Where's the mayor?

This afternoon Prime Minister Stephen Harper joined Premier Ed Stelmach, federal Environment Minister Jim Prentice and Mayor Dave... what?... what's that? Bronconnier wasn't at the Calgary ring road funding announcement? But it's the Calgary ring road. All three levels of government are putting up the cash for it. Where the heck is the mayor? Deputy mayor? Or an alderman of any kind? I don't see any of these folks in the 'platform party' photos.

Maybe we sent this sleepy/bored Roads worker instead to represent the City instead.


BTW, is this really one of the best photos you have of the event? Aside from the City worker it looks like the two speakers are about to fall asleep too. Maybe Bronco knew this and decided he had better things to do than nod off in a SE Calgary hanger.

Okay, everybody look like you're working for the camera!

When I saw this image flash across my screen last night while watching CBC's The National (had to hear what the At Issue panel had to say) I damn near laughed myself off the couch.

Forget about the budget for a second, why the need for this lame-o photo op? Did someone in the Conservative communications nerve centre actually think this would be viewed in any manner other than as crass political posturing? Did they actually think even one single Canadian would believe that after proroguing Parliament for two months the Conservatives in the room did no work what-so-ever until the very morning of the budget announcement, when they suddenly convened in front of the cameras, took off their jackets and finally got to work. (Some Canadians might believe they finally got to work congratulating themselves, but that's about as far as I can imagine anyone going.)

The image is a laugher because it works SO hard at turning over the big Harper stereotype that he is a lone wolf, muzzling MPs rather than working with them. The thing that really made me chuckle after the initial shock was Peter Mansbridge revealing that before the ministers came in the room the government press people handed out a seating chart saying who each of these people are and where they were sitting!

That's right. They've been in the shadows for so long the press might not even know who they are. (I wonder where that stereotype comes from...)

At least they are out of the shadows now - hopefully to actually get down to work. Rather than just for a photo op that makes them look like they are working.

(photo h/t AGRDT)

PS - Maybe Harper should go play with a football like Stanfield or play street hockey like Dion. Somehow I feel those photo ops gone wrong were almost less embarassing.

Can a hollow throne support our weight?

My quick impression of the throne speech (the text of which can be found here):

I agree whole heartedly with the words used. I, nay, we want politicians and the community to work together, not just to solve this "struggling economy", but also in general. We elect a group to represent us and solve these kinds of issues.

But there is something hollow about the language used. The speech presents the idea of working together as if it is a new thing - a tool that has not been available to us in the past months or years. Has this not been an option previously? Has it not been a potential solution to "uncertainty" all this time? Why was this tool not used before?

It gets me thinking about the stereotypical Stephen Harper left-leaning politicians and comedians alike love to put forward and abuse - the secretive Harper that holds few press conferences and 'muzzles' his MPs. Doesn't the language in the throne speech fly in the face of what has come before? Who is this speech aimed at? The writer? It all just seems... false, somehow.

Whether you agree or disagree with the Coalition between the Liberals and the NDP, with the support of the Bloq, it is hard to argue this is the kind of cooperation the throne speech calls for.

"Our Government approached the dialogue in a spirit of open and non-partisan cooperation." Why the change of heart from the government? Time will tell if this is really the dawn of a new era in Parliament, or just another political empty promise that we've become so used to over 142 years.

A simple marketing tip: you can't just say you are some thing, that won't fool anyone. To get your customers to believe you, you have to actually be that. Do this and you'll save a lot of heartache and money in the long run.

Obama has nothing better to do than listen intently to my opinions

First I thought it was odd enough that Lululemon Athletica started following me on Twitter (I don't follow them). But then this email arrived:

Hi, -dj.

Barack Obama (BarackObama) is now following your updates on Twitter.

Check out Barack Obama's profile here:

http://twitter.com/BarackObama


Best,
Twitter

Uh.... thanks? I guess Obama wants to hear my thoughts about how cold it is in Calgary or how we should just lock up Ignatieff and Harper in a room and let them fight club it out to create the next budget.

I think my brilliant ideas for saving America and solving the "global financial crisis" might get lost in his 154,000 + followings.

BTW isn't it odd that Obama is following 154k people while only 149k are following him? Looks like he really is listening to the public. (Maybe more than they are listening to him? That can't be bad can it?)

One Crisis(es) After Another

I thought this was too good to pass up, so I'll paraphrase Stephane Dion and Scott Reid from this past week. Maybe you'll get an ironic giggle out of it like I do.

This past week Mr. Harper turned an economic crisis into a political crisis. He then re branded that crisis by turning it into a national unity crisis, before instigating a constitutional crisis to get out of the whole mess.

All that in just one week when he could have just worked with the other MPs to solve the first crisis.

You know, I don't think I'd like to be Prime Minister if these are the only options put before me.

Here is what is going to happen now 2

My first prediction has come true and now we'll have to see if the second one does too.

It is fair to predict the only way the Prime Minister will survive an eventual confidence motion in January on the budget is if it includes the significant stimulus package the Coalition has requested/proposed.

What appeasement will the Prime Minister accomplish in a month an a half that he could not have accomplished put putting his nose to the grindstone now and worked out before Monday?

He didn't even try. He asked to prorogue Parliament today (Thursday) instead of getting his hands dirty and working his ass off trying to reach a deal until Sunday - when, if he couldn't reach an agreement with opposition parties, he could have gone down this same road and asked to prorogue the House.

Regardless of who you or I voted for in the last election this just looks like pure laziness on behalf of the Prime Minister.

Here is what is going to happen now

Here's the deal. Or at least my best guess at this point. (Isn't constitutional guessing fun?!)

The Prime Minister will ask for a prorogation of Parliament tomorrow morning and the Governor General (to my dismay) will agree. She'll agree because this is her best option - nobody wants the GG to disagree with a democratically elected Prime Minister.

They will prorogue for one week which will take us to the Holiday break, which is set to begin on December 13. I guess that's not so bad; one week?

We'll return on January 26 to... exactly the same situation we face now. But with cooler heads. But everyone will be just as angry. The budget will be presented on January 27 and it will be a confidence motion.

Why prorogue again?

On ensuring an unelected official does not decide the fate of our country

Also available on the Calgary Herald's Q.

The Governor General is a figurehead position, it has been for many years. It is unfair to ask an unelected official to decide the fate of our country.

Therefore there is only one option Michaelle Jean has before her: do whatever the Prime Minister asks of her. Assuming the PM enjoys the confidence of the House, he represents the will of 308 elected officials. This is the precedent and is exceedingly fair.

However it is also the reason Stephen Harper cannot ask her to prorogue Parliament.

To ask her to do so would be to ask an unelected official to decide the fate of our country. To do this would be near political suicide. It would be considered by many, myself included, as cowardly and undemocratic. The House of Commons is the governing body and they alone should be the ones to decide the future of Canada. Its members are our representatives. This is what we sent them to Ottawa to do.

In my eyes this leaves Stephen Harper with only three options. He can only present one to the Governor General, and she should agree to whichever one he proposes regardless of her own personal opinion.

1. Work with the opposition MPs to avoid defeat on Monday’s non-confidence motion – This is obviously my favourite option as it means Parliament returns to civility and we can get back to the job of governing and fixing the current economy situation we are in. It is however the hardest option of the three to undertake because it requires patience and quick work.
   
   If they go this route the Conservatives only have until Monday to strike a deal on the economy with the Liberals or the NDP. Or the Bloq. All you need is the support of one of those parties and we can get back to business as usual. Harper has already shown he is willing to back down on the majority of items proposed in the offending Fiscal Update – the Coalition should show they are willing to do the same. It is time to make at least one more concession to one other party. This is democracy in action. After Monday’s vote, you will have officially failed or succeeded at being a minority government. And you would only have two options left to choose from if you prove to be a failure.
   
   Proroguing is an extension of this option but one that you have asked an unelected official to grant you extra time to undertake the task. Instead, go ask an opposition leader and get more time democratically by gaining the confidence of the House of Commons, and Canadians.
   
   
2. Call an election – There is no shame in this if you can’t work with other parties. Let Canadians decide if we agree with you or the opposition. If we agree with you then you will probably get a majority. If not, you’ll become the opposition and the party we think can do the best job governing will be given a chance. Or you may be given a message that we don’t trust anyone fully and we are happy with a minority government so quit your bitchin’ and get back to work.
   
   Of course one could argue that this is what we just did on Oct. 14, but sometimes people need to be told twice.
   
   If you don’t like the option of facing the electorate once more that leaves you with only one last option.
   
   
3. Step aside and let the Coalition give it a try – If you think the first option is going to hurt the Tories pride this one will really sting. But it isn’t such a bad option. They will have a minority and with the support of the Bloq you could bring them down anytime you like. When the Conservatives of course will be in a much better position to win an election with a majority.

The morale of the story is there are still options available to the Government that don’t result in an unelected official deciding the fate of our country. We should expect the rest of the House of Commons to respect any decision the Prime Minister makes so we can avoid that; just as we would expect him to obey the will of the House if they decide this Parliament will not continue.

Of course there is that fourth looming option: prorogue. Suspending Parliament only to avoid a confidence motion is something I think most Canadians can agree is ridiculous for the reason I outlined above, hence why I’ve ruled it out altogether. But prevailing thought is this is what the Prime Minister will announce he is going to ask the Governor General to do. If he really does go down this road, I’d like to think she kicks him out of her office and says, “Get back to work and stop running away from your problems.” Although as an unelected official I don’t think she can do much more than agree to whatever he asks.

So if a suspension is what he asks for, and what he gets, the Prime Minister certainly will have lost my confidence forever for putting the future of our country in the hands of someone other than Parliament.

"I would certainly not like to find myself governing this economy today."

There's a clip from last night's This Hour has 22 Minutes episode that caught my eye. It shows the PM misspeaking a little in the House. He was having difficulty remembering who he was talking to. It made me laugh because apparently he doesn't even know who is or wants to be the Prime Minister any longer!

I'm joking of course, but the second half of the sentence he delivered does give me pause and caused me some confusion:

"I can just tell you Mr. Prime Minister I will... or Mr. President... I would... I can just tell you I just tell you Mr. Speaker I would certainly not like to find myself governing this economy today."

I don't think Liberals, NDP or Bloc would like to find you governing this economy today either. That's kind of what has us in this whole mess. If you agree, you're welcome to step aside and we can just avoid the whole hullabaloo that is coming...

(I couldn't find a direct link to the video - stupid Flash players - but here is how to find it: click here, then on the right hand side - under Latest - find the clip called "From the Newsdesk". Currently it is on the second page. The comment is found at 2:10 into the clip.)

Bastards and Boneheads

Also available on the Calgary Herald's Q.

The title of this post gets its name from Will Ferguson’s entertaining book of the same name. In the book he travels through history applying the label “bastard” or “bonehead” to each Canadian Prime Minister. If memory serves me correct, each PM who lead a minority government received the title of “bonehead”. Inevitably they did something stupid to lose power there-by granting them the moniker for eternity. (Except maybe Pearson who led a minority seemingly forever.)

Stephen Harper has led a minority government for a couple of years now and I’m pretty confident up until this past week he easily would have fallen into the “bastard” category. Lot’s of people hate him, but there’s no arguing with the results. And just two months ago Canadians, as a whole, re-upped his contract.

But now he’s gone down that other road and fallen squarely into “bonehead” territory. Call it what you will – ‘arrogant’ appears to be most people’s fave – but Harper’s political manoeuvring, so successful in the past, has caught up with him as he went back to that trough one two many times. Instead of just focusing on governing and the “global financial crisis”, he decided to take one quick swipe at the opposition parties and attempt to kill them off under the auspice of saving Canadian taxpayers some money. (Money that would stay in the government coffers and not actually save Canadian taxpayers some money, mind you.)

When you dance with the devil you get burned.

You can slam the opposition parties’ policies, you can spend millions discrediting their leaders, but if you threaten to kill them you had to expect they’d fight back. And fight they are.
And in a minority parliament you need their support to survive – you can’t pick fights. Yup, that makes Harper a "bonehead".

I’m not impressed with how anyone in this situation is handling themselves. Harper could have done the right thing in the first place and not brought this upon himself. The opposition parties could have decided the party they wanted to work with was across the house from them (the government). But for anyone on either side of the political spectrum to consider this situation “undemocratic” is ridiculous. We have a parliamentary system of government, this kind of “power play” is absolutely allowed – it is intended to make government more accountable. And it has worked. Harper has backed down on just about everything everyone found incredulous in his economic update.

Now it is the coalition’s turn to back down and get back to governing. Otherwise we’ll just have another "bonehead" running things.

Please stop picking on the arts so I can sleep

Is anyone else tired? Or is it just me?

I'm an arts advocate (among other things - don't try to define me!) and it turns out that has been about as busy a person as you could be lately. First I was run off my keester during the Federal election because the PM decided to run his mouth in Saskatoon there-by getting the entire arts community up in arms, and lately it has been all about making sure a proposed increase to Calgary Arts Development's budget was approved in the City of Calgary's 2008-2011 budget. I haven't been alone in the crusade (wow, now that is hyperbole!), but it has been exhausting and pretty much thankless.

Those that know me, know I prefer to - to steal a theatre phrase - stay backstage and out of the spotlight. I never wanted to be an actor. I always wanted to be a designer or a stage manager. But I do have to say it has been very nice to get all the encouraging and thankful emails lately. I'm no glory hound but I wanted to say to all those folks: thanks for backing us up and appreciating what we're trying to accomplish.

I was pushed over the edge on this front today by Stephen Hunt and his Blade Runner blog over at the Calgary Herald's website, where he basically republished a few of my recent 'call to action' emails. Thanks Stephen! I was equally blown over by the congratulations offered this morning by Rick Bell at the Calgary Sun after Council rejected the proposed cut to arts funding. For all his recent bluster in the paper about arts funding it was very kind of him to offer such kind words of encouragement.

Now I beg everyone to please let the arts be for a little bit so I can get some sleep! (Will I be able to stay out of this conversation?)

New Heritage Minister, empahsis on the "new"

James Moore, star of this blog's most popular post of all time, has been named the new Canadian Heritage Minister. He is best known for being one of the youngest MPs and Ministers in history - he's 32 now - as well as being the MP who caused a stir last year by being vilified for looking at pornography in the House of Commons on his laptop. It turned out he was not looking at porn he was actually looking at, and I'm not making this up, semi nude photos of his girlfriend that she emailed to him. The NDP MP who brought it up later apologized for some strange reason. (If he was still looking at inappropriate images why apologize?)

As near as I can tell he has no history with anything "Heritage" related. He was a broadcaster for a couple months between being a student - political science, natch - and a politician. Other than speaking French, but Lord knows that isn't much of a qualification. (Stephane Dion, I'm looking in your direction...)

While we're on the topic of 'things that give me pause', why is his official website a .org? James Moore is an organization? That would strike me as rather narcissistic. Let's hope that is not a sign of things to come. I'm keeping my fingers crossed really, really hard.

PS - I really don't want to nit-pick, but what is with the dog photo? Trying to one up Stephen Harper and his cats?

Real winners and real losers

Congratulations to the Conservatives on another minority government. Many consider Stephen Harper's team's performance tonight a decisive victory, others will no doubt call it a major loss. So without further adieu I cut through the punditry and give you my 'real winners and real losers' of Federal Election 2008:

Honourable Mentions:
Winner: Toronto Conservatives. Just when it looked like Stephen Harper had given up hope on ever having a major breakthrough in Toronto and area, Team Blue delivers in the 416, roundly defeating several Liberal seat holders.

Loser: Quebec Conservatives. Just when it looked like Stephen Harper had given up hope on ever having a major breakthrough in Quebec, Team Blue imploded and struggled to keep even the 10 seats they held last time around. Even hand picked-Senator Michael Fortier couldn't win. While hand picked-poster child Justin Trudeau had no problem winning in a seat that was anything but a sure bet.

Loser: Elizabeth May. She did great in the debates but just one political decision made before the election was even called was the one that did her in: running against Peter McKay. Why did she run in this riding?! She could have been the first Green MP save for this one extremely bad decision. I think her eyes were bigger than her stomach and she just got greedy. Instead the Green Party stays put with a big ZERO on the board and remains, sadly, irrelevant.

Loser: Bloc Quebecois. Harper hands you a gift and basically gives the entire province the finger and you turn it into... less seats?

Winner: Quebec Liberals. Never was a stronger message given that Quebec really is different than the rest of the country than when it came to the Liberal vote for 2008. Dion must be brilliant in French. How else to explain the Liberal increase in seats? Don't ask the Bloc or Conservatives, they'll be sratching their heads for weeks on this one.

Winner: Jack Layton. You may not be Prime Minister, so you're probably disappointed, but NDP numbers went up across the country and so did your seat count. That makes you a winner, but barely, because their is very little to be proud of here. There's only so many times you can say "better luck next time".

Loser: Stephen Harper. How did you NOT get a majority?! Seriously! Stephane Dion could have been condemmed to an asylum part way trough the election and I don't think it would have made a difference. The election was there for the taking, a better chance could not be imagined, and still... only a 15 or so seat increase. Never should a leader be so disappointed with his party's win. Has Harper hit his ceiling? What went wrong? Hopefully something went wrong and he can identify it otherwise there is only one other answer: the majority of Canadian's don't like or trust you. And that doesn't bode well for your party EVER returning to majority stauts.

Surprising Runner Up:
Loser: Stephane Dion. Harper can console his Loser status by knowing that Dion ranked higher on the Loser list. I don't need to harp on Dion and his leadership. That's just kicking a guy when he's down. Instead I'll let your party do it. Perhaps at the upcoming leadership review? See you then, Stephane. It ain't going to be pretty.

Grand Champion:
Loser: Canadians. Did you enjoy your unexciting Fall election that left us right back where we left off? With a - as the Prime Minister himself puts it - "dysfunctional parliament". Surely, you must at least feel a little lighter after all the frivolity? Maybe that is the lack of $300 million making you feel lighter. That's how much you just paid for... whatever it was that we just got to do. Thank goodness we have fixed election dates to look forward to that will make sure this kind of thing won't happen again... oh... yeah. Hmm. So much for that idea too, huh?

So there it is, my (annual?) Federal Election Real Winners and Real Losers. Shall we do it again next Fall? See you then, everybody!

Rumour mill churning on The Bow

I think I like the new banner up there at the top of the ol' blog. I like the look of downtown Calgary in the future. It reminds me of the opening credits of "Dallas" for some reason though. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or not yet...

Anyway, I when I first was looking at the image of Calgary's downtown future I couldn't help being struck by the Bow. That's going to be one super sexy skyscraper when its done. The photo to the left is what the site looks like right now. (If you like, you can click here for the Calgary Herald's "The Bow rising" photo gallery and follow the progress of construction.)

And of course thinking about the Bow got me thinking about the - now infamous - National Portrait Gallery space.

Do you remember last year all that hubbub about the federal government putting a the national gallery into a large public space that has been planned at the Bow? You remember: Stephen Harper proposes the first national gallery outside of Ottawa for his hometown of Calgary and everyone outside the 403 area code got riled up at the idea of such favouritism? No? Well maybe you remember the federal government short listing nine cities to put forward proposals to host the gallery? (Yes, Calgary is one of those cities.) Or maybe the instead you remember the City of Ottawa report saying it would save the country $2.5 million to simply build the gallery in the National Capital Region like all other national galleries have been.

BUT I DIGRESS because I started thinking about what was going to happen in the Bow's public space now that it will not be housing the National Portrait Gallery. So I did some digging and here is what I've been able to piece together from various bits of scuttlebutt on the street: the plan is still to use the space for arts/cultural uses; as a matter of fact I hear that a deal may be close to move one (or maybe two or three) existing Calgary arts organization(s) into the Bow. (None of this is verified though.)

Okay, sure that's exciting, but for me what's more exciting is what the domino part of this process might mean. Because we are talking about existing organization(s) making a move, that would open up existing arts space in Calgary for other organizations. If what I hear is true, then there may be three or more existing organizations that don't have a permanent home getting one!

This would certainly aleiveatve a lot of the stress currently on arts and cultural groups in Calgary that are clammering for space. For more details on that look no further than Calgary Arts Development's cultural spaces report. Odds are the Bow will be completed in about five years.

Harper: Dalia Lama is "not a call girl". K, thanks, Steve.

Seems how it is Christmas eve I wanted to give all of you left-leaning readers out there a little gift. Stephen Harper usually comes across as a a very smart man and yet many equate his politics to being up the same alley as George Bush, a man who - how shall we say this politely? - often does not come across as a very smart man. How's that for ironic?

Well, just this past week, in one of his many year-end television interviews (specifically the one with OMNI Television), Harper misspoke in a manner usually reserved for his colleague to the south. Here it is in all its glory; to the best of my recollection Stephen Harper's first Bushism:

"I met the Dalai Lama in my office but I meet everyone in my office. I don't know why I would sneak off to a hotel room just to meet the Dalai Lama. You know, he's not a call girl. As I say, he's a respected international spiritual leader."

You don't say, Steve? I was unaware of the fact that the Dalia Lama is not a prostitute. I guess you learn something new every day. BTW, Stephen, do you normally reserve sneaking off to hotel rooms to only your meetings with call girls?

Maybe Canada and Australia aren't so alike after all

People often compare Canada and Australia. We have similar values, we became countries in much the same way and at pretty much the same time. If we have a sister nation anywhere in the world most would say Australia is it.

So congratulations to Australian Prime Minister-elect Kevin Rudd on his victory earlier this week. His election swings Australia to the left on the political spectrum and ends 12 years of Conservative government.

Now I'm not a big fan of this whole left versus right, conservative versus liberal thing. I don't think we're so different. I think so long as you are trying to make the world a better place then bully on you, and good for us all. But recent comments made by Stephen Harper and Kevin Rudd might be dividing and defining out two nations even more. And showing there really is a difference between "left" and "right" political leanings.

By now we've all heard Stephen Harper's comments this past week at the closing of the Commonwealth Summit where he called the Kyoto Accord a "mistake". (Side note: rather than the expected binding agreement on global warming reduction tactics to come out of the summit, Harper instead pitched a non-binding agreement saying everyone will try to do something. Very, very vague and I can't see this being overly useful regardless of what side of the political spectrum you fall under.)

But what really got me thinking was what Kevin Rudd did immediately after he won the election: he started working on finding ways for Australia to ratify and meet the Kyoto Protocol targets.

It seems Canada and Australia may really different after all. Canada "tries" to meet the targets and gives up, while Australia leaves industry to solve the issue and then gives up in favour of Kyoto. We'll have a chance here to see if Australia has a better plan, or at least if they can show more effort than we gave. Either way Canada has something to learn by watching Australia as they go down this path.

Good luck Australia. You're going to need it.

I will not do that. Actually, yes I will.

I thought Stephen Harper was the Canadian version of "the decider"? Well it looks like the Canadian decider changed his mind. And for no real apparent reason. Oh, and he kinda deferred the decision to someone else.

It was just announced that Harper, after saying he wouldn't, will appoint an independent panel to decide whether the government should look into Karlheinz Schreiber's new allegations of wrong doings of former PM Brian Mulroney. Or if you prefer to think of it differently: Harper has announced an inquiry into whether their should be an inquiry about a previous inquiry. Now THAT is pure-bred Canadian politics. Mmm-hmmm. Tastes like... maple syrup.

What does this mean? Well, basically Harper is deflecting political decision making to a non-political decision maker. (I won't get into how shrewd a political decision this was for fear it will make the space time continuum collapse further.) But who will be leading this inquiry, you ask? Details! Details my friend. Harper's the prime minister so back off! He made a decision already today. And if you keep hassling him you won't get any more decisions until after Christmas.

So be a good little boy or girl and wait your turn to wait your turn while waiting your turn.