Gee Mom I Wanna Go, Back to Ontario...

It is the electoral mother-lode in Canada. With 106 seats it is, for all intents and purposes, the make or break province for a prospective government. Ontario.

Only once in our recent election history has a party formed a majority government without Ontario. That was in 1988, when Mr. Mulroney was able to overcome the province's concerns with the Canada-US Free Trade Agreement. Other than that, it's been simple. Take a strong plurality of seats in Ontario and you win.

Ontario is what gave Mr. Chretien his three majority governments. It enabled Mr. Martin to hold onto power in the post-sponsorship scandal environment. And it will be key to both Mr. Harper and Mr. Igantieff's prospects this time around.

So what are we seeing in this battleground province?

I noted yesterday that we are spending a lot of time looking at the top line, national polling results. These are interesting and fun (yes, I am a geek) to watch. However, too much focus on the national number can skew how we view an election campaign. It's like reading the headline but not the article - you get a picture, but by no means the whole picture. As a result, you can miss things.

Nationally, we see some consistency to the polling numbers. Generally, results show a 8-10 Conservative lead. Ok, fine.

However, if we look at Ontario we are seeing the results getting closer. Some polls are seeing a small Conservative lead, others show a statistical tie. This compares with the start of the campaign, at which time the Conservatives enjoyed a strong lead in the province.

What's driving the shift? A big factor is the falling support for the NDP. One element of the Liberal narrative over the first two weeks has been the portrayal of the party as the only national party able to stand up against the Conservatives. That, coupled with Mr. Igantieff trying to take notion of the coalition off the table, I think is having an effect on the NDP voter.

Similarly, the Liberal platform is strongly aligned with many traditional NDP views in areas such as education, training and families. Again, this will be attractive to the NDP voter.

What this means on election day - the only poll that matters - remains to be seen. The Conservatives are holding their vote in the province; we are not seeing any real bleeding of their support to the Liberals. However, they are not growing in any meaningful way and may in fact be close to a ceiling.

For their part, the Liberals are shoring up their urban support and pulling support from the left. Unfortunately for them, there is not enough of it to make this in and of itself a game changer.

The result? No one can count on getting a Chretien-esque motherlode of Ontario seats on May 2. Which likely means more of the same in the next Parliament.

Of course, this assumes that the debates don't spark a shift. If Mr. Ignatieff decides to really go for it, to make the case why he should be the Prime Minister, to attack Mr. Harper and say Canada can do better with him, well that might change things. It's a risk, but it really is the only option if they want to make a real shot at winning.

So, who do you think will emerge the victor in battleground Ontario. Equally important, tell me why. What will make the difference for the Ontario voter?

P.S. For more on polling, including some great analysis you should be checking out: http://threehundredeight.blogspot.com/. There's a lot of information on the blog, with regular updates and seat projections incorporating the latest polls.

Cry havoc, and let slip the dogs of war!

Here we go! By the end of the weekend, the election should be officially underway. To borrow from Shakespeare, "Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war!"

In truth, one could argue it's been underway for some time given successive minority governments, collective posturing and the threat of the election around the corner. Through it all, from all sides, we have been served a heavy plate of rhetoric and spin with often only limited helpings of substance offered.

Heads-up, rhetoric and spin are the MSG of politics watching. Tasty at first, but ultimately unsatisfying and leaving you hungry for something more filling.

This is where we come in.

We are about to enter into one of the true times when what's on our minds can matter, when we will be listened to, and when we have the potential to influence. This is our time to be engaged and to be responsible.

Demand more of your prospective MPs. Challenge them to define who they are, and what they represent. Don't accept messaging about "the other guy", if it is not accompanied by their own plan for governing; for representing you.

Think about what is important to you, your family, community, Canada. Think about it and let them know. Challenge the person who comes to your door to explain how they will address the things that matter to you. Make. Them. Earn. Your. Vote.

What is it for you?

- health care
- job stability
- the economy
- crime and security
- pensions
- the environment
- ethics, accountability and democracy

I want us to talk about these things and whatever else is on your mind over the coming weeks. Use this blog and some of the far, far better ones (see column to the right!) to raise issues, inform yourself and others, to debate.

And when the end is nearly there, please vote.

It's our democracy, our opportunity and our responsibility.

Thoughts?

Agenda Setting...

It's crystal ball season again. No, not those ones hanging from our Christmas trees. I am talking about those magical orbs which promise a glimpse into the future; some insight into what we can expect in the year ahead.

In terms of politics in Canada, this gazing invariably is focused on the prospects of an election. Five years of minority government will do that to you. However, it actually wasn't too long ago that our look-ahead focused on the issues at hand, on the agenda.

Yes, once upon a time issues and initiatives were discussed and measured on the relative strength of their merits and importance to Canada as a whole. Of course the electoral implications were considered. But this was by no means done to the degree to which it is today. The election prism did not define our politics the way it does heading into 2011.

So, rather than speculate on whether and when we will have an election in 2011, here are some more of my candidates for "the agenda."

First, what is the role of government? Deficits, both federal and provincial, should be forcing a conversation about the role of government. Government spending in Canada rose considerably before the global economy went into downward spiral. During the crisis it increased further, to levels that are not sustainable.

Our political discourse in 2011 should therefore include focus on restoring a measure of balance to our nation's finances. Such a discussion has implications for tax policy, for example. We have already seen the impact of the GST cut on the government's coffers. The outcome of the debate on corporate tax cuts (favoured by the government, opposed by the opposition) will have a significant impact on what government can and cannot afford to do in areas like health care, the economy, education, the environment.

Second, what does the future look like for our democratic institutions? In 2005-2006, the Conservatives ran a campaign based largely on the notion that our politics was broken, that there was a need for someone to "Stand Up For Canada." For about 2 years after their victory, the government was still referring to itself as Canada's "new government" - an attempt to make a sharp break from the past.

Heading into 2011, we should be having a conversation about what the past 5 years has meant in terms of things like accountability, transparency and debate. And more importantly, what we want the next five years to look like.

What do we expect of our MPs? What is the role of Parliament? To my eyes, our institutions are damaged. We too often see either a focus on more trivial issues, or debate on decisions that have been already been made.

So, on my agenda we have "What is the role of government?" and "What is the role of our democratic institutions?" What's on yours? Thoughts?