

Toronto gets:
-Another strike in 3 years.
-To continue paying about $25 per hour for CUPE to do a job that a private contractor would do for $17 per hour.

What will happen?
-Miller will probably get re-elected. Don't get me wrong, I really hope this doesn't happen, but this city keeps getting f*cked and somehow keeps asking for more.

What I hope happens:
-A few decent candidates running against Miller in 2010. He really, really, needs to go. If we get another Pitfield running against him, it's over.