Time Out...Back in Time

The passage of time is something that always fascinates us. Time flies. Where did the time go? Time out. Time heals all wounds. It's about time.

In recent weeks we have been treated to some observations about the passage of time...

- the Titanic sank 100 years ago;
- the Alberta Progressive Conservatives are in danger of losing their 40-year grip on power;
- the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is 30 years old;
- the one-year anniversary of the Harper majority is 12 days away; and
- your favourite political blogger has not posted in 53 days.

While certainly not the most important of these milestones, the last one - my break from blogging - is the one I want to take a moment to write about.

In the run-up to my break, the conversations of politics watchers were filled with references to robo-calls and dirty tricks. The general observation - mine included - was that our politics was in a state of perpetual decline, characterized by hyper-partisanship on the Hill and a decided lack of engagement everywhere else.

While I believe that observation to be correct, I nevertheless found it to be gnawing at me and not just influencing what I wrote about, but how I wrote. One thing I have always tried to do with this blog is remain outside of the fray. While I am progressive in mindset, it has always been important for me to retain a level of objectivity in my writing.

I started to find this difficult, so I took a break.

In taking a time out, I wanted to step back and start to look at our politics from more of a distance. Away from the partisanship and the scandals, real and imagined.

More to the point, I wanted to take some time to remind myself why I started writing in the first place.

The purpose has always been to promote a dialogue and foster a greater sense of engagement in our politics. This means looking at the issues that will define Canada. It also means taking a critical eye to all of our political protagonists, regardless of their affiliation.

So where does that leave us, dear reader (yes...I still cling to the illusion that someone reads this blog)? Hopefully right back where we started when this blog began. With the issues and the challenges and opportunities Canada is facing.

Our cast has changed (welcome Mr. Mulcair), but the issues have not (hello austerity, jets, deficits, and provinces...good to see you again). So let's re-start the dialogue by reminding ourselves that engagement is like oxygen to a healthy, well-functioning democracy. It is critical.

And it's time.

Doing the limbo under an already low bar

A lot has been said in recent days about the Conservative party's not-so-subtle campaign against Irwin Cotler in the riding of Mount Royal. To have the Government House Leader not only acknowledge the use of such tactics, but to go on and defend them has, as many have remarked, laid bare the depths to which our politics has fallen.

It is akin to setting the bar low, and then limboing under it. It takes a freakish skill and you can't care how you look. In this case, it is the Conservative government which has stepped up and responded to the challenge "how low can you go?"

To say that this is unfortunate is an understatement. We are seven months into a majority mandate, and for the first time since 2006 the "election around the corner" has been pushed to the back of our political minds. Or at least we hoped it had.

Rather than embark on the business of governing, stay above the fray, and do their job while the two main opposition parties turn inwards as they look for new leadership, the Conservative government has remained in their perpetual campaign mode. Sometimes it seems like they just can't help themselves.

Political stability should have brought a levelling off of the constant campaigning. It should have brought responsible government and meaningful opposition. And it should have brought debate, particularly on the more pressing issues of the day (hint - this does not mean prisons or the gun registry).

Unfortunately it has brought us very little of these things. What it has brought us is a vicious circle. Each week that we are subjected to events like those in the riding of Mount Royal sadly reinforces for many a sense that Parliament doesn't work and that there is no point to being engaged.

Rather than act as a lightning rod or a catalyst, these events simply accelerate the lack of engagement in our politics. People are tuning out, and there is no imminent election or stability among the opposition to grab their attention.

In this environment, Canada loses.

***

Political tactics and constant campaigning are undermining the already shaky foundations on which our belief in Parliament stands. We need to not only expect better; we must demand it.

Unfortunately letting someone know that this is not acceptable cannot be done by turning one's back. Improper actions should result in greater scrutiny, not less. If your concerns fall on deaf ears, talk louder.

There might not be an election around the corner, but some 308 people are in a 4-5 year job interview. And you are in charge of hiring. Don't let them forget.

Everything's changed and nothing is different

Taking a break can be instructive. You can learn a lot just by stepping back, and not getting so immersed in the things which typically hold so much of your attention. For me it was not about breaking out of the Ottawa bubble - after all, this is my home. No, it was more about stepping out of the politics watcher bubble.

Call it a personal prorogation.

It was needed. 2011 has been an intense year for a politics watcher. A federal election in the spring, and a series of provincial elections in the fall. Lots to watch and digest. Which brings me to today and where things stand on the federal stage.

Roughly eight months on from when the federal writ was dropped and everything has changed.

- A minority is now a majority, and the Conservatives have complete control over both houses of Parliament.

- The NDP has become the Official Opposition, but are now (tragically) leaderless.

- The Liberals have fallen to being the third party in Parliament, and are in the midst redefining themselves and finding permanent leadership.

- The Bloc is in the process of fading from memory.

I would bet that back in the spring when Mr. Harper asked for his strong, stable majority his wildest dreams would not have looked like things do today.

And yet re-emerging from my personal prorogation, it feels like nothing has changed.

Tone

The tone of our politics has continued its slide downwards. The hostility among MPs is on the rise, with personal attacks popping up with greater frequency. The government has looked smug and dismissive; the opposition desperate and frustrated.

The loser in their war of words? You, me, debate and public policy.

Parliament

Just when you thought Parliament could not look any less relevant to those outside the bubble, et voila. This is particularly frustrating.

Looking in from the outside, it often appears that many people worked tirelessly to get elected to Parliament for the sole purpose of showing that it can't work.

We have limited debate. Closure and other tactics are invoked quickly. MPs of all stripes continue to favour the embarrassment game in place of substance.

Policy

Whether it is a "tough on crime" approach that ignores all evidence that demonstrates it won't work, or a gun registry position that ignores the views of law enforcement in the name of the "base", the government insists on using its majority to play on the margins of what is significant and meaningful.

I get playing to the base - there is a time and place for it. It is part of politics. However, I am not certain this is the time. Particularly when I see what is happening in the world.

If ever there was a time to look like a government and not a party, this would be it. But this doesn't seem to be the case.

***

The federal election may have changed the landscape, but not the view. In many respects, it would appear that the Harper government got everything it wanted, so that it could do everything it was doing before.

If the stakes weren't so high, it would be laughable. Sadly, it is not.

Every day the world reminds us how interconnected we are, how fragile things can become, and how much more we accomplish when we work together. Canada and its politics need to heed this lesson.

Coming soon to a province near (many of) you...

For politics watchers here in Ottawa, the summer often offers slim pickings for those looking to satisfy their need for all things political. This is particularly true in an election year, when we move quickly from the pace and excitement of a federal election into the summer doldrums.

While the global financial crisis and the NDP have each done their best to satisfy our political cravings, it typically takes the imminent return of Parliament to really focus our attention. This time, however, things are different. Why? cue drum roll

Coming soon to a province near (many of) you...elections!

Yes politics watchers, five provincial elections are scheduled for this fall: Newfoundland & Labrador, PEI, Ontario, Manitoba and Saskatchewan. Candidates are being selected, ads are already airing, and messages are being sharpened in advance of what could prove to be a very interesting fall.

In a recent blog, I noted the following:

"The 2011 book on Canadian politics has two chapters. Chapter One was the May 2 federal election. Chapter Two will be the elections in those five provinces. Depending on the outcomes, Canada could look quite different by the end of the year."

After #elxn41, there was a lot of discussion about whether Canada was becoming more conservative; about whether the electorate may be shifting right in terms of its outlook and priorities. Here at A Guy Watching Politics, the view has been that we really won't know this until at least the end of 2011.

The upcoming elections will provide more insight as to how political views in Canada may be changing. With that in mind, over the coming few months we will take some time to look at each of these five elections individually - the key issues, the outlook and implications for the broader Canadian political narrative.

Some things to consider:

- will the global economic environment affect the outcome?

- will we see a consolidation of conservatism in Canada, or will voters decide to elect an off-set to a federal Conservative government?

- what will the key ballot box issues be in each province, and what will this tell us about Canadians' priorities?

The last point is an important one. Given the areas of provincial responsibility (see http://politicswatcher.blogspot.com/2009/10/you-get-this-i-get-that-division-of.html), provincial/local issues can play a big part in how these elections finish. While this offers an important degree of uniqueness, it can also limit the degree to which we tie a result into the broader Canadian narrative.

All to say, there will be a lot to consider and discuss. As always, your views and perspective are welcomed. Let's hear them!

The worst of politics or the best of government?

"A statesman is someone who does something for his country. A politician is someone who does his country for something."

I read that quip a long time ago, but it's something that has always stuck with me. Not because I see it as some irrefutable truth; but because as old as it is, it tends to sum up how so many people feel about politics and politicians today.

Before diving in on this point further, let me clear. I believe that there is a very strong sense of public service among many from our political class. A belief that there is a real contribution that can be made to life in Canada. This commitment to public service is reflected in some measure of sacrifice - time away from family and home, being perhaps the most significant. This is my view, and I believe that many share it.

So if that's the case, why do quips like the one above continue to resonate? Why are people disengaged from their democracy? Why do we see so much mistrust? I have some thoughts.

Let's look at the past year. Prorogation was seen as a tool to avoid accountability. Scandal was seen as more worthy of debate than issues. Pandering trumped dialogue and engagement. And attack ads continued to be the communications vehicle of choice.

It's because of issues like these that we have a government that has done a reasonable job on the economy, but still can't stay in "majority territory" for any sustained period of time. It's also the reason why we have an opposition that cannot mount a sustained challenge, despite the mis-steps of the government.

That bring us to today. Depending on who you listen to we have an opposition / "coalition" that is going to recklessly force an election, or a government that is ratcheting up the rhetoric and making the types of announcements that typically precede a call to the polls.

So if this is the case, what do we want? I have written on this blog on more than one occasion about the need to position Canada for success in the 21st century. Building a 21st century economy is about more than business. It's about health, the environment, security, social development, productivity - all supported by strong and functional democratic institutions, and an engaged citizenry.

In many respects, the world is at a cross roads. The economic landscape is changing, with power shifting to emerging markets. Environmental issues cast a long shadow, as do imminent demographic challenges. Global security remains an ongoing concern.

Canada is facing very real challenges and opportunities. We are faced with choices and we need to discuss them.

At this time, I expect the best of government. Unfortunately, too often I am faced with the worst of politics. For me governing is not about having all of the answers; but it does mean asking the right questions and then listening, engaging, communicating and making choices.

So as we consider the prospects of an election, that is my challenge to our politicians. Put aside the worst of politics and show me the best of the government.

Thoughts?

All I want for Christmas...

Here we are approaching the end of another year. For those of us (sadly) obsessed with Ottawa and its constant performance, I think 2010 will be remembered as a year of several mini-dramas...but not much in terms of substance.

In no particular order, this year has seen the political classes focus their energy on: prorogation; Rahim and Helena; the G20 and its fake lake; the long-form census; Ignatieff’s bus tour; Harper’s concert tour (ok, two performances); potash; by-elections; and construction contracts. This is by no means an exhaustive list, but nor is it a particularly warming one for those of us looking for real debate and dialogue.

That’s not to say that some of these issues (and others not mentioned) are not important or substantive. Potash, prorogation or the census issue clearly are. So is the future of the Afghan mission. However, the discussion and debate is often transitory. Issues emerge and debate occurs, but at some point it becomes clear that the issue does not satisfy a broader political goal (i.e. electoral prospects), and it falls from our collective radar as we move on to “The. Next. Big. Thing.”

Why is this happening? I think there are a few reasons. First, we have a government that knows it can provoke and challenge without any telling reprisal. The opposition does not want an election, so its condemnation of the latest government initiative does not amount to much.

When the government does “back down”, it does in response to polling data. The advocate of this approach to governing would call it strategic and measured. The critic would see it as akin to a child testing to see what they can get away with. The answer is likely somewhere in between.

The opposition’s failure to offer clear alternatives is also a major factor at play. For example, to this day I still do not know what a Liberal government would look like.

In a minority Parliament, this absence of a defined alternative makes no sense to me. As someone told me once, you should always have your cv up-to-date. After more than one year since trying to provoke an election, the Liberals have failed to craft an alternative vision for governing the country. I want the reason I "hire" someone to be based on more than than the fact that they aren't the other guy.

Failing to define a clear alternative results in the focus all opposition parties seem to have with the sensational...on the political theater. The attention paid to the thinner issues on offer does generate short-term gains - hence the small movements in weekly polling numbers.

Up to a point, I can see the logic to this tactic. It’s the “death by a thousand cuts” idea, whereby the opposition tries to use individual issues to develop a broader narrative about the government. The working material is certainly there. But up to this point in time, they have failed to develop this narrative. So the bouncing from issue to issues continues.

Another driver of this state of affairs is the “election around the corner” mentality I have mentioned previously on this blog. The government is probably comfortable with all of the theater and short-term discussion, as long as it does not factor significantly into how voters in those select swing ridings think. The opposition, which seems to be more "spray and pray" is too focused on trying to please everyone, which history will tell you pleases no one.

So, where does that leave us? Well, as the title of this posting suggests, it takes me to my Christmas wish list. What is it I want?

- A government that puts forward its plan for dealing with the challenges of today, and for positioning the Canada of tomorrow.

- An opposition that gives me an alternative; a clear sense as to what a different government would look like.

- A Parliament better focused on dialogue and debate on the government’s plan and the opposition’s position.

- An end to gossip-column politics; the challenges Canada is facing are worth more of Ottawa’s time than much of which has garnered the spotlight.

I also had on my list “a public prepared to hold everyone to account.” In previous posts I have lamented the absence of a more engaged citizenry. However, the stagnant polling numbers for all parties do tell us something about the public and the fact that they have not been seized in any meaningful way by any of this spectacle.

In our own, typically Canadian way, perhaps we are engaged. We have elected a minority government in each of the last three elections. The polling numbers from 2006-2010 have not moved in any significant way. Perhaps this is our way of saying that we are not captivated; that no party (outside of the Bloc in Quebec) has resonated with us. That we expect better.

Thoughts?

Dollars and Sense

So according to the recent reports, those Canada's Economic Action Plan ads should include an asterisk or some fine print suggesting that little red ridings need not apply. If you go by these reports, those who vote Tory blue get to host one MP, several staffers and one...large...novelty..cheque. Those ridings which don't, get less. Or nothing.

The Opposition calls this Duplessis-style politics. It's seen by them as a throw-back to the days when politicians reminded voters what a vote really means. Let's just say things were a touch more transactional back then.

Others see this as less about old-style politics and more of, you know, just politics. Honestly, I don't know if it is funny or sad that some people have a "well duh?" reaction.

So which is it? For me, politics will always have an element of payback and reward. Where things cross the line is when people treat or are seen to be using the country's money for overtly partisan purposes.

So, since the well-staffed statistics department here at politicswatcher assures me we now have readers and comments, I put the questions out to you.

• Is this the way things are in politics?
• Is this the way things should be in politics?
• Will any of this matter when it comes time to vote?

Tell me what you think...