Author: Graeme MacKay

Thursday November 7, 2019

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday November 7, 2019

NDP lost a lot, but Jagmeet Singh risks losing more

January 7, 2019

Justin Trudeau will now have to find dance partners from the NDP and/or the Greens to govern. NDP leader Jagmeet Singh ran a strong campaign. His line during the English language debate that voters did not have to choose between “Mr. Delay” (Trudeau) or “Mr. Deny” (Scheer) was the campaign’s most memorable zinger.

But Liberal alarmism over the prospects of NDP votes leading to a Scheer government appears to have spooked enough would-be New Democrat voters to contain any orange waves.

Singh lost all but one of his 14 Quebec MPs, the result of ground ceded in the lacklustre first 18 months of his leadership.

The compensation, if it is one, is the influence he may wield over the Liberals.

September 5, 2019

But a glance at the history books should be enough to convince Singh to tread lightly when it comes to dealing with the Grits. One of his predecessors, David Lewis, propped up Pierre Trudeau’s government after the latter won a plurality of just two seats in 1972. By the time Lewis decided to bring down Trudeau’s government  in 1974, he was in disrepute with voters, having received all of the blame and none of the credit for the preceding two years in power. In the ensuing election, the NDP lost half its parliamentary caucus.

The mercy is that no-one wants, or can afford, another election. MPs first elected in 2015 will look covetously towards pensions that will become vested after six years. Members from all sides of the House may be less enthusiastic to risk rich retirement plans.

The configuration of the new House of Commons suggests we may be about to encounter that most rare of beasts — a strong, stable, minority government. – John Ivison (National Post) 

 

Wednesday November 6, 2019

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Wednesday November 6, 2019

Elizabeth May calls it quits. Could the Greens do better with someone else?

Over the last decade, Elizabeth May became one of the strongest and most widely known personalities in Canadian politics. Under her leadership, the Green Party of Canada achieved the best results in its 35-year history.

October 14, 2015

Also under May, the Greens peaked at less than seven per cent of the popular vote and three seats in a 338-member House of Commons.

This is where the challenge lies in assessing May’s leadership and legacy.

By any measure, she’s the most successful leader in her party’s history. But that success was limited. And it’s fair to ask whether she and her party should have accomplished much more, particularly in the recent general election.

To May’s credit, her share of the political oxygen around Parliament Hill consistently exceeded her party’s share of popular support.

April 18, 2007

She convinced Stéphane Dion to not run a Liberal candidate against her in 2008 — when she chose to pursue a long-shot campaign against Peter MacKay in the Nova Scotia riding of Central Nova — and then talked her way into the televised leaders debates despite the fact that her party had never won a seat.

After she was elected in 2011 — defeating a Conservative incumbent in Saanich-Gulf Islands in British Columbia — she became a prominent voice calling not only for action on climate change but also for better decorum in the House of Commons and more respect for the sovereign power of Parliament. She was a constant presence in the House  and a regular guest at parliamentary committees, where she would turn up bearing amendments she wished to propose.

She took advantage of every opportunity afforded her as a member of Parliament, all while making her case that the institution, its members and political parties needed to change. The Greens, she vowed, would be different — if they could ever elect enough MPs to form a proper caucus.

September 29, 2008

In 2008, her first election as leader, the Greens received 6.8 per cent of the vote, a two-point jump over the previous election result; the party still failed to elect an MP. Three years later, the Greens focused their efforts on getting May into the House. They succeeded, but the party’s national support slipped to 3.9 per cent. In 2015, its share of the popular vote fell again, to 3.5 per cent.

The Greens elected their second MP in May when Paul Manly won a by-election in British Columbia. He and May were then joined in October by Jenica Atwin, who pulled off a surprise victory in Fredericton.

Three MPs is three more than the Greens had before Elizabeth May became leader. But three MPs is also a smaller number of victories than the Greens seemed capable of winning at the outset of this fall’s campaign.

September 18, 2019

In early September, the Greens were polling at 11 per cent and seemed to have a shot at overtaking the New Democrats for third place. The NDP was weaker than it had been in 15 years, and the issue of climate change — the Green Party’s raison d’être — was more salient than it had ever been. It was possible to imagine the Greens winning a dozen or more seats.

In announcing her departure on Monday, May boasted that the Greens received more than a million votes in this year’s election. But the party’s share of the popular vote — 6.5 per cent — was still below the 2008 mark.

She also celebrated the fact that the party had “doubled” its vote in Quebec — which sounds more impressive if you don’t know that means the party went from 2.3 per cent in Quebec in 2015 to 4.5 per cent this fall. (CBC News) 

 

Tuesday November 5, 2019

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Tuesday November 5, 2019

Wexit group applies to become federal political party

A separatist group calling for Alberta to leave Canada has begun the process to become a federal political party.

October 22, 2019

Wexit Alberta’s application arrived on Monday at Elections Canada, which has begun the verification process, according to a spokesperson for the federal agency.

The group, led by Albertan Peter Downing, aims to do “for Western Canada what the Bloc Québécois did for Quebec,” Downing said.

Downing ran federally with the Christian Heritage Party in 2015. He said he’s since been involved with federal Conservative Party boards, and as a campaign manager with the former provincial Wildrose Party.

Before that, he was an RCMP officer and during that time was suspended for uttering threats against his ex-wife — according to both National Post and a now-deleted article in the St. Albert Gazette. Downing has denied the allegations and says he left the force with a clean record.

Wexit Alberta has been accused of allowing conspiracy theories or other harmful rhetoric to circulate online.

Wexit (“Western exit”) supporters are scheduled to hold rallies across Alberta this month, and the sentiment has gained support in the wake of the federal election, which saw the governing Liberals shut out of Alberta and most of the west.

Western Alienation, by Arch Dale, 1915

Announcing the party’s application, Downing wrote on Facebook that Premier Jason Kenney “needs to become the VERY FIRST PRESIDENT OF ALBERTA.”

Kenney has called separation “irrational,” but is also planning a referendum on equalization and is appointing a panel to discuss the province’s place in the federation.

Many politicians are being careful to hedge their words on the topic, says political scientist Jared Wesley.

“This is a different kind of movement. We’ve seen it generate success south of the border and in Europe. I think political elites ignore it at their peril but they have to be very careful when they provide legitimacy to what, right now, is a pretty fringe movement,” he said.

Seceding could also be difficult, experts say. Any provinces looking to leave Confederation would have to address First Nations treaties and other complications like trade, national defence and amending the country’s constitution. (CBC) 

 

Saturday November 2, 2019

By Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Saturday November 2, 2019

Impeach Trump. Then Move On.

Is it possible that more than 20 Republican senators will vote to convict Donald Trump of articles of impeachment? When you hang around Washington you get the sense that it could happen.

September 27, 2019

The evidence against Trump is overwhelming. This Ukraine quid pro quo wasn’t just a single reckless phone call. It was a multiprong several-month campaign to use the levers of American power to destroy a political rival.

Republican legislators are being bludgeoned with this truth in testimony after testimony. They know in their hearts that Trump is guilty of impeachable offenses. It’s evident in the way they stare glumly at their desks during hearings; the way they flee reporters seeking comment; the way they slag the White House off the record. It’ll be hard for them to vote to acquit if they can’t even come up with a non-ludicrous rationale.

And yet when you get outside Washington it’s hard to imagine more than one or two G.O.P. senators voting to convict.

In the first place, Democrats have not won widespread public support. Nancy Pelosi always said impeachment works only if there’s a bipartisan groundswell, and so far there is not. Trump’s job approval numbers have been largely unaffected by the impeachment inquiry. Support for impeachment breaks down on conventional pro-Trump/anti-Trump lines. Roughly 90 percent of Republican voters oppose it. Republican senators will never vote to convict in the face of that.

August 23, 2018

Second, Democrats have not won over the most important voters — moderates in swing states. A New York Times/Siena College survey of voters in Arizona, Florida, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin found that just 43 percent want to impeach and remove Trump from office, while 53 percent do not. Pushing impeachment makes Democrats vulnerable in precisely the states they cannot afford to lose in 2020.

Third, there is little prospect these numbers will turn around, even after a series of high-profile hearings.

I’ve been traveling pretty constantly since this impeachment thing got going. I’ve been to a bunch of blue states and a bunch of red states (including Kansas, Missouri, North Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Utah). In coastal blue states, impeachment comes up in conversation all the time. In red states, it never comes up; ask people in red states if they’ve been talking about it with their friends, they shrug and reply no, not really. 

Prof. Paul Sracic of Youngstown State University in Ohio told Ken Stern from Vanity Fair that when he asked his class of 80 students if they’d heard any conversation about impeachment, only two said they had. When he asked if impeachment interested them, all 80 said it did not.

Fourth, it’s a lot harder to do impeachment in an age of cynicism, exhaustion and distrust. During Watergate, voters trusted federal institutions and granted the impeachment process a measure of legitimacy. Today’s voters do not share that trust and will not regard an intra-Washington process as legitimate.

Many Americans don’t care about impeachment because they take it as a given that this is the kind of corruption that politicians of all stripes have been doing all along. Many don’t care because it looks like the same partisan warfare that’s been going on forever, just with a different name.

Fifth, it’s harder to do impeachment when politics is seen as an existential war for the future of the country. Many Republicans know Trump is guilty, but they can’t afford to hand power to Nancy Pelosi, Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders.

March 31, 2017

Progressives, let me ask you a question: If Trump-style Republicans were trying to impeach a President Biden, Warren or Sanders, and there was evidence of guilt, would you vote to convict? Answer honestly.

I get that Democrats feel they have to proceed with impeachment to protect the Constitution and the rule of law. But there is little chance they will come close to ousting the president. So I hope they set a Thanksgiving deadline. Play the impeachment card through November, have the House vote and then move on to other things. The Senate can quickly dispose of the matter and Democratic candidates can make their best pitches for denying Trump re-election.

Elizabeth Bruenig of The Washington Post put her finger on something important in a recent essay on Trump’s evangelical voters: the assumption of decline. Many Trump voters take it as a matter of course that for the rest of their lives things are going to get worse for them — economically, spiritually, politically and culturally. They are not the only voters who think this way. Many young voters in their OK Boomer T-shirts feel exactly the same, except about climate change, employment prospects and debt.

This sense of elite negligence in the face of national decline is the core issue right now. Impeachment is a distraction from that. As quickly as possible, it’s time to move on. (David Brooks, NYTimes)  

 

Friday November 1, 2019

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday November 1, 2019

Can Doug Ford learn from his mistakes?

Ontario Premier Doug Ford has ended the longest legislative break in a quarter century and his own political exile. He admits his government has made mistakes and vows to find a new “tone” going forward.

May 29, 2019

“Governing is always hard,” says Ford. “We all mature in the role that we’re in and you just try not to make the same mistakes.”

Far be it for this page to disagree with Ford on any of that. Or his stated desire to “learn by your mistakes.”

His government has been a disaster, and the way Ontario voters cast their ballots in last week’s federal election strongly suggests they also know it.

But putting the wrecking ball that has been the hallmark of the Ford government’s first 16 months down to exuberance is far too simplistic.

The early autism cuts and cronyism scandal, for example, were mistakes. But much of the chaos in everything from education to social services is not the result of haste or blundering. It flows from purposeful policy decisions to cut costs.

October 29, 2019

So as Ford seeks to reset his government the real question is what exactly he thinks are his “mistakes.” That his policies proved to be more unpopular with the people of Ontario than expected, or that they were the wrong direction in the first place?

If it’s the former, Ontarians can expect to see a slower pace of change with more effort put into finding support for the government’s cuts. If it’s the latter, and we hope it is, it might mean more than that.

Monday’s Question Period, though, didn’t bode well for the idea that the new and improved Ford government is about substance and not just style.

Ford welcomed back NDP Leader Andrea Horwath and thanked her for her questions. Then he launched into the same half-truths he’s always peddled.

On education, Ford said, the government is investing “more money than any government in the history of Ontario.” But per student funding — the primary means of funding schools — is down; some high school students are struggling to get the classes they need for university; and teachers’ unions, furious about job reductions, are set to take strike votes.

May 14, 2019

On Ford’s appalling taxpayer-funded court battle over the federal carbon pricing plan, he continued to claim people “just can’t afford it.” He ignored, as usual, the fact that most people will get back more than they pay because of the rebates that come with it.

It’s obvious that Ford needs to reset his government’s agenda.

At this point, no one, not even his own Progressive Conservative colleagues, can possibly know even what it is, given all the U-turns and waffles over the last few months.

Ford happily blew up Toronto city council mid-election, supposedly to create better and more efficient municipal government and vowed to extend such thinking to other regions. Then, on Friday, after months of consultation and study the government abandoned that idea; instead, it offered municipalities more money to find efficiencies and improve services.

May 4, 2019

The province has finally moved to enact legislation passed by the former Liberal government to ban the promotion of vaping products in convenience stores but hasn’t done the same thing on labour reforms needed to protect temporary workers. It has reduced its deep cuts to child care, but not for legal aid. On carbon pricing Ford changed his mind two months ago, only to change it back again last week.

How is anyone to know what this government stands for now?

At the top of the Ford government’s list of legislative priorities is “restoring trust and accountability in government.”

After promising efficiencies but delivering devastating cuts that will be a long road.

And if Ford really wants to avoid repeating his mistakes, this legislative session needs to be about more than softer words. (Toronto Star)