Sunday, April 24, 2011

Gerard Kennedy didn't come back for you Parkdale-High Park

Gerard Kennedy is asking for your vote. But he didn't bother to vote for you.
He missed 122 votes out of 363 that took place since he took office.
That's 1/3 of all votes and has given him the 6th worst voting attendance record in the House of Commons.

  • The Globe and Mail originally broke the story: Which MPs missed the most votes?, March 7 2011. (It did not include the last 3 months before an election was called so the total missed votes at that time was 103)
Click here for the complete list of Gerard Kennedy's voting record:
1st session - 0 absences
2nd session - 34 absences
3rd session - 88 absences
Total: 122 absences out of 363 votes.
To view it directly from the website of Parliament, please click here.
In response to these facts, Gerard Kennedy's campaign has put out the following material and information. We have outlined how it differs from the factual records published by the Parliament of Canada. You can view it here.

Thursday, April 21, 2011

Point of View | He said / she said: The NDP rises up

Point of View | He said / she said: The NDP rises up


Scott Reid and Tasha Kheiriddin agree on one thing at least: the NDP surge is a game changer

Posted: Apr 21, 2011 1:12 PM ET

Last Updated: Apr 21, 2011 1:12 PM ET

Looking up in Quebec following an online poll from CROP that shows the NDP in the lead. Jack Layton waves to a crowd in Quebec City in April 18. (Mathieu Belanger/Reuters)

Looking up in Quebec following an online poll from CROP that shows the NDP in the lead. Jack Layton waves to a crowd in Quebec City in April 18. (Mathieu Belanger/Reuters)

Reid: Sit up and pay attention

This is an enormous event.

When news broke late Wednesday that the NDP has surged to top spot in Quebec, according to one poll — and drawn even with the Liberals nationwide, according to another — all lingering doubt was erased.

Jack Layton's momentum is real. It is accumulating. And it will be the principal agent that affects the final days of this election.

Scott Reid
Scott Reid is a principal with Feschuk.Reid and has held senior roles in numerous federal and provincial election campaigns. From 2003 to 2006 he served as senior adviser and director of communications in the office of Liberal prime minister Paul Martin.
In a campaign that was expected to drearily reproduce the status quo we might now plausibly expect the most dramatic realignment of the political landscape since 1993. It is a development that finally merits the much-abused label of game changer.

As such, each of the main parties is now faced with a treacherous set of choices and we enter a time when campaign strategists must earn their keep in full. Exact adjustments will be required. Nerves of polished steel will be needed. Precise decisions will have to be taken.

The threat is most immediate for the Bloc Quebecois, which is suddenly confronted by a fickle Quebec public that offered few warning signs of disaffection.
Obviously, the NDP have captured the fancy of francophones with a mix of policies and personality that Gilles Duceppe is now struggling to marginalize. Layton's nationalist appeal to Quebecers, which sometimes borders on something less admirable, is both a strength and, increasingly, a vulnerability for the New Democrats.

For Stephen Harper, the NDP momentum will give previously uninspired voters permission to leave the prime minister's fold. Something has clearly happened in the past few days.

Harper's personal approval rating is bleeding like a Wes Craven film. He must decide who, how and when to play a card. Does he stand and fight for his dozen Quebec seats? Or bail out and focus on the Lower Mainland and greater Toronto area?

Most importantly, is all this talk of coalition the antidote or the item that's turning people off?

Stop Layton


The Liberals may be inclined to see the rose garden amid the rubble. After all, an NDP surge would limit Harper to a weak minority with the Grits remaining the second largest caucus.

But that is dangerous thinking. The risk for the Liberals is pronounced. What it means is that a lot of voters are walking past Michael Ignatieff on their way from Stephen Harper. Why is that happening and how can it be halted?

Seats in Vancouver and the GTA are under great pressure. Montreal MPs are clearly imperiled. And there is no reason to assume the NDP tide has stopped rising.

This is not a static moment that can be sliced open and autopsied for its potential seat combinations. The Liberals have one clear imperative: Stop Layton. Stop him now. And recover their position.

Finally, the NDP face the greatest challenge of all: To preserve their momentum despite a certain barrage of incoming fire. Unpredicted rises in support have occurred before only to fall to threads like an overcooked roast. Think the ADQ in Quebec. Sharon Carstairs in Manitoba. Gordon Wilson in BC.

And, of course, Ed Broadbent in 1988.

All showed great promise but faded in the stretch. The exhilaration of Layton's campaign will be matched by a dread that it stands one mistake away from blowing an historic opportunity. Shrewd opponents can exploit that insecurity.

What cannot be said of this moment is that it is typical. The NDP have turned this into an historic election. A government will be lost. A sovereignty movement set back. A great institution humbled. Or an unprecedented possibility squandered.
In these few remaining days, great and lasting choices will be taken.


Kheiriddin: More seats or more three-ways for the Tories to win?


To hear Scott Reid tell it, the NDP's growth is The Biggest Event of This Campaign, or perhaps any Canadian campaign, ever.

OK, I'll concede that it is significant, particularly in potentially breaking the Bloc's lock on Quebec. But I
will hold the applause until May 2.

I am not fully convinced that this surge will sustain itself until voting day, and I am even less convinced that this surge is due to the strength of the NDP, rather than disenchantment with the Liberals and the Bloc.

Tasha Kheiriddin
Tasha Kheiriddin is a columnist and member of the editorial board for the National Post newspaper. She is a regular contributor to CBC's Power and  Politics and hosts a radio show, Sunday with Tasha Kheiriddin, on CFRB Newstalk 1010 in Toronto.
If you pick apart the NDP platform (which isn't hard to do), it greatly resembles the Liberal platform, with some anti-business rhetoric thrown in.

There's a pledge to help families with "green" renovations. There's assistance for caregivers and a boost to the CPP. There's a cancellation of tax cuts (a reversal, in the NDP's case) but still the message is the same: families first, corporations second.

The NDP ratchets up the business-bashing with their promises to cap credit card rates, tighten reviews on foreign investment, hold Canadian companes doing business overseas to Canadian environmental standards and discourage the export of unrefined petrochemical products.

Are these policies driving their rising poll numbers? While they may have some traction with left-wing Bloc voters, they are not likely the kind of thing that would make Liberal voters kick up their heels and cross the floor.

The NDP is surging because the Liberal and Bloc campaigns are failing to catch fire with the electorates of English Canada and Quebec, respectively.

Michael Ignatieff's anemic performances in the leaders' debates, coupled with the Liberals' inability to make a single scandal stick to the Tories, sucked the air out of whatever momentum the party had generated in the first two weeks of the campaign.

Meanwhile, Gilles Duceppe may have won the French debate, but it was more by virtue of linguistic advantage than substance, and his subsequent pleas for votes to stop a Harper majority imbue him with an air of desperation.

Still, I will wait and see, because Quebecers are notoriously fickle and self-interested voters. They like to go with a winner.

And while the NDP are on a roll, nobody believes Jack Layton's bluster that he's running for prime minister.

While Gilles Duceppe is not seeking the keys to 24 Sussex either, his party has represented the de facto "home team" for the past seven elections.

Self-interest


If Quebecers are resigned to staying on the bench, they might switch teams. But if they really want to play the game of government, logically, they should switch their votes to the Conservatives.

That could still happen, if Conservative numbers spike in the last week of the campaign.

But self-interest could be subsumed by political leanings. Quebecers tilt left on most issues, including spending, the size of government, social mores, and foreign policy — and thus should be fertile ground for the NDP.

The unresolved question, of course, is the impact that a higher NDP vote would have on seat counts.
In Quebec, the CROP poll would seem to put them within striking distance of half a dozen seats, including several on the island of Montreal.

In English Canada, the NDP surge could stave off Tory gains, pick up a few Liberal seats — or split the centre-left vote and allow Conservatives to come up the middle.

Clearly, the Liberals need to change tactics and focus on the NDP. But with their inability to make a dent in Stephen Harper's Teflon exterior, it's hard to see what the Liberals could throw at the even more popular Jack Layton to knock him off course.

Both the Liberals and the Bloc will likely play the same card: vote for them to stop a Harper majority at all costs. Hmm, the coalition is forming already.

Tuesday, April 19, 2011

Minimum standards needed for candidates

Minimum standards needed for candidates

Last Updated: April 19, 2011 9:09am

Help Wanted: Sometimes hard-working, maple-sugar pie-eating, baby-kissing candidate for public office. Salary based on taxpayer generosity and unrelated to your abilities or commitment. Extensive travel and entertainment may take precedence over job duties once sworn in.

It's easy for voters to be increasingly cynical--particularly those who are legitimately engaged in full-time work-- when politicians take to stumping around the countryside asking to be elected or returned to office.

Too many of them are like teenagers running for high-school student council. Let's win the popularity contest and then we can skip off class.

The common worker would be fired smartly for repeated absenteeism, yet this is not so in the country's hallowed halls of government. In Canada's Parliament, missing work seems to be an inherent right of the elite.

In the 3rd session of the 40th Parliament, which ran from March 3, 2010 to March 26, 2011, Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff was the most invisible MP in Ottawa with 135 absences.

In fact Liberals showed (up) very poorly, accounting for six of the seven most-often empty desks in the House.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper misses out on a good attendance pin as well. He was missing in action 82 times, while Helena Guergis didn't show up for work on 81 separate occasions.

It is not acceptable that Justin Trudeau or Bev Oda can miss work 56 times. It is not reasonable that Stephane Dion can have trouble finding the Parliament buildings 59 times, or that Gerard Kennedy can get tied up 88 times.

How many other jobs permit such blatant absenteeism?

Perhaps it is the natural consequence of having to report to the board of directors (the voters in this case) only once every few years.

Elected officials work for Canadians, except of course when they don't.

It isn't enough to simply go to the polls, cast your ballot and trust that your elected representative is in fact working for you.

Be engaged, ask questions, demand answers, or be okay with throwing that $157,731 a year salary down the drain.

--John Chambers

Monday, April 18, 2011

Kennedy and Nash square off over attendance

Kennedy and Nash square off over attendance


Kennedy and Nash square off over attendance. At the microphone Taylor Train (Conservative), to the left, Peggy Nash (NDP), to the right Gerard Kennedy (Liberal) and Andrew Borkowski (Christian Heritage) during the Swansea Area Ratepayers Association on April 13. Staff photo/ERIN HATFIELD
With a current Member of Parliament and a former MP vying to regain the seat in Parkdale-High Park, although cordial the discourse is heating up in the west end riding.

In Parkdale-High Park the electorate is in the position to compare the back-to-back terms of candidates Peggy Nash, who represented the riding from 2006-08 and Liberal Gerard Kennedy, who unseated Nash in the 2008 federal election with 20,705 over Nash's 17,332.

A recent debate, hosted by the Swansea Area Ratepayers Association on April 13, highlighted that rivalry. Although on most accounts, the event was less a debate and more of a conversation about where each of the four candidates stood on a range of issues. It remained largely congenial and at times comical, except when the issue of Kennedy's attendance in Ottawa and in the riding was called into question.

"Of all things you might accuse me of, don't accuse me of not working for this community," Kennedy said. "I believe enough that if Peggy Nash... would look at the facts, repudiate what she has been putting out with phone calls and at the door we could have a good clean honest debate that this community wants and deserves."

During this campaign Nash has called into question Kennedy's attendance record on voting at the House of Commons, referencing media reports that Kennedy has missed one-third of the votes in the House.

"I do believe it is important that when you elect your member of parliament your vote be respected in the MP voting in the House of Commons," Nash said.

The panel of candidates included Kennedy and Nash as well as first-timer Conservative candidate Taylor Train and Christian Heritage Party of Canada candidate Andrew Borkowski, who ran in 2008, receiving 0.47 per cent of the vote.

Kennedy said it has been his privilege to represent the area but there is still work to be done to engage people in the political process.

"We need to be the ones who leave something behind for our kids," Kennedy said. "This isn't just about who you send to Ottawa or who you pick, it is about whether or not we get a positive agenda."

Borkowski, 45, was born in the riding and works as a pharmacist and has acted with Bloor West Village Playhouse. He describes himself as pro-life, pro-family and pro-justice.

Train, who has a degree in history, has been a resident of Parkdale-High Park for 15 years. A teacher at Seneca College, he has in the past served in the army and worked in financial services.
Train said he joined the race because he got fed up at yelling at politicians on the television and decided to do something about it.

"I'm a PUC," Train said. "I am a Progressive Urban Conservative. I am socially progressive, I sure am an urban boy and I believe in the Conservative philosophy. The Conservative philosophy is not grand schemes of things, not huge projects that are going to change society, but the little wee things that we can do every day inch-by-inch to improve people's lives."

Nash said scandals and political games have gotten in the way of real work being done in Ottawa.

"This community deserves a more reliable voice in Ottawa," said Nash. "You all know, however you have voted in the past, that I have worked tirelessly for this community, in and out of elected office. You do have a choice in this election; here in Parkdale-High Park you can vote for a leader who consistently stands up for you and your family and an MP who will respect the trust your ballot represents."

Questions that evening, which were submitted by the audience, covered a wide range including the aging population, climate change, gas prices, job security and immigration. But, perhaps the most telling responses came when the candidates were asked to imagine Parkdale-High Park in 20 to 50 years time.

Nash said she looks to a time when we have a more balanced and happier society where caring for those who are most vulnerable is our highest calling.

"At the end of our lives when we look back, what is most meaningful are our relationships with other people," Nash said. "I believe government has a role in fostering those relationships and in balancing powers outside of the democratic forces."

Train said his vision for the future is based on history and Canada's reputation as a land of opportunity.

"People can come here and they can live together in peace, they can live in a caring nation that they are proud of," Train said. "A place where they can live and grow with their families and build their lives with opportunity."

A place that will give them an education, work, security of person, freedom of religion and access to services, Train added

Kennedy said his vision is for a Canada that people can be proud of, that citizens are engaged in and feel they can contribute to.

"I see a Quebec that has reconciled with Canada and putting Canadians first, and I see people having a right to their own potential, whether they are new immigrants or low income people or any of the people we don't value as much as we should."

While offering his vision for the future of Canada, Borkowski replied, "Babies, babies, babies."

In 50 years Borkowski said he would like to see the population of Canada double.

"Like a European country, this is such an empty spacious county and the population is so low," Borkowski said. "We could be and should be up to a billion people. People are good for the economy."

Gerard Kennedy versus Peggy Nash in Parkdale-High Park: the huggiest grudge match ever

Gerard Kennedy versus Peggy Nash in Parkdale-High Park: the huggiest grudge match ever


Gerard Kennedy and Peggy Nash are slugging it out in Parkdale-High Park (Images: John Michael McGrath)

Like so many ridings in the 416, Parkdale-High Park is hosting a showdown between the Liberals and the NDP while the Tories and the Greens duke it out for third place. What’s odd about this district, however, is that it might actually change hands on May 2—and both of the viable candidates have “re-elect” signs (the NDP put orange tape over the “re-” without being forced to the way the Liberals were elsewhere). Liberal incumbent Gerard Kennedy took Parkdale-High Park from the NDP’s Peggy Nash in 2008 by 3,000 votes, and Nash is back for a rematch. Like in Trinity-Spadina—the one other downtown riding that may swing—this is a fight between the left and the really left. The knives aren’t out, but the fight is interesting nonetheless, especially with the NDP’s numbers on the rise across the country. Here, we talk to Kennedy and Nash about what’s at stake for Parkdale-High Park.

Over the course of our interviews, the candidates gave their sharpest responses when the issue of the air-rail link from Union Station to Pearson Airport was raised. As we’ve discussed before, the community is in a bit of an uproar over the province’s decision not to electrify the line until after the 2015 Pan Am games. Nash says, “I’ve been pressuring the federal government to spend the money we need to build it right the first time.” She says an NDP government would introduce a national transit plan set in law and transfer more money to cities to deal with their transit problems. Trying to win Toronto votes with transit spending? Where have we heard that before?

Kennedy agrees that the relationship between Metrolinx and the community around the air-rail link has at times been “ridiculous.” “I think Metrolinx has been sluggish. If I’d been in the government, I’d have to take responsibility,” he says. “There’s two points though: they have committed to electrification, and the local movement, the couple or three ridings, have been taken over by the NDP and used for partisan purposes.” Kennedy says he’s had a hard time trying to get groups like the Clean Train Coalition to give him the time of day, much less the time to speak. “When I went to a meeting and asked for a chance to speak, they tried to give me one minute.”

Responding to criticism that he’s been absent from the spotlight over the last two years and that the residents of Parkdale-High Park need an MP who can attract more attention to their concerns, Kennedy asks people to judge him by his record. He says he brings the issues to the forefront, not his own face: “Maybe I haven’t done the best job promoting myself, but I’ve been in hundreds of stories on infrastructure and the environment.”

There are, of course, plenty of other issues in this riding. The air-rail link may have inflamed the most passion, but it probably won’t be the issue most people remember on voting day. Both Nash and Kennedy say they’ve heard from voters about the economy, how dysfunctional Parliament is, and, of course, a desire to fight Stephen Harper and the Conservatives.

As well, the recent spate of unprovoked beatings in Parkdale has the entire community nervous and looking for a better solution to mental health issues than locking people up. Nash points out that mental health is only one side of the coin—poverty is another. She and the NDP want a national housing strategy to help combat urban poverty, a national plan the Liberals failed to deliver during the Chrétien-Martin years. Kennedy says he’s been working with local police in an unofficial capacity. “Nobody in the community is clamouring for the law-and-order Conservative stuff,” Kennedy says. “People want to know what will we do, how will we keep people safer.”

Whatever happens, the fate of this riding won’t change the balance of power in Parliament. It’s not going to take a seat away from the Conservatives, and hanging on to it probably won’t change the Liberal prospects for a win on voting day. But since this riding is one of the few in Toronto that could conceivably change hands—Nash herself won it after Liberal Sam Bulte had a bit of an Internet meltdown in 2006—it remains on our list of ridings to watch.

Thursday, April 14, 2011

Is Gerard Kennedy worth $124,615.38 to Ryerson?

Is Gerard Kennedy worth $124,615.38 to Ryerson?

April 14, 2009 by admin 

The Ontario Government’s list of public sector employees who earned more than $100,000 in 2008. MP Gerard Kennedy was an unlikely addition to Ryerson’s list of the highest rollers.

Nora Loreto
News Editor
Ryerson Free Press

Ontario’s Public Sector Salary Disclosure 2009 was released on March 31 and, despite its timing right before April Fools Day, many of the salaries listed were no laughing matter.

Among Ryerson’s top-paid administrators, faculty and staff was former Liberal leadership contender and current Member of Parliament for Parkdale - High Park Gerard Kennedy.

For 2008, Kennedy’s salary was $124,615.38, despite only working there for eight months. The original announcement of his appointment indicated that his term would be finished on September 4, 2008. By coincidence, this happened to be only days before the federal election was called.

Had Kennedy worked every weekday from January to September, with benefits, he would have made $738.04 dollars a day. That is just under $100 an hour.

“I was paid less than I have been for other work I’ve done, less than I make in government,” said Kennedy. He added that he did not negotiate his salary, that it was Ryerson’s offer he accepted.

While at Ryerson, Kennedy gave three guest lectures, worked with undergraduate and graduate students on a variety of projects and started to develop a centre for Canadian enterprise with other universities. He also represented Ryerson in a number of meetings and delivered remarks on behalf of Ryerson to several groups in Canada and in the Ukraine and Israel.

His contract was renewed in summer 2008, but contained a clause that said it would be terminated upon the commencement of a federal election. The election was called on September 7.
During that election, Kennedy unseated New Democratic incumbent Peggy Nash by just over 3,000 votes.

“My only regret is the sudden call of election,” he said. Despite the end of his contract, Kennedy said that he’s continued to work on finishing some projects through the fall of 2008 and winter of 2009.

Ken Jones, the Dean of the Faculty of Business was pleased with both Kennedy’s contributions to Ryerson and with the network of people he built around the Faculty. “He helped brand us in a new set of communities,” said Jones, adding that Kennedy’s left-of-centre approach to business provided a needed balance to the Faculty.

Jones said that Kennedy worked three to four days a week, met with students, provided counsel to Jones himself and made linkages across other faculties.

“His view is that entrepreneurship should be applied to government, not-for-profits, business and social organisations… from my point of view, that’s an important message,” said Jones.

When Tania Hassan, Vice-President of Student Rights for the Continuing Education Student Association of Ryerson (CESAR), was told about the salary, she was shocked.

“When President Sheldon Levy speaks about there not being enough money for infrastructure, but they can find the money to pay someone for eight months of work – that’s ridiculous,” she said.

Kennedy was the only Professor of Distinction on the list of salaries over $100,000.

When asked if he felt that his salary was too high, he asked, “Was there value received? The University said yes, there was” and added that he believed that his work led to tangible benefits for students and that Ryerson will see good things arise as a result of his work.

Jones was not part of the discussion of salary for Kennedy. He said that it was an institutional decision, rather than a decision of the Faculty of Business.
“Different people have different costs associated to them… If you want to get people who have a reputation, it has a cost. He had a market value and had other options,” said Jones.

In total, 548 faculty and staff at Ryerson made over $100,000 in 2008. President Sheldon Levy topped the list with a combined salary and benefits of $391,217.00. Right after him was Vice-President University Advancement, Adam Kahan who made $369,730.66.

There are 59 more people making over $100,000 than last year, up from 489.

“Why are students’ backs being broken to pay these high salaries?” asked Hassan, also a part-time student in the School of Social Work. “I’m working two jobs just to stay in school. It’s ridiculous… it’s ridiculous.

ELECTION WATCH: Battleground T.O.


Now that the debates are behind us, it’s more obvious than ever that there is a universe between Harper and the rest of our party leaders. Don’t get me started.

But if you came from a different planet to watch on Tuesday night and were asked to place Michael Ignatieff, Jack Layton and Gilles Duceppe along a political spectrum, you’d be hard-pressed to figure out who is the most mainstream and who the edgiest. And that’s true even if you add in Elizabeth May, who should have been there. Interestingly, even Stephen Harper decided to put his left foot forward; turns out he’s passionate about gun control, criminal rehabilitation and clean energy. Who knew?

How is it that we’ve never had a more right-wing government, yet our politicians play to the left when trying to win our hearts? Says something about us all, don’t you think?

So now the horse race begins in earnest. The most committed voters are the Conservatives’ supporters. An estimated 800,000-plus Liberal voters stayed home last time, and so did droves of young potential voters. It’s the perfect time to start watching how the key Toronto races are shaping up. Here are the ones to keep an eye on.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Parkdale-High Park

Incumbent
Gerard Kennedy
Main challenger NDPer
Peggy Nash

The Skinny They like their politics progressive in Parkdale-High Park, that’s for sure. Popular and respected former NDP incumbent Peggy Nash losing her seat to Gerard Kennedy by a fat 3,000 votes in 2008 was one of the NDP’s real heartbreaks. A battle between two grassroots campaigners with
progressive cred seemed like a waste. Even though the Liberals held the riding for a long time before Nash grabbed it, Kennedy’s victory was extra-surprising because the Dion factor was otherwise sinking Lib campaigns across the country. Logic would say Kennedy is sitting pretty. But logic isn’t everything. Since he left for Ottawa, it’s said that Kennedy hasn’t been seen much. Nash is a long shot, but don’t underestimate the deep community roots she’s been tending since her first run in 2004.

Wednesday, April 13, 2011

Will Liberal MP Gerard Kennedy be held in contempt of Parliament?

Will Liberal MP Gerard Kennedy be held in contempt of Parliament?


Despite a valiant attempt, Liberal MP Gerard Kennedy (Parkdale-High Park) couldn't convince Bloc MPs on the House of Commons' Transport Committee on Tuesday to kill a Tory motion that calls out the not-so-media-shy MP for releasing details of camera proceedings of the committee. The motion, passed on Tuesday, says committee members "felt that their privilege had been breached" and the whole in camera process "had been jeopardized."

The matter is now in the hands of the Speaker of the House of Commons "to give the House an opportunity to reflect on these matters and consider holding the Member for Parkale-High Park in contempt."

You see, it seems Kennedy was keen to get some public credit for getting a motion passed at the committee last month to study the impact of the government's March 31, 2011 deadline for infrastructure stimulus projects -- one of the few files Kennedy has been able to get some ink. But in his zeal for attention, Kennedy may have revealed a little too much information (that is was his motion; and it received all-party support).

Kennedy apologized to the Committee on Tuesday, explaining that as a long-time politician and former chairman of a committee, he's a big believer in the parliamentary process. But his mea culpa wasn't enough to keep him out of hot water. The Bloc transport critic Mario Laframboise was particularly unimpressed, saying the more Kennedy spoke, the less "confident" he felt. "He wanted this motion to be made public.... It was a strategy on your part, you planned your intervention.... You planned to send this to all municipalities," Laframboise told Kennedy.

Yikes (or should I say Zing).

But did Tory MP and parliamentary secretary Brian Jean, who moved the motion, reveal a little too much himself? During the debate about whether Kennedy may have breached privilege, Jean mentioned that Kennedy had moved a motion during the month's in camera proceeding to take the debate out of camera. At the request of NDP transport critic Dennis Bevington, the chairman of the committee will now look at this question.

Ah, the joys of the parliamentary process.

--Sarah Schmidt

Friday, April 8, 2011

Politicians think you’re stupid - Gerrard Kennedy

Politicians think you’re stupid - Gerard Kennedy

 
Liberal Gerard Kennedy

They think you are stupid. They are talking down to you.


There. That is the short and simple idea I want to get across. Now I will repeat it, and repeat it, always using precisely the same language, as if I were training an unusually thick beagle.

Who are “they”? You may think it’s “the elites” we hear so much about these days. But it’s not. It’s the politicians who rail against “elites.”

They think you are stupid. They are talking down to you.

Consider John Baird, powerful government official, former resident of Toronto, and scourge of the “Toronto elites.”

On Tuesday, Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff suggested it’s “un-Canadian” for the Conservatives to investigate people and bar them from political rallies because they may have links with other parties. In response, the Conservatives called a press conference and raised the curtain on the Bill Shatner of Canadian political theatre. “He should be the last person to call anyone un-Canadian,” Baird emoted with the subtlety of Shatner shouting “Khaaan!” Michael Ignatieff is a man who “called the United States his country, a man who has called the Canadian maple leaf a pale imitation of a beer label.” And so on. It was less a press conference than a stage adaptation of a Conservative attack ad.

Political observers chuckled. Vintage Baird.

In person, John Baird is a lovely man. People from all parties like him. But when the curtain goes up, Baird snarls and rages and bellows his lines with the discipline of a classically trained actor who will not deviate from the script no matter how ridiculous it is. Then the show ends and everybody goes for a beer.

They think you are stupid. They are talking down to you.

Yes, I know. Constant repetition is annoying. In the last two weeks, I’ve heard Conservatives repeat the phrase “risky coalition” more often than I’ve heard my son say “I want to play video games.” The difference is my son is sincere. Adults do not repeat precisely the same phrase again and again unless they have suffered severe brain damage or they are following the advice of an expensive consultant who tested the phrase on focus groups and found it presses the right buttons.

People “vote based on short bursts of political communication that are typically seven to 10 seconds in length and squeezed in between a car chase and the latest panda birth on the local news,” writes Republican pollster Frank Luntz. Find the right phrase. Repeat it until you vomit. That’s how you win elections. Politicians call it “discipline.”

Stop the gravy train, says Rob Ford. “How will you balance the budget?” Stop the gravy train. “What about mass transit?” Stop the gravy train. “What’s wrong with the Leafs?” Stop the gravy train. “I’m going to blow my brains out if you say that again.” Stop the gravy train.

“It’s no accident that contemporary politicians have learned to array American flags in the background of their press conferences or speak in front of themed backdrops, pronouncing the subject and message just in case the speech doesn’t make it abundantly clear,” writes Luntz. “It’s politics for the simple-minded.”

Of course “politics for the simple-minded” is not a Conservative or Republican or right-wing thing. It’s a political thing. All parties used themed backdrops, vapid talking points, and droning repetition. It was Roméo LeBlanc, the Liberal “Codfather,” who observed that “if you can’t read it on a barn door driving 60 miles an hour, then it didn’t happen,” and the Liberals have certainly delivered their share of patronizing rhetoric in the current campaign — notably their policy “family pack” (comes with coleslaw and fries) and the slogan “we choose families, not jets” (although the official policy is to buy jets).

They think you are stupid. They are talking down to you.

But the most egregious guff comes from fake populism — think Montgomery Burns running for governor on The Simpsons — and fake populism is, today, a conservative specialty.

In his 2006 book, Right Side Up, journalist Paul Wells recounted a conversation with Conservative Jason Kenney. The Tories would be happy for the Conservatives to run against a Liberal party led by any of the leading Liberals, Kenney said. “I can’t see Gerard Kennedy or Michael Ignatieff or Bob Rae or Stéphane Dion — all smart, decent people — selling with a 40-year-old plumber in Peterborough who makes 40 grand. The spectrum of first-tier leadership candidates there reads like the perfect list of attendees at a cocktail party in the Annex or Cabbagetown. It’s not Main Street.” Now imagine this next bit in the voice of Mr. Burns: “What’s Ignatieff’s wife’s name again?” Zsuzsanna. “Exactly. So in the next election it’s Steve and Laureen versus Count Michael and What’s-Her-Name. It’s almost a dream for us.”

A politician hasn’t sneered like that since Mr. Burns made dinner with a common man part of his campaign strategy: “Every Joe Meatball and Sally Housecoat in this godforsaken state will see me hunkering down for chow with Eddie Punchclock.”

I’d like to think plumbers in Peterborough are smart enough to see through this stuff. So I won’t repeat myself.

Dan Gardner’s column appears Wednesday and Friday.
E-mail: dgardner@ottawacitizen.com.

Monday, April 4, 2011

Layton proposes pension overhaul


Layton proposes pension overhaul
 
KRISTY KIRKUP, QMI Agency
 
First posted: | Updated:

TORONTO - NDP Leader Jack Layton kicked off the second week of the federal election campaign by promising to gradually double Canada and Quebec pension plans.

"The New Democrat pension plan will help hard working families worried about retirement," said Layton. "It will provide options to those Canadians that do not have stable workplace pensions."

Layton said he will allow for Canadians to funnel money from their personal savings to top off the public pension plan. He also proposed amending federal legislation to make pensioners and workers on long-term disability a priority if employers declare bankruptcy.

The NDP leader has long been calling for improved retirement security.

"Stephen Harper promised to stand up for the Canadian family," said Layton. "But when it came to the retirement security crisis they face, he has turned his back on them."

During his visit to the Greater Toronto Area, Layton endorsed composer and journalist Andrew Cash in the Davenport riding. It is currently held by Liberal MP Mario Silva, who first claimed victory back in 2004.

The GTA is considered a Grit stronghold, but the New Democrats are determined to pick off a few key seats here. The party has focused its efforts on winning back the riding of Parkdale-High Park. NDP Peggy Nash lost her seat to Gerard Kennedy in 2008. In this election she is going after his attendance record, known as one of the worst in the House of Commons.

Layton will also visit the riding of Elgin-Middlesex-London later Monday, where an NDP candidate shocked everyone by dropping out of the race. Ryan Dolby announced last week he was backing out on the NDP and would throw his support behind the local Liberal candidate.

The New Democrats were quick to find a replacement within a 24-hour period. Fred Sinclair is now the party's candidate in this riding.

Layton told reporters Sunday that Dolby apologized for his quick departure via text message.

On Twitter: @kkirkup