Will Harper's minority be short-lived?

Post-election, media pundits have assumed that Stephen Harper had two years to implement his agenda and prepare for the next election. With the rocky start this week and the mounting fury among Conservatives about the Emerson cross-over, some are now beginning to question this assumption. A new Global National/Ipsos Reid poll released tonight indicates that the honeymoon ended on Day One of the new Government. 48% of those polled disapproved of Harper's decision to appoint Emerson to his cabinet versus 40% who approved. It appears that the bloom is off the rose.

Chantal Hebert speculates in today's Star that the daycare issue may be for Harper the equivalent of the Clake/Crosbie 18-cent gas tax in 1980. As she observes:

"Canada's last Conservative minority government died a quick death on the arid hill of a steep hike in gasoline taxes; this one has chosen the grassy knoll of a popular $1,200 child-care allowance for its first do-or-die stand in Parliament.

"On his first day in office this week, Stephen Harper announced that he would fulfill his big-ticket promise to families by July 1. Win or lose, this is the battle that will set the tone for the rest of his mandate in and outside the House of Commons."

The Liberals and the NDP are opposed to the Conservative daycare initiative. Indeed, the NDP has announced they will introduce a bill to set national daycare standards when Parliament is convened.

To survive their first budget and get cheques delivered to parents of young children by July 1, Harper will need the support of the Bloc Québécois. Will the BQ support the Conservative initiative after criticizing it during the campaign?
Apparently this week Duceppe said he did not oppose the notion of direct help to families but suggested that to secure BQ support Harper would have to strike a deal with Jean Charest.

Harper created the impression earlier this week that there is room for accommodation with Quebec. That stirred the attention of Ontario and Manitoba, the other two provinces with five-year funding agreements with the Liberals. If Harper makes a special child-care deal with Quebec at the expense of other provinces, he will provoke a backlash elsewhere.

At the moment it is unclear that he will be able to secure the necessary votes in Parliament to pass this measure. He has already set a deadline for its passage. If he is going to make this minority government work, he will have to display more adroitness than he exhibited in the Emerson affair.

Story behind the Muslim cartoon protests

Muslim outrage over the Danish cartoons featuring the prophet Muhammad continues to mount with protests intensifying around the world. Over the past couple of days the story of how events escalated from the publication of the 12 cartoons in a minor Danish newspaper last fall to the current escalating worldwide protests has begun to emerge.

Yesterday the Globe and Mail described how a young Danish Islamic scholar distributed booklets of photocopied cartoons to Muslim leaders in the Mideast, sparking the firestorm of anger around the world.

In late December,Ahmed Akkari, a young Islamic scholar and Danish activist, flew to Beirut carrying a package of spiral-bound booklets whose contents consisted mainly of cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad. Having failed to get the Danish Prime Minister to take action over the cartoons' perceived slight to Islam, he was seeking help from prominent figures in the Muslim world.

The New York Times today described how matters escalated from that point. The cartoon outrage crystallized when leaders of the world's 57 Muslim nations gathered for a summit meeting in Mecca in December. The hallway chatter focused on the Danish cartoons satirizing the Prophet Muhammad.

The closing communiqué expressed "concern at rising hatred against Islam and Muslims and condemned the recent incident of desecration of the image of the Holy Prophet Muhammad in the media of certain countries" as well as over "using the freedom of expression as a pretext to defame religions."

The meeting in Mecca, a Saudi city drew minimal international press coverage. But after that meeting, anger at the Danish caricatures, especially at an official government level, became more public. In some countries, like Syria and Iran, that meant heavy press coverage in official news media and virtual government approval of demonstrations that ended with Danish embassies in flames.

At the end of December,talk of a boycott became more prominent. The Islamic Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization published on its Web site a statement condemning "the aggressive campaign waged against Islam and its Prophet" and officials said member nations should impose a boycott on Denmark until an apology was offered for the drawings.

In a few weeks, the Jordanian Parliament condemned the cartoons, as had several other Arab governments. On Jan. 10, as anti-Danish pressure built, a Norwegian newspaper republished the caricatures in an act of solidarity with the Danes, leading many Muslims to believe that a real campaign against them had begun.

On Jan. 26, in a key move, Saudi Arabia recalled its ambassador to Denmark, and Libya followed suit. Saudi clerics began sounding the call for a boycott, and within a day, most Danish products were pulled off supermarket shelves.

In the intervening weeks protests have swept around the world and show no signs of subsiding.

According to the Globe and Mail Mr. Akkari now regrets the results of his journey, the somewhat distorted message of which flashed around the Muslim world by Internet, newspaper and text message, and caused millions of Muslims to believe that Denmark and the Nordic countries had become home to blasphemies:

"As he sat in one of Copenhagen's neat brown stone buildings yesterday and gazed at the melting snow, Mr. Akkari grappled awkwardly with the global emergency that has sprung from his mission. Friends, strangers and close family members are now blaming him for exactly the thing he says he was trying to prevent: the caricaturing of Muslims as violent fanatics.

"The riots, he acknowledged, have placed his fellow European Muslims in a far worse position than they had previously known."

"Yeah, it has been more violent than I expected," he said. "I had no interest in any violence. . . . It is bad for our case because it's turning the picture completely from what this should be about, to something else -- and this is a dangerous change now."

Is the Conservative train heading off the tracks?

Check out Kevin Brennan at Tilting at Windmills on what he perceives as the Coming(?) Conservative Train Wreck.

Reflections on the Harper Cabinet

With the Emerson cross-over, Harper has unleashed the fury of the Conservative rank and file. Conservative bloggers are in a tizzy about the ethics of the Emerson move. Paul Wells is offering an award to the nominee who put forward the best apologia for Harper's decision, named SDA after Kate of Small Dead Animals blog, who opined that Harper had done just fine. Some Conservative bloggers are pissed as hell and are doing something about it.

BabblingBrooks is marshalling Conservative bloggers pissed at Harper's decision.
Check out his blog and you can follow the story from there.BabblingBrooks

The media are having a field day over the Emerson/Fortier appointments. The Ottawa Sun opined:

"Stephen Harper has ushered in the Conservatives’ promised new era of ethical and accountable government with a Senate appointment and a patronage plum.

"Despite all his lofty election promises to do government differently, Harper has constructed a cabinet more with an eye to political porking than principle, an executive administration designed more to dispense regional goodies before the next election than to restore public confidence in federal institutions tarnished by years of Liberal patronage and corruption.

"Too bad. He was doing so well."

Sheila Copps observed:

" Prime Minister Stephen Harper may have received a gift horse in the person of David Emerson that he will live to regret.

"Part of the balancing act of a minority government is keeping every caucus member on side. With a cabinet post for Emerson, that leaves other long-time Conservative loyalists seething in the back benches.

"But that's not the only problem. By elevating someone who has so little loyalty to Conservative values, Harper risks being tarred with the same opportunistic brush that he plied on the Liberals when they accepted Belinda Stronach."

On a different aspect of the Cabinet Jeff Simpson of the Globe and Mail notes the potential implications of the heavy representation in the Cabinet of MPs with provincial government backgrounds:

"Ms. Ambrose once worked as a civil servant in Alberta, and seven ministers served in provincial governments. Ms. Ambrose, those seven ministers, Mr. Harper himself and the nationalist Quebec ministers make this cabinet arguably the most province-friendly since Wilfrid Laurier attracted provincial Liberal heavyweights to his "ministry of all the talents" in 1896.

"The cabinet's composition, therefore, signals to provinces that Mr. Harper is serious about rectifying the "fiscal imbalance," an idea articulated by premiers, notably from Quebec, that Ottawa has too much money and the provinces too little, relative to their respective responsibilities. The Conservative platform was magnificently and purposefully vague about how this "imbalance" would be eliminated.

"To widen the beachhead in Quebec, Mr. Harper needs to deliver on this promise, while taking care that he does not become perceived elsewhere as, in Pierre Trudeau's famous description of Conservative leader Joe Clark, a "head waiter for the premiers.""

Insightful as ever, Chantal Hebert in the Star points out that the Tory hold on power may not be as secure as it looks. She notes that a Liberal-NDP coalition could present a viable alternative:

"If the Liberals, the NDP and the Bloc agree with the Conservatives on anything, it is the fact that the country is in no mood to return to the polls anytime soon. But the Tories would be fools to assume that automatically gives them as much breathing room as current conventional wisdom has it.

As they ponder how much of their agenda they can safely move forward, the ministers appointed today should never lose sight of the fact that there actually is a potential alternative government sitting across from them...........

"If it came to an early showdown between the opposition and the incoming government, the Liberals and the NDP have enough members between them to cobble together a coalition and offer it up as a replacement.

"That would be a momentous turn of events. It would still leave Canada with a minority government — although one tilted to the left rather than the right — and it could not, of course, happen without the consent of the Bloc Québécois.

"There was a time when Gilles Duceppe would have gone out of his way to ensure the survival of a non-Liberal government, but that was before Stephen Harper emerged as the biggest threat not only to the Bloc's supremacy in Quebec but to the entire sovereignist agenda.......

"And so, given the smallest excuse, Duceppe could have a strong incentive to co-operate in the installation of a different government."

The first Harper Conservative Cabinet

Stephen Harper was sworn in today as Canada's 22nd Prime Minister. He lost no time in getting down to action by naming a lean and mean 26-member cabinet, compared with 37 in the Martin cabinet prior to the January 23rd election. Despite the reduced size of the cabinet Harper threw a couple of curve balls. Perhaps the biggest surprise was the swearing in of Davis Emmerson, just recently Minister of Industry in the Martin cabinet, as Minister of International Trade in the new Conservative administration. Emerson, who as Liberal industry minister won re-election on Jan. 23, shocked observers Monday when he abruptly switched parties to work in a pared-down Conservative cabinet. This must be a new record for crossing the floor post-election. The Emmerson appointment must have left a few long-standing and hard-working B.C. Conservatives who didn't make it to the cabinet shell-shocked.

Given Harper's commitment to an elected Senate, the other surprise was the appointment of Conservative campaign co-chair Michael Fortier to the Senate and from there as Minister of Public Works and Government Services. Fortier's appointment to the Senate is supposed to be temporary until he resigns and runs in the next federal election.

Harper's moves with respect to Emmerson and Fortier were described as necessary to give two of Canada's largest cities, Vancouver and Montreal, representation in the cabinet. Similar treatment was not accorded to Toronto, Canada's largest city. Harper said that Jim Flaherty, the new Finance Minister, would be responsible for the GTA.

In terms of Conservatives missing from the cabinet the most glaring absence is Diane Ablonczy, widely expected to be given a prominent position in the cabinet. The appointment of 36-year-old Rona Ambrose instead of the experienced and very capable Ablonczy is curious.

Harper's cabinet building with heavy representation from Ontario and Quebec appears to be an attempt to position his government to secure a majority in the next election by securing more seats in these two most populous provinces.

The old adage "loose lips sinks ships" was applied vigourously in the days leading up to today's announcement. The success of Harper's administration and his attempt to secure a majority may well depend on the maintenance of the same rigourous discipline that has prevailed from the dropping of the election writ until now.

Following is the list of Ministers and their portfolios.


THE CANADIAN MINISTRY

(in order of precedence)


The Right Honourable Stephen Joseph Harper

Prime Minister


The Honourable Robert Douglas Nicholson

Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform


The Honourable David Emerson

Minister of International Trade and Minister for the Pacific Gateway and the Vancouver - Whistler Olympics

The Honourable Jean-Pierre Blackburn

Minister of Labour and Minister of the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec


The Honourable Gregory Francis Thompson

Minister of Veterans Affairs


The Honourable Marjory LeBreton

Leader of the Government in the Senate


The Honourable Monte Solberg

Minister of Citizenship and Immigration


The Honourable Chuck Strahl

Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and Minister for the Canadian Wheat Board



The Honourable Gary Lunn

Minister of Natural Resources



The Honourable Peter Gordon MacKay

Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency


The Honourable Loyola Hearn

Minister of Fisheries and Oceans


The Honourable Stockwell Day

Minister of Public Safety



The Honourable Carol Skelton

Minister of National Revenue and Minister of Western Economic Diversification


The Honourable Vic Toews

Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada



The Honourable Rona Ambrose

Minister of the Environment


The Honourable Michael D. Chong

President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs and Minister for Sport


The Honourable Diane Finley

Minister of Human Resources and Social Development


The Honourable Gordon O’Connor

Minister of National Defence


The Honourable Beverley J. Oda

Minister of Canadian Heritage and Status of Women


The Honourable Jim Prentice

Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and
Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-Status Indians


The Honourable John Baird

President of the Treasury Board


The Honourable Maxime Bernier

Minister of Industry


The Honourable Lawrence Cannon

Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities


The Honourable Tony Clement

Minister of Health and Minister for the Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern Ontario


The Honourable James Michael Flaherty

Minister of Finance

The Honourable Josée Verner

Minister of International Cooperation and Minister for La Francophonie and Official Languages

The Honourable Michael Fortier

Minister of Public Works and Government Services

How long to rebuild the Liberal party

Norman Webster of the Montreal Gazette has the following words of wisdom about the Liberal leadership race:

"The Harpers should go ahead and order new drapes for 24 Sussex Dr. It looks like they’ll be living there for some time.

That’s the message from the flailings of the federal Liberals. People are withdrawing from the leadership race so quickly they have to co-ordinate their press conferences. Not even two weeks from the election and we’ve already lost all of the party’s front-rankers: Frank McKenna, John Manley, Brian Tobin and Allan Rock.

Each of these men had a national profile, support within the party and years of experience in government at the federal or provincial level. Each could have slipped into harness fairly quickly as the new leader.

But they’ve all been hit by a sudden desire to spend more time with their families. Which is to say they have concluded there is no quick fix for the Liberal malady.

The party needs a major policy rethink. It must reconnect with Quebec – where Paul Martin, curiously, got out of step. It absolutely must end the bitter internal feud that has so sapped its strength. It will take years of toil and travel and bean suppers in church basements before the Liberals are ready to return to power.

How many years? Probably six at least – two elections – and even then there’s no guarantee, far from it. Stephen Harper will be in his prime by then and might even have learned how to tell a joke. You can see why the heavyweights are giving this a pass….

Belinda Stronach? Don’t get me started. Backstabber, perennial candidate for leader before accomplishing anything, unilingual, deeply untrustworthy, Stronach embodies almost everything the Liberal Party should be running away from. Surely, there are stronger female candidates than this."

Out of work? Need a job? Apply to be Liberal leader

Out of work? Need a job? Apply for the Liberal leadership. New talent desperately needed. All applicants will be welcomed with open arms.

With all the front-ranked candidates now having declared that they will not run for the Liberal leadership, the federal Liberal party is in a bit of a pickle. This is illustrated by the fact that two of the names now being tossed about are Belinda Stronach or Scott Brison, two defections during the last Parliament from the Conservatives to the Liberals. Or they might take a chance on an ex-goalie not noted for his oratorical skills or a Harvard Professor who has spent most of the past 30 years outside Canada but dropped by to run in the January election.

Better still , as the Toronto Star put it today, if you own a car you could be leadership material.

LIBERAL LEADERSHIP APPLICATION FORM Thank you for your interest in becoming the leader of the Liberal Party of Canada.

At least, we hope, that by picking up this form, you truly are interested in becoming the leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, and aren't just messing with us to raise false hopes.

Please take a few moments, or longer, whatever you need, take this home and bring it back tomorrow if that would be more convenient, to answer the following questions:

1. Are you currently a member of the Liberal Party of Canada?

2. If you are not currently a member of the Liberal Party of Canada, how long do you think it would take for you to become one?

3. Why do you want to become the leader of the Liberal Party?

a) I want to rebuild this party into the great party it once was

b) I just got out of prison and am looking for work

c) sitting around the house starts to get boring after awhile, my mom says I should get a job, and this looks kind of cool

d) I tried the Green Party, but they got all touchy about my habit of using blue boxes for target practice

4. What are your feelings on the same-sex issue?

a) the issue is over, a free vote is not necessary

b) it kind of creeps me out

c) as long as you're getting some, who cares if it's the same everyday?

5. How would you restore the party's integrity?

a) weed out those tainted by the sponsorship scandal

b) draft a code of conduct for everyone in the party

c) give Liberals envelopes stuffed with cash so they won't be tempted to take kickbacks from strangers

6. How would you describe your feelings about taking this job, knowing that in the next election, you'd be a total novice, you'd be pitted against a pretty experienced Stephen Harper, that you could be relegated to the Opposition benches for years, and that you might never actually become Prime Minister?

a) no one mentioned anything about THAT

b) who's this Harper guy again?

c) I'm in for the long haul, prepared to do whatever it takes, to work night and day, seven days a week, just so long as I don't have to meet lots of people and shake hands and make small talk. Hate that

7. Which of the following phrases are you most comfortable using at the beginning of every sentence?

a) The fact is

b) I want to make it clear that

c) I'd love to answer that question but the real issue is

d) My opponent sleeps with a yak

8. Which, if any, of the following do you have in your background?

a) a few criminal convictions, nothing major, except maybe for that thing in Saskatoon

b) suspicious real-estate transactions

c) once blurted out military secrets in my sleep to a Soviet spy

d) all of the above

9. Being a leader is about more than politics. Canadians want to know what you're like as a person, what your interests are. Check as many of the following that apply:

a) hockey

b) stamp collecting

c) hiking

d) surfing for porn

e) trainspotting

f) saving bits of wood in case you need them for something later

10. How would you describe your feelings for Canada?

a) I love Canada

b) I have made out with Canada

c) We have an understanding.

11. Do you own your own car?

Thank you SO MUCH for taking the time to fill out the Liberal Leadership Application Form.

You will be hearing from us shortly. Count on it.

Go ahead. Be bold. Take a chance. The Liberal Party needs you. You are definitely as well qualified as the 12 or so names currently being mentioned as contenders.

The Case of Wanda Young

Canada's Supreme court has ruled that a woman wrongly labelled a potential sex offender more than decade ago as a result of an essay written for a social work class is entitled to more than $800,000 in damages from Memorial University of Newfoundland.
In a decision handed down last Friday, the Supreme Court of Canada said there was no basis to interfere with an earlier jury's verdict in the case, which centred on Wanda Young's claims that her life was ruined after she was wrongly reported as a potential sex abuser.

“Accordingly, we would set aside the judgment of the Court of Appeal and restore the trial judgment,” the court said.

The case dates back to 1994, when Ms. Young submitted the assignment as part of the course work for a social work class at Memorial.

An anonymous first-person account of sexual abuse taken from a text book was appended to the paper and her professor – wrongly believing the material was written by Ms. Young – contacted provincial Child Protection Services after talking to a supervisor.

For two years, without her knowledge, the assertion that she was a potential child abuser was passed between university professors, the RCMP and several social workers. Her attempt to study full-time at Memorial's School of Social Work was also turned down.

When the situation came to her attention in 1996, she immediately showed child-protection authorities the textbook. They apologized for the error, but she says the label hung over her for years, interfering with her ability to find work.

She later sued Memorial and her professor. The case went to trial in 2003 and a jury awarded her $839,400, although the university had argued that it had acted in accordance with child-welfare laws.

The Newfoundland Court of Appeal later overturned the financial award and ruled that Ms. Young could not seek a new trial.

In Friday's ruling, which quashed that decision, the Supreme Court noted that the Child Welfare Act requires everyone to “report information that a child has been, is or may be in danger of abandonment, desertion, neglect, physical, sexual or emotional ill treatment or has been, is or may be otherwise in need of protection.”

It also said those who have a statutory duty to report such cases have to be protected from any adverse legal consequences flowing from their action. In the current case, the court also ruled that university staff “acted in a way the jury found to be without any reasonable cause even to make a report."

“Here the university professors acted on conjecture and speculation which fell short of the required reasonable cause to make a report to [provincial Child Protection Services],” the court found.
For the text of the Supreme Court decision , see the decision

How does Google square the circle?

Is Google hypocritical?

It is regrettable that a company whose motto is "Don't be evil" has chosen to abandon the principles of free speech and universally available information in order to gain access to a large market in a repressive state.

Internet searches via the Chinese website to be established by Google will be censored by the company itself. They will, therefore, exclude results on such sensitive topics as democratic reform, Taiwanese independence and the banned Falun Gong movement.

Google awkwardly defended its decision, admitting that censorship was "inconsistent with Google's mission" but was better than providing no information or subjecting users to a "heavily degraded" service.

For more on this see the Star.

Debate on Climate Shifts to Issue of Irreparable Change

Some Experts on Global Warming Foresee 'Tipping Point' When It Is Too Late to Act

According to the Washington Post, now that most scientists agree human activity is causing Earth to warm, the central debate has shifted to whether climate change is progressing so rapidly that, within decades, humans may be helpless to slow or reverse the trend.

This "tipping point" scenario has begun to consume many prominent researchers in the United States and abroad, because the answer could determine how drastically countries need to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions in the coming years. While scientists remain uncertain when such a point might occur, many say it is urgent that policymakers cut global carbon dioxide emissions in half over the next 50 years or risk the triggering of changes that would be irreversible.

"There are three specific events that these scientists describe as especially worrisome and potentially imminent, although the time frames are a matter of dispute: widespread coral bleaching that could damage the world's fisheries within three decades; dramatic sea level rise by the end of the century that would take tens of thousands of years to reverse; and, within 200 years, a shutdown of the ocean current that moderates temperatures in northern Europe.

The debate has been intensifying because Earth is warming much faster than some researchers had predicted."

Meanwhile Canada has done little to address this issue notwithstanding Paul Martin's December attacks on the U.S. Stephen Harper has said he will do something different. What? Stephen, we await your clarification.

Election +6

According to Ian Urquhart "the phone lines are starting to burn up as premiers call each other and prime minister-designate Stephen Harper about striking a new deal that could dramatically alter Confederation by strengthening the provinces and reducing Ottawa's role."

At issue is the nation's "fiscal imbalance," which sees Ottawa awash in surpluses while the provinces struggle to make ends meet. Paul Martin, the outgoing prime minister, denied the very existence of a fiscal imbalance; Harper, on the other hand, has promised to fix it.

In his election platform, Harper said he would "work with the provinces in order to achieve a long-term agreement which would address the issue of a fiscal imbalance in a permanent fashion."

Seizing on those words, the premiers have begun talking to each other about what the new deal should contain.

The premiers' first goal "is to get a better understanding of what the Harper government has in mind," said McGuinty in an interview yesterday in his Queen's Park office.

"They (the Harper Conservatives) have not been definitive, and probably deliberately so. ... It's a bit of a black box for all of us right now."

There is, however, a sense of urgency among the premiers as the window of opportunity for an overarching fiscal deal may have a short timeframe. The window has been opened by the election of Harper, but it will be closed if Charest, who is trailing in the polls, loses the next Quebec election — expected in the spring of 2007 — to André Boisclair and the Parti Québécois.

As the other premiers see it, they aren't likely to be able to strike a deal with the separatists, whose objective is to leave Confederation, not fix it.

On the other hand, a new fiscal deal that is seen as beneficial to Quebec (as well as the other provinces) could help Charest remain in power.

"There's an opportunity before us," agreed McGuinty. "We have a willing prime minister and we certainly have willing premiers."

Stephen Harper would be well advised to take his time in reaching a deal with the provinces on this matter. Most Canadians don't want to see Canada end up as a collection of provinces with widely different levels of education, health and social programs. But this is the the way the train is headed to head off sovereignists in Quebec and "We can go it aloners" in Alberta.

Election +5

Jack Layton has been making noises that he might be able to work with the Conservative government on some issues. Despite his initial skepticism, he's sounding more conciliatory and ready to deal on a half-dozen issues where left and right appear to intersect.

"I am going to make a legitimate, determined effort to find things where there can be common action," he said in an interview with The Canadian Press.

"I believe there are ideas in all of our platforms for the parties to get something done." See
CTV.ca

It appears that the Liberal coffers didn't sustain as big a hit as had been rumoured.
With voter turnout up from the last election, the Liberals will get an annual Elections Canada subsidy of about $7.8 million, which the party says is "a manageable" $1.3 million or so less than it received before.

"We will have a debt, but it won't be nearly as much as some people have suggested. It will be a few million dollars, I would anticipate," said party president Mike Eizenga, who added that all the spending has not yet been tallied. "We think we will be able to have it pretty much retired by the end of the year."

The Liberals wouldn't comment on their finances during the campaign, which allowed rumours to swirl that the party was about $33 million in debt.

Eizenga dispelled those rumours yesterday. "We were debt-free in the fall," he said.

It appears that Frank McKenna, the current golden boyof the Martin machine, is not only a business Liberal but also spent many years as Premier of New Brunswick fighting the establishment of abortion clinics in his province. Hardly a poster boy for liberalism after all. He seems far more right wing than Stephen Harper.For the gory details, see Angry in the Great White North.

For some insight into the evolution of Stephen Harper into a moderate and pragmatist, see article by Susan Delacourt in the Star.

Jim Traversoffers some good insights into why the Liberals need to search for the soul of the party before they try to pick a saviour.

Robert Fulford in the National Post reminds us of "the great unwritten rule of Canadian politics: We never make premiers into prime ministers. It's not something we do." He details the many failed attempts by provincial premiers to become Prime Minister. some words of caution here for Frank McKenna, Bob Rae and Brian Tobin, all of whom are being touted as potential candidates for the Liberal leadership.

Election +3

Among the potential Liberal leadership candidates being mentioned are the following:

Frank McKenna
Bill Graham
Bob Rae
Scott Brison
Stephane Dion
Maurizio Bevilacqua
Denis Coderre
Michael Ignatieff
John Manley
Belinda Stronach
Martin Cauchon
Brian Tobin

Scratch Manley who has announced today that he he will not run.The Globe and Mail ran an article rating the potential candidates.

Prime Minister-designate Stephen Harper held his first news conference post election today. He indicated that his first priority would be to clean up government through his proposed federal accountability act. Harper said he will immediately put into action those promises he made during the election campaign.

He said he will also work to implement his proposals to lower taxes beginning with the GST, address the fiscal imbalance between Ottawa and the provinces, and establish wait time standards in health care. More details at
CTV.ca

Prime minister-designate Harper also took advantage of the press conference to take aim at criticism of the Conservatives' Arctic sovereignty plan by American ambassador David Wilkins on Thursday. The U.S. ambassador to Canada had said his government opposes Harper's proposed plan to deploy military icebreakers in the Arctic to detect interlopers and assert Canadian sovereignty over those waters.

"There's no reason to create a problem that doesn't exist," Wilkins said. "We don't recognize Canada's claims to those waters... Most other countries do not recognize their claim."

"The United States defends its sovereignty and the Canadian government will defend our sovereignty," Harper told reporters in Ottawa. "It is the Canadian people we get our mandate from, not the ambassador of the United States."

During the federal election campaign the Conservatives promised to spend $5.3 billion over five years to defend northern waters against the Americans, Russians and Danes.See CBC.ca

Meanwhile Ottawa is abuzz with speculation on the composition of the Conservative cabinet. For an overview of some likely candidates see CTV.ca

Election +2

Harper has put his transition team in place headed by Derek Burney, former Chief of Staff to Brian Mulroney. The change of government is expected to occur in about two weeks. Speculation about who will get which Cabinet post intensifies daily. The consensus seems to be that Lawrence Cannon, former Bourassa cabinet minister, will become Deputy Prime Minister and Harper's Quebec lieutenant.

It is clear that Harper will have to move cautiously to implement his proposed intiatives. He faces a delicate balancing act.More than half the people who voted Conservative in Monday's election did so mainly because they thought it was time for a change, according to an Environics poll conducted for the CBC the weekend before the vote.

Only 41 per cent of them said they were voting for Stephen Harper's party because they wanted a Conservative government, compared to 54 per cent who said they were casting their ballots for the sake of change.

"They have to be careful about taking a very different direction for the country," Donna Dasko, the senior vice-president of Environics Research Group, said of Harper's incoming minority government.

"The support they gained is not support for radical change."

The apparent items on which there is consensus include:

Getting tougher on sentences for crime, especially crime committed with handguns, which won 88 per cent support.

Reforming the Senate by holding elections for vacancies rather than having the prime minister appoint people, which was supported by 71 per cent of those polled.

However, the poll indicated that Canadians are split almost down the middle on a handful of issues that the Conservatives promised to address:

Lowering the GST, if it means removing income tax cuts previously announced by the Liberals.
Getting rid of the gun registry, which enjoys heavy support in Quebec as well as urban regions of the country.
Taking away the Liberal-promised national day-care system, even if the Conservatives replace it with a plan to give parents $100 a month for every child under six.

According to the poll, 66 per cent of respondents did not want Harper's party to bring the same-sex marriage issue back to Parliament for a free vote, as he has promised. A total of 30 per cent of people polled wanted to see that vote happen.

While Harper is wrestling with how to proceed to effect change, the Liberals face the challenge of a party that has been split asunder by the Martin/Chretien feud for years. Various Liberals are on the record as saying that the new leader should not come from either of those camps. David Herle is the new Warren Kinsella.

Speculation is growing that Frank McKenna, former NB premier, is the early frontrunner in the race to succeed Martin. McKenna today announced that he would be resigning from his post as Canadian Ambassador to the U.S., setting the scene for entry into the leadership race. Meanwhile many other names are circulating as potential leadership contenders.

The Election: Day 56 (Conservative minority)

As predicted by the polls the Conservatives gained enough seats tonight to form a minority government. However,the margin of victory was much less than most polls indicated. Most recent polls indicated a likely spread of 10-12%.

At midnight the results were as follows:

CP 125 Lib 102 NDP 30 BQ 50 Ind 1

The Conservatives will have a plurality of 20+ seats, enough to give them the right to form a government but fewer than Paul Martin had in the last Parliament. The NDP made significant gains.

In looking at the percentage vote by party what is amazing is the accuracy of the most recent CPAC-SES poll posted yesterday on this site. Below is a comparison of the SES poll with the actual results as reported by CBC TV at midnight January 23rd.

CPAC-SES Jan 20-22: CP 36.4% Lib 30.1% NDP 17.4% BQ 10.6% GP 5.6%

Results Jan 23 CP 36.50%LIB 30.10%NDP 17.36%BQ 10.48%GP 5.03%


The SES poll predicted the percentage vote with uncanny accuracy.

Paul Martin conceded defeat and, while doing so, announced that he would not lead the Liberal party into another election.

These results, and Martin's announcement, set the scene for a fiery Parliament and an exciting battle to renew the Liberal party. It is unlikely that any party will wish to precipitate an early election.

The new Prime Minister will face enormous challenges in making this new Parliament work. I would expect it to last two years unless the Conservatives see an opportunity to secure a majority by a return to the polls in the interim.

The Election: Day 55

Latest poll results as of Sunday night:

CPAC-SES Jan 20-22: CP 36.4% Lib 30.1% NDP 17.4% BQ 10.6% GP 5.6%
Ipsos Jan 17-22: CP 38% Lib 27% NDP 19% BQ 12% GP 4%
Strategic Counsel Jan 19-22 CP 37% Lib 27% NDP 19% BQ 11% GP 6%

The Strategic Counsel poll was released late Sunday. Strategic Counsel chairman Allan Gregg said the poll would produce "a solid Conservative minority government with more Bloc and more New Democrats than we have today." He said the numbers also showed a tightening in the race, particularly in B.C. — where the Conservatives, Liberals and NDP are dead even — and NDP support inching ahead in B.C.'s Lower Mainland and the Toronto's city core to the detriment of the Liberals.

On the basis of the poll results, Mr. Gregg predicted the Conservatives would win in the neighbourhood of 140 seats, the Liberals 75, the New Democrats 35 and the Bloc in the high 50s or low 60s.

In the final analysis this election is about democracy. In a democracy you have the option of changing the government. For many years it looked we might not have that opportunity and were instead headed for a one-party state. Fortunately that danger has been averted. The Candian Alliance and the former Progressive Conservatives were brought together into a new Conservative party. Harper clearly deserves some of the credit for that merger. Now it looks like he will be given the chance to demonstrate whether he and his party are capable of governing Canada. It also looks like the NDP will win enough seats to keep the minority Conservative government in check. Tomorrow I will be voting for democracy. I will be voting for change because the tired,corrupt Liberal party and Paul Martin,in particular, do not deserve my vote. Let's hope the Liberals learn from their defeat and learn enough to choose a better and more capable leader to lead them into their next encounter with destiny.

I had intended to write an analysis tonight of how the Liberal campaign came unglued and why the Conservatives will win a minority. But then I realized that what I intended to say was captured exceedingly well in a column yesterday by Jim Travers in the Toronto Star.

Here are some excerpts from Jim Travers' article:

"Everyone knows the moment when it went so wrong for Paul Martin. It's just that every moment is different.

"In their bitter weariness at the end of a cruel campaign, Liberals trace the turning point to the RCMP investigation into suspected leaks of Finance Minister Ralph Goodale's income trusts decision. It freed the spectre of scandal to stalk Liberals who were until then holding their own. Static public opinion became fluid, and a drift toward a suddenly not-so-scary Stephen Harper became a current.

"But there are other moments that come with larger questions marks. Did the Prime Minister destroy his fiscal prudence reputation as well as a campaign trump card with a wild, pre-election spending spree? Were Liberals so overconfident that Conservatives would self-destruct that they opted for a marathon eight-week campaign that gave Harper time to find a more flattering costume? Or was it that seminal "popcorn and beer" crack that convinced voters that Martin's smart-alecky fraternity was exercising enormous power with precious little discipline?

"Each moment has merit and all certainly contributed to what promises to be a sobering election night for a party whose principal purpose is winning. But none quite captures the how and why of the Prime Minister's long fall from the peaks of the Liberal leadership to the lowlands of this extraordinary winter campaign.

"Whatever the final outcome, Martin is irreparably damaged. Even if Liberals snatch victory from defeat a second consecutive time, a party that now understands the importance of renewal won't fight another campaign with this leader.

"No, Martin's prediction that he would lead the country through 10 years of transformational change is foundering after only two. A wreck so catastrophic can't be fully explained by the curious timing of an RCMP investigation, a prime ministerial persona that became too fuzzy to identify or even the failure to replace the team that seized the leadership with one mature enough to manage and hold power.

"What's self-evident now is that the seeds of Martin's failure were sown by success. In dividing Liberals to topple a sitting prime minister, Martin and his clique so weakened the Western world's most successful political party that a Conservative revival became inevitable.

"Looking back, it's easy to see how the decision to distance the new and old regimes locked Martin's infamous "board" into subsequent decisions that would eventually bring prime minister and party to today's threshold of defeat. There's no more instructive example than the sponsorship scandal.

"With an acidic leadership campaign just behind, an election just ahead and with the promise to do politics differently ringing in his ears, Martin's only viable option was to inflate rather than deflate the government response to Auditor General Sheila Fraser's startling report. Instead of following Jean Chrétien's pattern of shoving dirt under the RCMP rug, a "mad as hell" Martin put Justice John Gomery on the case while the backroom whiz kids, disconnected from history and perspective, snapped their suspenders and insisted Adscam was the worst Canadian scandal ever.

"It wasn't then; it might be now. From tawdry Tory contracting practices, the sponsorship scheme grew into a Liberal remake of The Sopranos that drew Quebecers to daytime TV and resuscitated separatism.

"With the election just two days away, a party that tried to make itself synonymous with Canada in Quebec is in danger of becoming a rump in the province that, along with Ontario, was once its base. More remarkable still, the rising voice of federalism now belongs to Stephen Harper.

"And why not? In their desperation to repair self-inflicted damage to the brand, Liberals made serial mistakes that hurt the party, first in Quebec and then across the country. Martin made the reformed separatist and accidental comedian Jean Lapierre his provincial lieutenant, dumped Toronto's Bill Graham, one of a handful of strong ministers, to elevate the accident-prone Pierre Pettigrew into the prestigious foreign affairs portfolio, and then recklessly declared this election a referendum on national unity.

"Of the three mistakes, the third is most revealing. Voters accept that politicians will say almost anything to get elected. But prime ministers are diminished when they make national interests subservient to partisan advantage.

"That's now a recognizable Martin trait. Just as he sacrificed the party to capture its leadership, Martin twice made the country's priorities second to his own at critical times. Immediately after elevating this election to a test of patriotism, the Prime Minister jeopardized Canada's sustaining relationship with the U.S. by tilting crazily at George W. Bush's environmental record.

"Bashing the most unpopular modern U.S. president is good, if easy, domestic politics. But gratuitously attacking the U.S. presidency does lasting damage — particularly when Ottawa's greenhouse gas performance is worse than Washington's — and leads to nasty repercussions.

"In this campaign's brightest flash of dark humour, a U.S. nuclear submarine, complete with camera crew, popped through the polar ice to poke a gaping hole into empty Liberal commitments to Arctic sovereignty. More subtly, the gesture reminded Canadians that Martin the Prime Minister is not Martin the leadership saviour-in-waiting.

"When power was just an abstract concept, the former finance minister was very, very clear. He would strengthen U.S. relations, shift power from the Prime Minister's Office back to Parliament and strengthen the constant triumvirate of economy, health care and education.

"It's not that Martin didn't make progress on an impossibly lengthy priority list, it's that each advance came with an asterisk. After promising to write in public a health-care prescription for a generation, Martin applied another Band-Aid behind closed doors. A national daycare program became a provincial patchwork quilt. And a prime minister now campaigning as a staunch federalist cut serial deals with the provinces as corrosive to strong central government as anything Harper plans.

"Bit by bit, Martin prepared the ground for this election's turning points. A prime minister trying to be all things to all people, a party suffering from excessive-entitlement syndrome, and a government bouncing between policy guardrails, offered broad targets to Conservatives who committed to memory the hard lessons of the 2004 election.

"Politics abhors a vacuum, and in the weeks before the Christmas ceasefire, Conservatives eased smoothly into the space Liberals vacated. Given time and elbow room, Harper redefined himself and a reconstituted party with easily grasped policies that spoke directly to the self-interest of all those ordinary Canadians who no longer understood, liked or trusted Liberals or their leader.

"By the time the RCMP income trust investigation became public, voters who couldn't stomach Harper in 2004 were ready to tumble to Conservatives. In times as good as these, that reversal is extraordinary.

"Canadians are turning away from a party inextricably linked to a strong economy and from a prime minister promoting what should be popular policies on issues that make a difference. On cities, stimulating innovation and international competitiveness, Martin is safely aligned with younger, urban and highly educated voters.

"But is anybody still listening? It's this campaign's phenomenon that a soundproof glass wall now separates Martin from those voters who rescued Liberals in the last election's final hours. In marked contrast to that pivotal last weekend, a prime minister who says so much about so many things isn't being heard when it matters.

"Liberals still hope for a repeat of that 11th-hour recoil from the prospect of a Harper government. Conservatives are confident the preconditions for another last-ditch Liberal rally have vaporized.

"Opinion polls argue the Conservatives' case. In 2004, residual optimism that Martin might yet fulfil those great leadership expectations trumped the unpleasant experience of his first months in office, making it possible to demonize Conservatives as Reformers. This time the winds of change are howling at Harper's back and Liberal warnings about neo-cons storming Parliament Hill sound like what they are: fear-mongering.

"Remember too, Liberals and Conservatives have effectively flipped election roles. Instead of Conservatives exposing their default characteristics with uncensored comments, it's Liberals who are tripping over their tongues. Instead of Liberals setting the pace with a razor-sharp campaign, it's now Conservatives.

"Of the many reasons for that reversal, one stands in sharp relief. Between elections, Conservatives looked unflinchingly at why they lost while smug Liberals convinced themselves they had won because they were smarter, shrewd, more compelling. One party was honest with itself and learned, the other wasn't and didn't.

"A few days before the first campaign shot was fired, a senior Martin cabinet minister confided how Liberals planned to morph a minority into a majority. They would make Stephen Harper the ballot question one more time.

"What the strategists missed is that all those moments, all those turning points, changed the campaign dynamic. This election is not about Harper and an apprehended Conservative threat, but about Martin and the Liberal record. Rather than a referendum on unity in Quebec, the second election in less than two years is a national referendum on this prime minister.

"Harper's small missteps earlier in the week could still make this election close. But unless the polls are wonky and the political scientists deluded, all that remains to be decided is the size of the Conservative win.

"If voters give Harper a majority, that will be this election's final turning point for Paul Martin and the Liberals."

.

The Election: Day 54 (The Final Gasp)

Last night I posted the results from several polls which show the Conservatives with a clear lead heading into the final two days of the campaign. Today one pollster , Darrell Bricker of Ipsos Reid, said that a strong Conservative minority government is now certain. The Ipsos Reid survey indicates Canadians are ready to elect a strong minority Conservative government Monday with a solid NDP check on its power.
The survey also indicates the Liberals and the Bloc Quebecois are in a neck-and-neck race to become the official Opposition.

The Tories lead the Liberals 38% to 26%. Liberal support is declining while the NDP appears to be gaining in support.

Ipsos Reid projects the Conservatives could win 143 to 147 seats. The Liberals and the Bloc Quebecois could get 59 to 63 seats each, and the NDP 39 to 43 seats, more than double the number in the 2004 election.

The bulk of the NDP's gains, as many as 15 to 20 ridings, are anticipated to be in Ontario, where the party is poised to pick off seats from the Liberals in northern Ontario, as well as the Hamilton and Windsor areas. Paul Martin's call for progressive voters to unite appears to be backfiring in favour of the NDP.

In British Columbia, Conservative support rose five points to 35%, and the NDP climbed four points to 29%. The Liberals dropped one point to 27%, and the Green party fell nine points to seven per cent.

Jack Layton has spent the past couple of days in B.C. attempting to capitalize on the Liberal collapse. Layton called on voters to abandon what he predicted will be the "smoking hulk" of a defeated Liberal party.

"Mr. Martin is trying to perpetrate one more Liberal fraud in this election, hoping you'll reward him one more time with your vote," Layton said in Vancouver. "He says you have to hold your nose and vote Liberal. Again he's saying this. Well Paul, it's not working this time."

Layton is on a cross-country blitz today, with stops in Regina, Thunder Bay, Sudbury, London and Hamilton.

Paul Martin undertook a last-minute sprint across the country categorizing his opponents as extreme right-wingers who bear no resemblance to the Conservative party of old. His warnings of a right-wing agenda have had little or no impact on the Tory lead in the polls. Still Martin keeps ranting about "the ultra-conservative, extreme right-wing agenda of Stephen Harper." In Brampton, Ont., Martin claimed a Conservative government would imperil abortion rights. He delivered the warning - aimed squarely at women voters - surrounded by eight of his Toronto-area female candidates. But the most telling point, illustrating Martin's hypocrisy, was the absence of local Liberal candidates who share the anti-abortion leanings of many Conservatives.

Martin keeps flogging the abortion issue even though Stephen Harper has repeatedly said he would not introduce abortion legislation and would use his influence to keep the issue from ever arriving for a free vote in the House of Commons.

Meanwhile Harper renewed his attack on Liberal corruption, accusing Paul Martin of evading crucial questions:

"He has not provided Canadians a single compelling reason why his government should be re-elected and he has utterly failed to answer three important questions," Harper said. "Mr. Martin, where is the missing money? Mr. Martin, why do the scandals such as income trusts keep happening? Mr. Martin, how after two referendum defeats could you let separation get back onto the national agenda?" Harper asked.

"He's dodged these questions because the answers to these questions all point to the corruption of the Liberal party."

In Quebec the Bloc Québécois launched a last-minute ad campaign urging Quebecers not to vote for the Conservatives, telling them the party is more concerned with looking after interests in Western Canada. The ad shows a cowboy hat and says, in French, "We won't let Calgary decide for Quebec."

So the battle lines are drawn. On Monday we the voters will determine the outcome.

The Election: Day 53 (Conservative minority imminent)

A number of recent polls suggest the Conservatives have maintained a 9-12 point lead over the Liberals despite Paul Martin's desperate last-minute attempts to scare voters into voting for the Liberals. Here are the results available tonight:

CPAC-SES Jan 17-19: CP 35.5% Lib 29% NDP 18.8% BQ 11.1% GP 5.6
Ekos CP 37.4% Lib 27.3% NDP 20.8%, BQ 10.1%, GP 3.9%
Gregg Jan 17-18: CP 37% Lib 28% NDP 16% BQ 12% GP 7
Leger Jan 12-17: CP 38% Lib 29% Ndp 17% BQ 11% GP ?
Ipsos Reid: CP 38% Lib 26% NDP 19% BQ 11% GP 5%

These numbers indicate that the Conservatives will form a solid minority government as a result of the election. It appears they will make a breakthrough in Quebec and elect several members. The effect of the unanticipated Conservative surge in Quebec will be to deny the Bloc Quebecois the opportunity to break through the magical 50% barrier as seemed possible early in the campaign.

Will Jack Layton gain enough seats to be able to exert leverage over the Conservative minority government? Some projections suggest the NDP might get up to 30 seats or so.

In the last days of the campaign Paul Martin is painting Stephen Harper as an extreme social conservative and pleading for NDP supporters to bolt to the Liberals to block Harper. This is a replay of his campaigning in the last days of the previous election. That time it worked for him. This time the Conservative and NDP vote is holding steady.

Harper,after straying off message earlier in the week with his musings about the Senate,courts and public service, has returned to his central campaign theme, "Let's get rid of Liberal corruption. It's time for a change."

Jack Layton is concentrating his efforts in B.C. where the races are tight and he could pick up seats if voters tired of the Liberals but unwilling to embrace a Conservative government pick up his challenge to: "Lend us your votes."

The Election: Day 52

According to a poll conducted by the Strategic Counsel for The Globe and Mail-CTV News two-thirds of Canadians say it's time to change the government. This poll indicates that the Conservatives continue to hold a double-digit polling lead (16 points)despite some tightening and apparent resistance from the Liberal stronghold of the Greater Toronto Area. Nationally the results are:

Conservative 41%
Liberal 25%
NDP 17%
Bloc 12%
Green 5%


The desire for change has grown most in Quebec, where 83 per cent say it's time for a change, up from 59 per cent when the election was called. The desire for change is up across the country. However, the most resistant voters are in Ontario. Ontario continues to be the Liberals' last bastion as voters in the Greater Toronto Area continue to support Paul Martin's party over the Tories.

Turnout at advance polls for the federal election this year jumped by about 25 per cent compared to the 2004 election.

Perhaps the most significant development in this election has been a seismic shift in Quebec. Chantal Hebert describes the changes occurring there during this election:

"For the first time in over a decade, it is once again politically correct to support the Conservatives in Central Canada. After a 13-year absence, the party has returned to the mainstream and, from all indications, it is there to stay.

"But it goes beyond that. Quebec has been the scene of a dramatic shift, a sea change whose implications are still difficult to measure except to know that they are significant.

"Consider the following:

"This was never going to be a good year to run as a federal Liberal in Quebec. But if Quebecers had only wanted to punish Paul Martin for the failings of his party and his government, they would have stuck with the Bloc Québécois.

"Gilles Duceppe remains Quebec's most respected leader. He has run a campaign whose only fault to date has been its predictability. For his pains, he has recorded a double-digit loss in support since the election call. According to a CROP poll published this week, the Bloc could come out of the election with less than 40 per cent of the popular vote on Monday. In the Quebec City area, it has actually fallen behind the Conservatives.

"Harper's surge in Quebec caught the Bloc completely off guard. It seems its counteroffensive was too late in coming to nip it in the bud.

"That a leader from Alberta — whose policies remain controversial in Quebec — is the beneficiary of this turn-around makes it even more remarkable......

"Regardless of Monday's seat count in Quebec, this will have lasting consequences. For better or for worse, the Conservative party has for now become the federalist option of choice in Quebec. For the foreseeable future, it — rather than the Liberals — stands to attract the better candidates....

"The sovereignty movement is the biggest immediate loser of Quebec's flirt with Harper. In the short term at least, the momentum toward another referendum has been reversed. For those who harbour the dream of a winning referendum at the first opportunity, this is a wake-up call that will be difficult to ignore."

Conservatives themselves say they may have difficulty cashing in on their new-found popularity in Quebec because they don't know who many of the voters are and they face problems getting some of them to the polls.

Today Stephen Harper moved to correct an impression left by remarks he made yesterday. In an article entitled: "I'm an ally for public servants" in the Ottawa Citizen, Harper vowed to extend "an open hand to all public servants" if he's elected, saying he would prevent political aides from receiving preferential treatment when applying for public service positions.

"First and foremost, and contrary to fearmongering, we have no plans to cut department program spending. In fact, our plan commits us to moderate spending growth from now through 2011."

Harper called on public servants to "renew the partnership that has built this country for more than a century."

The government has often blamed its mistakes on the public service, he wrote.

"We would end the practice of allowing political staff and party supporters to displace veteran public servants with greater experience or qualification," he wrote. "We would also create a Public Appointments Commission which would set merit-based requirements for appointments to government boards, commissions and agencies, so that competitions for key posts are both widely publicized and fairly conducted."

As the election campaign enters its final days, Paul Martin has been hammering away at Stephen Harper, using his recent comments about the Supreme Court as a battering ram to try and dent his armour.(
CTV News)

Harper, meanwhile, is doing his best to play it safe and maintain momentum in the last few days before Canadians go to the polls, without letting the Tory train slip off the tracks.

Martin stepped up his attempts to try and drive a wedge between Harper and voters
by claiming to stack the courts with hard-core social conservatives. He keeps raising the specter that Harper will reopen the debate on abortion and claw-back same-sex marriage rights.

Harper keeps insisting that he has no plans to reopen the abortion debate, but has said he would allow a free vote in Parliament to decide whether the same sex issue should be revisited.

Meanwhile NDP Leader Jack Layton is coming under fire from his critics in his own party for running a campaign that they say is helping to elect a Stephen Harper government. The charge occurred as Layton continued his strategy of attacking the second-place Liberals while they're down.Campaigning in B.C., Layton for the first timed turned his attention to Harper. He warned B.C. voters that supporting Harper would mean bringing in a right-wing agenda similar to those of Gordon Campbell, Bill Bennett and Bill Vander Zalm.

The Election: Day 51/Conservative minority or majority?

Conflicting polls and headlines today left us wondering whether the Conservatives are headed for a majority or a solid minority.

Two new public-opinion surveys by Decima and SES suggested the recent Conservative wave of momentum may have crested or even receded a bit just days ahead of Monday's election. The Decima Research poll, conducted Jan. 12-15 for The Canadian Press, put the Conservatives at 37 per cent support compared with 27 per cent for the Liberals.
The NDP stood at 18 per cent and the Bloc Quebecois at 11. Previous Decima polls had the Tories leading nationally by up to 13 points.

An SES survey, conducted Jan. 14-16 for CPAC also put the Conservatives at 37 per cent support nationally, but gave the Liberals 30 per cent.

Taken together these two polls suggested that the Conservatives had peaked and were still in minority territory with up to a 10-point lead.

Meanwhile the latest Strategic Counsel poll, conducted for CTV and the Globe and Mail, showed the Conservatives with a mind-boggling 18-point lead. This poll showed the Liberals continuing to plummet in popularity, falling to an all-time election campaign low of 24%, with the Conservatives at 42%. Earlier Strategic Counsel numbers had the Conservatives leading the Liberals 40% to 27%.

Harper and Martin were campaigning today in the Toronto area. Martin was accompanied by ally Buzz Hargrove of the CAW. Hargrove earlier in the campaign had ticked off Jack Layton by urging union members to vote for Liberals to hold the Conservative hordes at bay.Today Hargrove set off a firestorm when he said Stephen Harper is essentially a separatist and Quebecers ought to vote for the Bloc because anything is better than a Tory government. Speaking to reporters after Martin's speech, Hargrove said having a strong Bloc Québécois caucus in opposition would be better for national unity than a Conservative caucus in power.

Harper said Hargrove's comments were "shocking," and suggested Martin distance himself from them. "I don't think any federalist leader should be urging people to vote for the Bloc," Harper said.

Martin went into damage control and said he doesn't agree with the characterization of Harper as a separatist. "I have large differences with Stephen Harper but I have never doubted his patriotism," Martin stated. (Imagine: Martin's great ally called on Quebecers to vote for the Bloc....)

Meanwhile Stephen Harper was into a little damage control of his own. The Ottawa Citizen today carried on the front page Harper's remarks of yesterday that the Senate,public service and courts are stacked with Grits.

Clarifying his remarks today, Harper said that the checks and balances of the courts and the Senate are part of the Canadian system of Parliament that a Conservative overnment would have to work with. "We have no alternative but to accept the checks; they're part of our system."

Judges, even though they are appointed by the government, are "independent, there's no doubt about that," he said. Harper also said he believes much of the civil service would welcome a new government and would be happy with the changes the Tories want to implement.

"I actually think that the vast majority of civil servants would welcome a government that would provide some direction for the civil service and for the country. I think they've been lacking that the past few years," he said.

As for the Senate, Harper said he wants to reform the upper house, but recognizes that wouldn't happen quickly. The Liberals have a huge majority in the Senate, which Harper said could be a worry. "The Liberal Senate in the past was extremely unco-operative when their party wasn't in power," he said.

"I hope that better judgment will prevail and the unelected Senate will play the role that historically it has played, which has been a useful technical role, but will not try to interfere with the democratic will of the elected House." CBC.ca

In British Columbia a battle royal is being waged among the Conservatives, Liberals and the NDP. There are many closely-fought three-way races. B.C. voters will probably get to tell us on Monday night whether we have a Conservative majority government or another couple of years of minority government, albeit this time a Conservative minority.