Just Not That Motivated

I got a call today to volunteer on one of the campaigns for a nearby Conservative candidate. My answer was, "I'm not sure tell the candidate to call me." It's been a while since I put everything I had into a campaign, but I'm usually pretty excited around election time and more than ready to do my part for a cause or person that I believe in especially if there have been weeks of ramp up ahead of the election call. Aside from the brutally cold weather (-17C tonight!) there are two reasons I'm just not that motivated: First, the forcible silence of pro-life MPs seems likely to continue into the next Parliament. Harper told Peter Mansbridge he would not reopen the abortion issue if he achieved a majority and elaborated by saying, "If you want to diminish the number of abortions you’ve got to change hearts, and not laws." Whatever. I say if you want to limit any type of action you change hearts and laws. I may yet support some pro life conservative candidates, but the central party hasn't seen a donation from me since they formed government and they aren't likely to in the near future. Second the Harper Government has been indifferent to the needs of Ontario Agriculture ignoring repeated requests to participate in a price insurance proposal. Indeed Gerry Ritz was needlessly partisan in a letter to Better Farming refusing the proposals out of hand. As a Conservative, I'm embarrased by his closed mindedness. I explained to about 200 farmers and industry support people last week, we can vary not only who we support but our level of support. Right now my level of support is dangerously close to zero.

Fare thee well Stockwell

I was shocked and disappointed by the news that Stockwell Day will not run in the next election. I've been a Stockaholic since he first entered federal politics - to be honest part of me was still hoping that somehow events would transpire to make him our Prime Minister. I wasn't alone in that thinking, just over two years ago in the Saskatoon StarPhoenix David Akin wrote an excellent account of Day's success in the Harper cabinet concluding:

His renewed political success even has some in his party quietly whispering that he ought to consider running for leader again when Harper decides to retire.

I enthusastically helped on Day's campaign for the leadership of the Canadian Alliance and for the newly formed Conservative Party. After all that he went through during a caucus revolt from many of his colleagues, I would have completely understood if he had retired back then. Instead he demonstrated his ability and his class by staying on and becoming one of this government's most effective cabinet ministers

Stockwell's class was on full display in his retirement statement:

And [Thanks] to Prime Minister Harper for allowing me the privilege to serve under his outstanding leadership. That leadership has led our nation through the most troubling economic times in over half a century.

His belief (and insistence within his caucus) that every MP must be allowed equal ground to speak up vigorously for their constituents is the foundation of decision making upon which we develop the policies for our nation.

I wish the Prime Minister full success in the days ahead in the efforts on behalf of all Canadians in maintaining a Canada that stands strong and free.

I will miss Stockwell's class, integrity and effectiveness dearly and I believe this is a huge loss to the Conservative Party and to Canada.

But our loss is his family's gain and I sincerely wish him a happy retirement.

Shameless Plug - Riding Fundraiser

On Saturday October 17, 2009 the Wellington Halton Hills Conservative Riding Asssociation is hosting a Murder Mystery Dinner at the Optimist Hall on Trafalgar Road west of Georgetown. Tickets are a very reasonable $40.00 each and the food is great. For tickets contact Laurie at "mlaurien - AT - yahoo.ca" by October 9.

I've gone in years past and both the actors and the meal were excellent. If you're in the area it's definitely good value for your money. If you do plan on going please leave a comment, I'm still deciding whether to go and you might help tip the scales for me.

A Strong Start for Hudak

Yesterday I heard music to my ears as I heard about the new Ontario PC leader's reaction to the Toronto garbage strike:

Mr. Hudak, 41, vowed to steer the Tories back to the right-wing, small-c conservative policies of his mentor, following his third-ballot victory at the party's leadership convention on the weekend. In his inaugural news conference yesterday, he weighed in on the strike by 24,000 unionized workers in Toronto that has left residents without garbage collection, daycare and a wide range of other services for the past week.

Union leaders need to "get a grip" on the fact that strikes do not sit well with the public when many middle-class families are struggling during the recession, he said.
"Public-sector union leadership needs to give a reality check to its demands."

No more mushy middle, he's taking a concrete position, and I'm pretty sure he's in line with public opinion on this one.

Final Thoughts on the Leadership Race

I spent the better part of my night scrutineering for Frank Klees in the Ontario PC leadership race. It seems like now's a good time to jot down a few final thoughts on the leadership contest overall.

I think it will be close, and that's a story in itself. Tim Hudak was the early front runner with major endorsements from his fellow MPPs and Mike Harris the former premier. Despite the fact that his campaign seemed to run out of steam he has some experienced organizers behind him and could easily win.

Christine Elliot had the money behind her, it was clear today with election signs near the voting stations, but my favourite example of her money advantage was with a push poll call that I received a few weeks ago. It was simply a survey by a research firm but the questions like "Why do you think Tim Hudak's campaign has imploded?" and "Do you think Tim Hudak's position on Human Rights Tribunals will drive voters away from the party?" were highly effective negative advertising. I should say the person asking the questions had no idea which campaign hired them, but I'm certain it was Elliot.

Frank Klees' membership drive is what made him a contender, I think he's handled himself well and his campaign material is good. I wonder about his organization, I volunteered to help on the campaign and I answered several surveys from his office, but the voters list I received today didn't list me as being his supporter.

I don't think that Randy Hillier is a contender, but you never know. He was ultimately my second choice, I want him to have a strong showing to send a message to the party leadership that the issues he fought hardest for such as conscience legislation and an end to human rights tribunals are worth considering.

My only complaint is that voting was on Father's Day. It's bad enough that the party would choose a Sunday over a Saturday to hold voting. It's disrespectful and unfair to people who want to set time aside for their faith and their families. Father's day is a specific chance to get together with your family and the voting certainly interfered.

I'm looking forward to Saturday when the ballots will be counted. I think it's safe to say that whoever is elected, they'll be stronger after surviving this hard fought campaign.

The New Attack Ads

The latest Conservative Attack Ads are pretty good. I especially like "The Economy." It's the least personal of the ads and it hits hard by drawing attention to his promise to raise taxes and the way he described himself as a 'tax and spend Liberal.' The ad still plays to the fact that he's basically completely unknown except for the fact that he's intensely arrogant. The image at the end of all the English with Ignatieff seeming to imitate a king or Pope, kissing his hands toward a throng of journalists speaks volumes. If you haven't seen it, take a 30 second look below:



I'll close with 2 random thoughts. The French ads seem OK, the tone is tougher and I think they'll play very well in a province that still seems anti-establishment. The downside is they end with a reference to a website www.quisuisje.ca, which sounds a lot like 'who am I?' I was intrigued, but right now that website just jumps to the Conservative Party's YouTube page.

I don't think these ads will be as effective as the anti-Dion ads. Dion was just too easy a target. I do think they are important, Ignatieff is an enigma and he's spent the last 5 months focusing on opportunities for self aggrandizement to the exclusion of everything else. These ads are certain to make Canadians think twice about this guy.

Campaign Life Endorses Klees

Campaign Life Coalition (CLC) endorsed Frank Klees today. Lifesite News reports:

"Campaign Life Coalition's Preferred Candidate Frank Klees (MPP Newmarket-Aurora) has a pro-life history, has been a strong supporter of parental rights and conscience rights for health care workers. He supports the traditional definition of marriage and the defunding of abortion."

LifeSiteNews.com spoke with Klees about CLC's backing. He said the endorsement was gratifying and confirmed his pro-life stance. "My position on pro-life positions has been consistent since I've been in public life," he said.

This endorsement is a big deal for the Klees campaign which started out well behind the other campaigns that had been organizing since the last election, well before John Tory's resignation.

Campaign Life's endorsement matters because of their long established organization, substantial membership, and motivated volunteers. Their targeted support will bring far more memberships and volunteers to the Klees campaign than a half dozen MPPs or riding presidents.

The fact that Frank Klees welcomed the endorsement speaks very well of his credibility. Many politicians are willing to accept social conservatives' help but shy away from acknowledging them publicly. Frank's reaction speaks to his integrity and his level of commitment to the cause.

Each of the issues highlighted by the CLC is a winning issue. Other candidates recognize the importance of conscience rights as essential to our fundamental freedoms, but Frank has backed this commitment with action by introducing a private member's bill in the legislature. Perhaps the most controversial policy sighted by CLC is defunding abortion. However, even this policy is supported by a majority of Ontarians, Frank's support for this policy is both principled and politically savvy.

It's worth joining the Ontario PC party just to support Frank Kless. Join today or at least by May 14.

Frank Klees Gets My Vote

I decided last night at the leadership debate in Fergus that Frank Klees gets my vote for leader of the Ontario PC party. I also renewed my membership, so he can count on at least 1 vote.

The way I look at it, the next leader has to rebuild the party first, then convince the voters the party deserves their support, finally they will need to govern.

During the debate yesterday it was very clear to me that Frank was the most committed to resurrecting the democratic process that created the Common Sense Revolution. I remember participating in that process, by the time the policies were developed I felt a sense of ownership in a platform that I was passionate about supporting. The policies in that platform were strong because they were tested and vetted through the membership. We can't simply take a 15 year old policy document and try to use it again, but we can use the same process and create something new, relevant, and principled. Frank's commitment to the process convinces me he's the right man to rebuild the party.

The other candidates seemed focused on fighting the next campaign. If campaigning was the only skill that mattered, Tim Hudak, could have the advantage but if there's no substance to sell, his energy alone won't be enough.

Finally there's governing. Frank was the most statesmanlike leader by far, his experience demonstrates that he can govern. While the other candidates wanted to fight the move to change the Provincial Sales Tax to a Harmonized Sales Tax, dramatically increasing the number of services that are taxable, Frank said bluntly that by the time the Conservatives form government the tax will be a reality and the best thing they could do is decrease the rate. That's rational and pragmatic but still true to Conservative principles.

Finally the bonus is Frank's old enough that if he does win the leadership, but loses the election I doubt he'd try to hang on for another round like John Tory did.

The next provincial election is only 2 years away. That time will go fast but with Frank at the helm, I'm sure the party will be ready.

Debate in Fergus

Last night I was at the Fergus Legion to hear the Ontario PC Leadership candidates here's what they had to say in order of table position:

Randy Hillier - Wasn't able to make it. That's a shame, I've never seen him speak I was looking forward to finding out what makes the rebel tick. Fortunately the event host, Ted Arnott, read a statement from Randy. It was short but bold. He called the McGuinty plan to replace the Provincial Sales Tax with a Harmonized Sales Tax while not decreasing the overall rate a 'colossally stupid' idea.

The cornerstone of his message was conscience legislation that would allow professionals to refrain from actions they don't believe in. For example it would guarantee that a doctor, nurse or pharmacist would not be forced to participate in a chemical, or surgical abortion. It would guarantee a priest, minister, or justice of the peace would not be forced to marry a same sex couple. I wanted to ask the other candidates what they thought of this position, but I was too shy. Regardless of the outcome of the leadership race, I think this is a winning issue, it's a matter of fairness and fundamental freedoms and it should be a core part of any policy platform.

Likewise, Randy's comments on Human Rights Commissions were bang on. It's time to dismantle them because their rulings consistently plow over fundamental freedoms such as freedom of speech and religion.

Christine Elliot - Was very well spoken and professional. I could see myself sitting across from her at a meeting table and accomplishing a lot. She was the candidate I knew the least about going into the meeting and I was very impressed. I actually started the applause during her opening statement when she endorsed increasing the provincial income tax deduction for charitable donations. I think it's an excellent idea charities can be far more nimble and do far more good than a government program.

Tim Hudak - Looked and acted like the leader. His opening speech was packed with energy and policy statements. He aggressively went after Premier McGuinty and for a moment it felt like I was at a campaign rally with a week before the election. During the question and answer session he answered a question about being a leader with a heart by giving the example of a 5 year old who had a condition that required expensive prescription drugs in order to walk and he delivered the story very well. Frank Klees had answered the same question in a similar way, but Tim was definitely more engaging on that point. The other thing was Tim seemed most informed about Agriculture, Christine Elliot was out of her depth on that one.

Frank Klees - Is a statesman. He's the real deal and he leveraged his experience with the party and building a business to send a very strong message that he could be the leader and he could be premier. He started out by describing his guiding principles of individual responsibility and social responsibility, and that was well done. He also described his involvement with the party and the policy development process that brought about the Common Sense Revolution. He told us how he will reinvigorate the process so that the policies the party brings forward in the next election will be tested and relevant. He's absolutely right. Detailed policy pronouncements right at the beginning of the campaign cannot possibly be tested.

When a question came up about funding faith based schools, the controversial issue that is credited with losing the last election, Frank answered it best. He said that if the policy had gone through the proper development process it either would have died, or it would have been developed tested and understood by all the party members. Either way the last election would have turned out differently.

I have decided who I'm supporting, but I've gotta get to work. I'll let you know who I'm voting for tonight.

UPDATE: I had called Christine Brenda. I'm not sure where that came from. Thanks to the commenters for calling me on it. The text is now correct.

Unanimous?

Yesterday I was disappointed when I heard the news that the government passed a law making it illegal to talk on a traditional cell phone while driving in Ontario. By the fall it will be punishable by a punitive $500 fine.

Today I was shocked to hear that the bill passed unanimously:

The Legislature unanimously passed the government's law against "distracted driving" yesterday but it will take several months before associated regulations are drawn up and a public education campaign launched, said Transportation Minister Jim Bradley.

Based on a lot of the comments I've read on a few news stories, there's a lot of support for the new law, so I guess I'd best stop complaining and just get ready. Still with the Conservative leadership race in full swing, I was kind of hoping that one of the candidates would take a stand against the latest incursion of government into our lives.

Why Vote for a Leader

I just wanted to thank True Blue and Brett for their thoughtful comments in my post, 'Who is the Red Tory?' They both raise some interesting ideas that are worth repeating. True Blue said:

"Considering the party elite has rushed through the election date, I think it would be a good idea for the candidates to give us their platforms right away so that we can make an informed vote. Christine Elliott just released her platform and it was a giant ball of fluff! No substance, just words. We need to know what we are voting for!"

Brett responded:

I'm a fan of clear, conservative policies as well, but I'm also big on Party members having a say. Its interesting that you talk about the CSR. While Mike certainly brought his own strong ideas on where to take the province, it had a lot of input from the Party membership - after he was elected leader. I respect Hillier's willingness to outline his policy ideas (I also agree with some of them), but it doesn't seem he's learned from John Tory. Tory's commitment to two good policies - religious school funding and rescinding the health tax - during the leadership tied his hands when crafting the platform down the road.

On this point, I think I agree more with Brett than with True Blue. A detailed policy platform is really not appropriate during the leadership race. Guiding principles are. This leader could be at the helm of the party for 10 years or more, long after the specific policies outlined during this campaign are decided or no longer relevant. I do want to know what the leader is made of and what philosophy he/she will use to guide their decision making process. A brief policy statement would certainly be helpful. If someone is all fluffy and mushy middle now, I know I don't want them leading the party.

Later in the discussion True Blue said:

If we have no idea what the leader of the PCPO plans for the future how can we vote for them? Whether it is an election campaign, or a leadership campaign, we need to know what the candidate stands for. I personally do not wish to put all the people who were behind John Tory back in power. They were/are not conservative.

And Brett responded in part:

As to Tory advisers, I don't think any one camp can claim a monopoly on being a home to them. Even still, if a Leader has conservative principles to begin with, I'm less worried about who's advising whom.

This time I'm definitely with True Blue. I've found both personally and at work that the secret to success is to surround yourself with good people. I think it's even more true in politics. I don't know who John Tory's key advisers were, to be honest I just didn't care. However, if they have all lined up behind one candidate, that would definitely make me nervous about supporting them.

Frank Klees Just Called

I just got done speaking with Frank Klees for about 20 minutes. I take it as a real compliment that a candidate for the leadership of the Ontario PC Party would personally call me to answer my questions and to talk about his campaign. He would have really impressed me if he said he had read my blog, but alas he called because one of my good friends on his campaign recommended he call me.

We had a very direct conversation. I asked him a very aggressive question about one of his past campaigns and he answered it very well. We talked about his motivation and the people that he had working on his campaign. I let him know I was a social conservative and I don't want to waist my time working for a Red Tory. He told me about his motivation for entering politics, his faith and his strong belief in individual responsibility.

I didn't commit my support to him yet, but I told him I'll make a decision by next Monday. I've got to have a few other conversations with folks on other campaigns, however, Frank did convince me that he's not the closet Red Tory in the crowd. He also has a number of people I highly respect on his campaign. I'm definitely considering supporting him.

Who is the Red Tory?

To listen to the rhetoric of Tim Hudak and read the coverage in the Toronto Star, he's trying to position himself as Mike Harris II. Christine Elliot is married to Jim Flaherty the Federal Conservative Finance minister, who comes from the conservative side of the conservative party. Party maverick Randy Hillier is running his campaign with a bold and attractive platform as a 'conservative's conservative.' Frank Klees has the public support of Charles Mc Vety a prominent evangelical leader. That's the complete rundown of candidates as far as I know.

We can't forget these candidates are competing to replace the party that elected John Tory and Ernie Eves, two red Tories that had disastrous results. However, the fact remains, that in the last two leadership elections red Tories from the far left of the party have been elected. The Reds were even able to keep John Tory on for more than a year after he should have resigned. So where are they going? Who are they supporting in this leadership battle?

I've committed to making a decision on who I will support by next week because the membership cut off is quickly approaching. However, I don't want to put any effort into electing the next Red Tory leader of our party. So my question remains who is it? Comments are welcome.

Jason Kenney is Making a Difference

Jason Kenney, is one of the hardest working politicians I've known. I met him first when I was in University and he agreed to speak at one of our campus club events. If I remember correctly, there were only around 20 people there, but he happily took time out of his busy travel schedule to speak to us and combined it with radio interviews, and presentations to a class on campus. He is intensely loyal and worked tirelessly while Stockwell Day led the Canadian Alliance. Stuck on the sidelines for too long, he's now a full fledged member of cabinet and he looks like he's setting out to make some truly transformational changes in immigration and multiculturalism. The National Post notes:

The higher-profile matters -- the Galloway issue, the scuffle with Arab groups, the language abilities of immigrants -- form the early marks of a pattern of what is to come. Rejecting the CAF's support for Islamic terrorists and arguably anti-Semitic messages, Mr. Galloway for financially supporting Hamas, calling for newcomers to better integrate: These are of a piece with efforts to fortify what the Conservatives would call The Canadian Identity. It is, Mr. Kenney makes clear, a vision for a country that stands up for its pluralism, but also for its core liberal traditions of tolerance, democracy and secularism. "We can't afford to be complacent about the challenge of integration," he says. "We want to avoid the kind of ethnic enclaves or parallel communities that exist in some European countries. So far, we've been pretty successful at that, but I think it's going to require greater effort in the future to make sure that we have an approach to pluralism and immigration that leads to social cohesion rather than fracturing."

This is a big challenge, if Canada is going to continue to rely on immigration for growth, and there's probably no alternative, we have to make sure that immigrants integrate well with our cosmopolitan society. It's a difficult balancing act a group of established Polish immigrants would probably be the best people to help a new Polish immigrant get established. The problem comes when specific communities want to shut themselves out from the rest of society or become openly hostile to other communities and risk bringing their conflicts with them. If there's anyone who can navigate these choppy waters it's Jason. I've noted he's a trooper who will put extraordinary effort into getting the job done. The National Post also noted his background will give him a big advantage:

But political opponents looking to brand him as too redneck for the sensitive immigration file find it hard to land a punch. In his diverse Calgary Southeast riding, families speak fondly of Mr. Kenney's efforts, long before he became the minister in charge, in helping them sort out immigration issues; his key staffers, including a Tibetan, a Muslim and an Armenian, resemble the dessert lineup at the UN cafeteria. He spearheaded the government's efforts to recognize the Ukrainian Holdomor, its apology to the East Indian community for the Komagata Maru incident, he has defended Chinese Uyghur Muslims and paid his respects at the Mumbai Jewish centre attacked by terrorists. On his office wall hang portraits of abolitionist heroes William Wilberforce and Abraham Lincoln. A few years ago, Mr. Kenney boarded an entire family newly arrived from India in his Calgary home while they settled into Canadian life. "It gave me, for the first time, a real view of the immigration experience from the eyes of a family that's landed without any previous connections in Canada," he says. "I benefited from it as much or more than they did." Today, the kids call him Uncle Jason.

Looks like Stephen Harper picked the right man for the job. God bless your efforts Jason.

Undecided BUT

I still haven't given much thought to the Ontario PC leadership race. I'm still kind of enjoying the departure of John Tory. Because I haven't given much thought to the race, I remain undecided. BUT, news that Mike Harris, and Common Sense Revolution architects Tom Long and Leslie Noble are all supporting Tim Hudak has definitely got my attention. This is not because I just want to follow the crowd or that I think we need a Mike Harris II but because this is a sign that Conservatives are once again welcome in the Ontario PC party.

The Globe and Mail asserted that "there appeared to be a high degree of public fatigue with the polarizing style of the Mike Harris and Ernie Eves governments," when John Tory was elected. Maybe, but Eves and Harris should not be included in the same sentence. Despite his record as Mike Harris' Finance Minister, Ernie Eves was a red tory that led the party to a quick defeat. John Tory was a red tory that led the party to back to back humiliating defeats. I don't remember the Bill Davis era that people talk about when the Conservatives ruled the province for 40 years until the early 80s - from what I've seen Conservatives get elected when they run on a conservative platform.

I'm going to give Tim Hudak a good look partly because of these high profile blue conservative endorsements, and because the day after Tory resigned friends of mine from the Niagara region spoke very highly of Hudak. I'm looking for a true blue Conservative who recognizes the importance of the members' opinions and who won't try to sideline social conservatives. Purely based on what other people are saying, I'm starting to feel optimistic that Tim might be up to the job.

Goodbye John

Finally! John Tory has stepped down as leader of the Ontario PC party. His unglamorous end was typical of his leadership. Tory must have known it was the end when he lost a by-election in a safe conservative seat Thursday. Instead of resigning that night, he had to hold on one more day and wait until 2:00 PM Friday to resign. It's just like last year when he took hours after the leadership review vote to decide whether he was going to stay on.

Tory's comments demonstrated just how little he got it. When he said, "I hope the new leader is blessed with greater success on [the unity] file," it sounds like the problem is with the party. The problem was exclusively with him. He was a left wing red tory that tried to take the party to a place it wasn't meant to go. When he lost an important election badly, he should've resigned. When he barely garnered 2/3 support of Conservative delegates at last year's convention, he should've resigned. When he didn't find anyone to step aside to allow him to run before the end of the year, he should've resigned. The only reason there was a 'unity issue' in the party was because of the broad disappointment in his leadership.

His comments about the last election also showed an extreme lack of depth. In talking about his controversial plan to extend public funding to religious schools he said, "I've certainly learned that religion and politics is a volatile mix that is best avoided." Not necessarily John. What should be avoided is thrusting a controversial new policy on your party without first getting buy in from the members or the caucus. What should also be avoided is being clearly insincere about supporting the policy, and then flip-flopping on it during the last week of the election campaign. When you do that people who oppose the policy have to vote against you in case you bring it in, and people who support the policy have to vote against you because you've already betrayed them.

John Tory was out of his depth and its a good thing for the party that he's finally stepping aside.

Are the Gloves About to Come Off?

The Conservatives are preparing attack ads according to the Canadian Press. The article notes, "The Harper government had been uncharacteristically tame toward the Liberal leader until last week, when MPs began taking shots at Ignatieff in the House of Commons."

This is probably good news. Michael Ignatieff has been given a free ride and he should be held to account. Canadians deserve to know a lot more about this guy if he wants to continue to act like an alternative to our Prime Minister. However, the Conservatives need to be careful, the attack ads can't be cheap attacks like, "He has scary eyebrows." Even if it is true they'll have to nail him on something more substantial. The interesting thing to me is that Ignatieff reminds me a lot of Harper so I'm looking forward to see how the Conservatives can make some mud stick to Ignatieff and still keep their guy clean.

Harper is Back!

Finally Stephen Harper sounds like a Conservative and he is acting like our Prime Minister. After 2 months of being on the defensive, offering the opposition 'coalition' everything they had asked for, Harper was beginning to look like a push over who was going to govern like a Liberal until the real Liberals had raised enough money to force another election. There were some days in the past few years where I didn't like that Stephen Harper was acting like a bully, but I liked him a lot less as the one being bullied.

When Canada's employment report came out yesterday and we found out that 129,000 jobs were lost in January when most analysts only expected 40,000 would be lost, the leaders of the Spend and Spend Coalition went into full panic mode demanding even more stimulus money. This time Harper is holding his ground, the Globe and Mail reports:

Stephen Harper says he will not yield to opposition calls for more economic stimulus measures despite confidence-shaking news that Canada lost 129,000 jobs in January, the sharpest decline ever.

Little more than a week after the federal government introduced a budget that projects a massive deficit and pours $40-billion in stimulus measures into the economy over the next two years, the opposition Liberals have said the worsening economic picture will probably require more.

Mr. Harper said Canadians can expect more job losses in 2009, but that the government has already responded in a big way. "The reason this government has proposed such a massive economic plan and such a massive deficit-spending stimulus is our anticipation of significant economic challenges, including significant job losses in the year to come. That's why we're doing what we're doing," he said at an event in Miramichi, N.B . . .

. . . the Prime Minister directly rebuffed the Liberals' hints they might force the Conservatives into another round of stimulus spending in late spring. "We cannot have in Parliament, quite frankly, instability every week and every month, every time there's a new number, people demanding a different plan…" Mr. Harper said. "We continue to believe this is the action we need, and we're going to need it in the months to come, and we're not going to be blown off track every time there's some bad news."

He's right. There are limits to how much the government actually can do to revive the economy, and there are definite limits to how quickly it can take effect. The government's budget contains a lot of new spending and other measures to breathe life into the economy, opposition calls for more spending before any money flows from this stimulus package are simply ludicrous.

We've already learned the hard way in the 80s and 90s that massive deficits can cripple the economy. I'm hoping the big deficits our government will run in the next few years are only temporary. For the first time in a while Stephen Harper looks like he might be capable of keeping spending in line.

Now's Your Chance John

The Toronto Sun Reports, "Finally! Tory gets a chance." Premier McGuinty has called a by-election in the riding where Conservative MPP Laurie Scott agreed to step down so that John Tory could run. The election will be held on March 5 and then the Conservative Leader will finally be able to sit in the legislature and challenge the premier face to face.

Tory has been without a seat since the 2007 election that saw the Conservatives get soundly defeated and saw John Tory lose his own seat. Since then the only time John Tory has made the news was when he faced various challenges to his leadership. Essentially he's wasted a year and a half when the party could have been rebuilding while he tried to convince someone to step aside for him. Assuming he wins on March 5 it will be his chance to turn the tide and show himself to be an effective leader. I hope he's up to the job, but I'm just not sure.

Incidentally Facebook keeps on suggesting John Tory as a friend I may know. Somehow I just can't bring myself to add him to my friends list.

Everything is Back to Normal

Now that the budget has passed, it appears things are moving back to normal. The best indication has been how quickly conservative commentators have been to criticise the budget. The National Post didn't pull any punches in their editorial:

As we’ve noted in recent days, all bricks-and-mortar stimulus programs are inherently problematic from an economic point of view: Injecting cash into public works and private projects involves picking winners and imagining the future; and for a variety of reasons well-understood by any student of Adam Smith, governments usually botch that job. But at least much of Mr. Flaherty’s extra infrastructure money is being focussed on projects that Canada may actually need — bridges, roads, schools and the like. In this sense, Mr. Flaherty’s blueprint compares favourably to the current legislative incarnation of the more scattershot U.S. stimulus package, described by New York Times columnist David Brooks in recent days as “a muddled mixture of short-term stimulus haste and long-term spending commitments.”

The attention being given to “social housing” by Mr. Flaherty, on the other hand, should raise red flags among fiscal hawks. Housing expenditures will raise the cost of labour in the short term for more immediately productive enterprises. Moreover, social housing has a long history of unexpectedly turning into a black hole for unwary governments — the white-elephant Vancouver Olympic Village being just the latest
example. And it doesn’t make much sense to hand cash to first-time homebuyers while simultaneously stimulating the real estate market — thereby making it more
expensive for them to buy that first home.

Good for them, it's time for voices of reason to weigh in and add balance to the debate. Government by hysteria will leave a big hangover long after the money's been spent.