It's a four-peat (54 out of 57 ain't bad)

Looks like I was right in 54 of 57 constituencies in my Manitoba election prediction. I was wrong in thinking the NDP's rural vote would slide enough for them to lose Dauphin and Dawson Trail. In the end, they held on against strong Tory challenges in those seats. I was also wrong about St. Norbert, where new NDP candidate Dave Gaudreau managed to narrowly hold the seat for the party by around 150 votes.

The end result is 37 NDP to 19 PC and 1 Liberal rather than the 34 to 22 to 1 I had predicted. I thought the Conservatives would beat the NDP in popular vote, but the NDP still won 46% to 44%. That means an unprecedented fourth majority government and seat count, at least in modern Manitoba political history, and a stunning win for Selinger who entered his first campaign as party leader.

Election Oracle, Manitoba edition

After the mediocre prediction posted in last spring’s federal election, you think Prairie Topiary would have the good sense not to come out of retirement once again to make an election prediction. Alas, old habits die hard.

This is my forecast for this Tuesday’s provincial election: 34 NDP, 22 PC and 1 Liberal. Yes, so that means an unprecedented fourth majority for Manitoba’s NDP and a first for Premier Greg Selinger, a slightly larger and stronger PC opposition under Hugh McFadyen, and Liberal survival as Jon Gerrard clings to perhaps the last bastion of Liberal support in his River Heights seat.

Expect the NDP to win a comfortable majority of seats but lose the popular vote to the Tories who tend to pile up massive wins in rural areas yet fall just short of victory in most of Winnipeg suburbia.

Throughout the campaign, the media has kept its focus on the battles in Winnipeg, which holds 31 of the province’s 57 seats and the bulk of NDP holds that the Tories have to win to form government. I think, however, that the races outside of Winnipeg are just as interesting, so let’s start there.

South-western Manitoba

In southwest Manitoba, which has eight seats, expect the Tories to win solid victories in Arthur-Virden, Spruce Woods, Agassiz and Riding Mountain. I’m expecting previously NDP-held Dauphin and Swan River to be close. Though incumbent and Finance Minister Rosann Wowchuk is not running again, I expect the NDP to retain their Swan River Riding. In Dauphin, the battle is much tighter given riding redistribution, which reduces the NDP’s 2007 lead to 900 votes. I predict Tory candidate Lloyd McKinney will score an upset victory here over the NDP’s Stan Struthers, taking the seat for the Tories for the first time since 1977.

Brandon’s two seats are also battlegrounds. Brandon East has been held by the NDP since 1969, though the party’s wins have been slimmer in recent years. Brandon West, though traditionally Conservative, went NDP in 1999 and 2003 before Rick Borotsik took it back for the Tories in 2007. Both races could go either way in this election, though I predict an NDP hold in East and a Conservative hold in West.

SW MB tally: 2 NDP, 6 PC

South-eastern Manitoba

This region has 14 seats, most of which elect Conservatives. The NDP is hoping to hold its seats in Interlake, Gimli, Selkirk, and Dawson Trail, with Tory challengers strongest in Interlake and Dawson Trail. I predict defeat for Ron Lemieux in Dawson Trail against Tory Laurent Tetrault but NDP holds in the other three, with Interlake the narrowest of these. I may not be right – in 2007, I wrongly predicted defeat for Lemieux.

The only other seat worth watching is Portage la Prairie, which has never elected a New Democrat MLA, a goal the NDP has nevertheless been coming closer and closer to achieving in recent years. With redistribution, the 2007 Tory margin is only 400 votes and their incumbent is not running again while the NDP’s James Kostuchuk is. I’m not predicting it, but this may be one of the few places the NDP can make gains despite slippage in their vote elsewhere. Expect easy Tory wins elsewhere in this region.

SE MB tally: 3 NDP, 11 PC

Northern Manitoba

I don’t see any surprises here. Provincially, the NDP has long ruled northern Manitoba and should take all four seats again in this election.

Northern MB tally: 4 NDP

Winnipeg

Let’s get the strongholds and easy wins out of the way. The Conservatives will easily win Charleswood, Tuxedo and McFadyen’s seat of Fort Whyte (3 seats). Expect easy NDP wins in Wolseley, Minto, Logan, Point Douglas, St. Johns, Burrows, Elmwood, Concordia, Kildonan, The Maples, Transcona and Greg Selinger’s seat of St. Boniface (12 seats). And though the Tories may be eyeing the following seats (as they should), they’ll also remain safe for the NDP in this election: Assiniboia, St. James, Rossmere, Radisson, St. Vital, Fort Garry-Riverview and Fort Richmond (7 seats). That leaves nine Winnipeg battlegrounds to consider.

Kirkfield Park and Southdale: In 2007, these were the site of shocking NDP gains in Tory heartland. While the Conservatives are putting up stronger campaigns in this election, the organizational resources of the NDP combined with the incumbency factor of the MLAs likely mean NDP holds. Either way, these will be close races.

Tyndall Park and Fort Rouge: These represent the only true Liberal-NDP battles in the city. As Inkster in 2007, most of what is now Tyndall Park was strongly Liberal. Redistributed results, however, put the Liberals only 400 votes ahead in this seat and, without now-MP Kevin Lamoureux as their candidate, the Liberals will almost certainly see the seat return to the NDP fold. Liberal Paul Hesse is putting up a strong campaign in Fort Rouge against the NDP’s Jennifer Howard and it’s their only chance – albeit a long shot – of actually gaining a seat in this election. With Liberal vote fizzling in this election, I predict an NDP hold.

River Heights: Liberal leader Jon Gerrard is fighting to hold his own seat against Marty Morantz of the Conservatives. With redistribution, he would have won 4,448 to 2,407 votes in 2007, which is still an impressive margin of victory. Despite the Liberals’ plunge in the polls, I think the good doctor can eke out a victory here. This seat was traditionally Conservative until Sharon Carstairs took it in 1986 and they have struggled to win it since, succeeding only in 1995.

Riel, Seine River and St. Norbert: These three NDP seats in southern Winnipeg are being strongly targeted by the Conservatives. Under redistribution, the NDP would have won them last time by 2,200, 2,100 and 500 votes, respectively. With a close margin of victory and no incumbent running for the NDP, St. Norbert is ripe for Tory picking and I think they’ll do it. My gut tells me the margin of victory is too much for the Tories to overcome in the other two seats, though, even for popular former City Councillor Gord Steeves, who hopes to knock off Health Minister Theresa Oswald in Seine River.

River East: Conservative Bonnie Mitchelson barely held on to this seat in 2007, in what was a surprisingly strong result for the NDP. Under the redistributed boundaries, the NDP would have actually won the seat by 70 votes instead of losing it by 52 votes. I think the NDP’s numbers will drop here, like in most areas of the province, so that the Conservatives hold the seat.

Winnipeg tally: 25 NDP, 5 PC, 1 Liberal

Final thoughts

Of the 16 close races I’ve identified throughout Manitoba, I predict NDP wins in 9 (Swan River, Brandon East, Interlake, Kirkfield, Southdale, Tyndall, Fort Rouge, Riel, and Seine River), Conservative wins in 6 (Brandon West, Dauphin, Dawson Trail, Portage, St. Norbert, and River East) and a Liberal win in River Heights. Whether I’m right or wrong will come with Tuesday night’s news.

If I am right, the NDP will be jubilant even if stung by a few of their losses, Conservatives will devastated even if in a stronger position to win in 2015 (with a similar seat count to the NDP’s before they took power in 1999), and the Liberals will be relieved to be alive even with the soul searching that undoubtedly lies ahead for them.

---

Photo: A ballot from Afghanistan’s 2006 legislative elections. Large numbers of Manitoba voters will hopefully exercise their own right to vote on October 4.

Election Oracle: 2011

It’s been about a year and a half since I’ve made any posts on this blog. Life has made it hard to keep up with the writing and there’s a good community of Manitoba bloggers that keep the ideas flowing and the debates going. While I’m not sure if I’ll bring this blog back to life at some point, I’m happy for now to use it for my election predictions. Usually, I come in a bit closer than just about anyone, but we’ll see if that holds true for this time, especially when the last polls of the campaign are still showing increased movement toward the NDP.

Canada

Last election (incl byelections): C 145, N 36, L 77, B 49, I1
Prediction: C 152, N 84, L 51, B 20, I 1

They key question from the start of the campaign was whether the Conservatives would get a minority or majority. The second that emerged was whether the NDP will form the Official Opposition. I’m predicting 152 Conservatives, which is a small increase and within a few seats of a majority. If I’m wrong and they pick up a few extra Liberal seats in Ontario, then they may eke out a slight majority. The NDP will be solidly in second place, even if their organization can’t convert all of their support into hard votes. The last few polls of the campaign have showed the NDP numbers still increasing, but I’ve tried to offer fairly conservative predictions.

If my prediction is right, it’ll be a tepid win for the Conservatives – they’ll have yet another minority, leaving them unable to push their agenda through Parliament, but it’ll be a strong minority, which means they’ll be too strong to be pushed aside by an opposition coalition. It’s a historic rout for the Liberals and one from which they may never recover, if a British-style left-right realignment is the outcome. It’s also a crushing defeat for the Bloc in Quebec, which has dominated since their formation in the early 1990s. Now they’re more of a chip than a block. For the NDP, it’s an astonishing result and an endorsement of Jack Layton’s style and direction.

So what lies ahead? For the Conservatives, they’ll continue in a minority government and continue strategizing about how to hold back the NDP from further growth. I can only hope that the Conservatives see this election as a sign that Canadians prefer vision and substance over dirty tricks and character assassinations, but that might be too much to hope for. It may get worse yet.

For the NDP, as Official Opposition, the task ahead will be one of discipline, coalition building (informal rather than formal) and developing an image, platform and strategy for forming government. All parties go through some growing pains as they transition from a protest party into a governing party and the federal NDP won’t be any different. As well, with Liberals, Bloquistes and Greens all migrating to the NDP, the party may no longer be interested in a formal merger or coalition deal. The new NDP is the coalition.

For the Liberals and Bloc, regrouping will be tough. Right-wing Liberals may gravitate to the Conservatives in the hopes of stopping further NDP growth. Left-wing Liberals who’ve flirted with the NDP but saw them as having no chance of forming government will now feel the pressure to move to the NDP. With the Liberals in third place, potential candidates, leaders and donors will now all be much harder to come by. For their part, Bloc members may wonder what point there is in sticking around. More socially conservative nationalists may drift to the Conservatives while left-leaning ones will feel compelled to join many of their colleagues in supporting what is now the largest social democratic party in Quebec. The Bloc and Liberals will try to convince voters that this election was a blip or a one-off event, but clawing their way back isn’t going to be easy.

Atlantic

Last election: C 11, N 4, L 17
Prediction: C 14, N 7, L 11

Apart from several Conservative and NDP pickups, I expect the Atlantic to be mostly unchanged, even though some polls are pointing to a last-minute NDP surge here. I see Tory pickups in Avalon, Malpeque, Madawaska-Restigouche and Moncton and one loss to the NDP in Nova Scotia’s South Shore. Look also for NDP gains in St. John’s South and Dartmouth.

Possible surprises: Tory win in Random-Burin-St. George or NDP wins in Central Nova (Peter McKay) or Halifax West. Some pundits have suggested these, but I’m sceptical they’ll happen.

Quebec

Last election: C 10, N 1, L 14, B 49, I1
Prediction: C 8, N 36, L 10, B 20, I1

The story here is the catastrophic meltdown of the Bloc and the meteoric rise of the NDP. Many pundits are completely puzzled by the NDP’s strength, but the party’s been laying the groundwork for growth and seeing incremental results for years. Of course, the perfect storm of good fortune for the NDP in this election helped throw open the flood gates. I predict Duceppe will lose his own seat in Laurier-Ste-Marie, making the Bloc’s collapse even more stunning. Look for NDP gains throughout the Montreal/Laval, Gatineau and Quebec City regions.

While the Liberals will lose some seats to the NDP, including Westmount, NDG, Lasalle-Émard and Hull-Aylmer, the few good news stories of the night will come when they pick up Bloc seats (Ahuntsic, Haute-Gaspésie and possibly Brome-Missisquoi where Denis Paradis is running) as the NDP siphons away Bloc votes. The Tories will lose Beauport-Limoilou, Charlesbourg and Pontiac (Lawrence Cannon, one of my least favourite MPs) to the NDP, but should hold on to the rest. Unfortunately, independent Arthur André, known for working another job while being an MP and making intolerant comments on the radio, will probably eke out a victory over his Bloc and NDP competitors.

Possible surprises: Everywhere, as untouchable Bloc and Liberal strongholds fall. Watch for NDP star candidate and Innu leader Romeo Saganash in a close battle with the Bloc for his northern Quebec seat.

Ontario

Last election: C 52, N 17 , L 37
Prediction: C 60, N 22, L 24

With Quebec not interested in their party, the Tories needed Ontario to get their majority. It would have worked well if the NDP only cut into the Liberal vote, so as to toss Liberal-Conservative races to the Tories, but the NDP have pulled votes from the Tories too. I predict most new wins for the NDP in the Toronto area, including Beaches-East York, Davenport, Oshawa, Parkdale-High Park and and York South-Weston. I think they’ll also win Oshawa from the Cons.

The Liberals, squeezed from both sides, will probably lose around one third of their Ontario seats, including many in the 905 belt. The Holland-Alexander race has drawn a lot of attention in Ajax-Pickering. I predict a Tory win there as well as in Mississauga South, Brampton-Springdale and Brampton West. A few Toronto seats are likely to swing Tory as well (a first since the 1980s), giving them Don Valley West, Eglinton-Lawrence and York Centre.

Possible surprises: I expect Iggy will be safe in his own seat, but a surprise of the night could be the Tories giving him a run in his home seat. If the NDP really surprises, they may pick up Scarborough Southwest, Guelph, Essex, Kenora and others, but I expect they’ll fall a little short in these ridings.

Manitoba

Last election: C 9, N 3 , L 2
Prediction: C 9, N 4, L 1

I don’t expect the electoral drama that’s going on in most other provinces to really reach us here in Manitoba. The NDP should win Winnipeg North back from the Liberals in a close race, giving us the same result as in 2008.

Possible surprises: The Conservatives could surprise and win Winnipeg South-Centre from the Liberals or Elmwood-Transcona from the NDP, but I don’t think their numbers are quite high enough to do it.

Saskatchewan and Alberta

Last election: C 40, N 1 , L 1
Prediction: C 39, N 2, L 1

There is NDP momentum in our two neighbouring prairie provinces, but it’s probably not enough to make many seats change hands. NDP targets include Palliser, Desnethé-Missinippi-Churchill River, Saskatoon-Rosetown-Biggar, Edmonton Centre and Edmonton East. Of these, I predict an NDP win in the Saskatoon seat with tighter races but not wins elsewhere.

Possible surprises: Conservative nomination loser James Ford is running again as an Independent in Edmonton--Sherwood Park and there’s an outside chance he could pull off an upset. The NDP might also surprise with a second seat in Alberta. On the other hand, it’ll be one of the few big letdowns of the night for New Democrats if they surge Canada-wide but end up shut out of Saskatchewan again.

British Columbia

Last election: C 22, N 9 , L 5
Prediction: C 21, N 12, L 3

The NDP has seen big upward movement in their poll numbers here as in most other provinces and it should gain them a few more seats. On election night, watch for them battling to pick up Kamloops-Thompson-Cariboo, Vancouver Island North and Surrey North from Tories, while the Tories fight close races to pick up Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca (vacated by Keith Martin) and Vancouver South (Ujjal Dosanjh).

The Greens are of course hoping for a win in Saanich-Gulf Islands, where Elizabeth May is running. It’s their one shot at a seat and I think they’ll fall well short, despite the poll they released claiming they’re in the lead.

Possible surprises: A stunning upset could come if Hedy Fry is defeated by the NDP in Vancouver Centre or if Elizabeth May somehow does pull off a win on Vancouver Island. A last minute NDP surge might also toss them some seats they haven’t won since 1988.

The North

Last election: C 1, N 1 , L 1
Prediction: C 1, N 1, L 1

Don’t forget about the north! I predict one seat apiece for each of the three parties – same as last time. The NDP in the Western Arctic (NWT) and the Conservative in Nunavut each stave off a former Territorial Premier running as the Liberal candidate.

Photo: John William Waterhouse's Consulting the Oracle, 1882.

Inside last year's coalition deal

Brian Topp's chronology of last year's events in which federal opposition parties banded together in an attempt to take power from the minority Conservative government is a must-read for any political junkie, no matter your opinion of the deal itself.

Topp, a former NDP campaign co-chair and a coalition negotiator for the NDP, presented his take on the day-to-day drama in a six-part series in the Globe and Mail over the past week.

All the juicy details are there: Dion's desire to un-resign his leadership by leaping right into the Prime Minister's chair, the coalition's strategic error in closely associating themselves with the Bloc (which the Tories seized on pretty much within seconds of hearing about the plan), the Ignatieff team's tepid embrace and then rejection of the coalition, some funny moments of Liberal "entitlement" behaviour (for example, see Marlene Jennings's comments during cabinet negotiations), Dion's final big flop on national television and a whole lot of "big names" playing a role, among them Dion, Ignatieff, Layton, Rae, Chrétien, Broadbent, Blakeney and a host of others.

The series has created quite a stir among political commentators. See the reactions by Chantal Hébert, Rex Murphy, Paul Wells and Curtis at Endless Spin Cycle (whose earlier post I initially missed when composing this one). Jane Taber comments on how the Tories celebrated the one-year anniversary of the coalition's demise.

Photo: Competing protests in favour and opposed to the proposed coalition in late 2008.

A shameful lack of vision

Andrew Coyne sure tells it like is. Why is a government that so adamantly denies any knowledge of Canadian complicity in torture so desperate to keep us guessing? If they're holding the truth in their back pocket, why are they more determined than ever to block the way forward?

With one Tory MP after another getting in on the act of trying to undermine former diplomat Richard Colvin's testimony (for example, for being filmsy, inconsistent, and unreliable), it took Christie Blatchford two articles to articulate what weeks of inept spinning have failed to do: poke holes in Colvin's credibility. Don Martin of the National Post has done some similar work.

Of course, many questions remain and Blatchford focuses only on Colvin's testimony, not on the bigger torture issue (as one Globe letter writer suggested, her "wheat vs. chaff" comment sounds like she misses the boat entirely on the torture question). We can only hope the Military Police Complaints Commission, which is investigating the allegations, is able to eke out the truth despite the government's best efforts to block and obfuscate.

Once again, we see petty and angry politics trump reasoned, articulate, responsible leadership at the federal level. After all, were the leaders of this government to have the courage of their own convictions, surely they would continue to champion the mission in Afghanistan while rushing to sincerely address the damaging allegations that have surfaced. Yet, we see no leadership; we hear no vision. Instead, they duck and hide behind angry, petty invective disguised as spin.

Lawrence Cannon, no friend of Canadians

As the Tories launch their latest round of plans to secure a majority government, they might find getting off the ground is easier if you first get rid of the anvil sitting in the luggage bay.

The anvil in question is Lawrence Cannon, our federal Minister of Foreign Affairs, and no friend of Canadian citizens travelling abroad. In this weekend's Globe, both Rex Murphy and Gerald Caplan eloquently describe Cannon's bungling and bizarre comments that make clear his inability to stand up for the citizens his government is supposed to represent. If law-abiding Canadians find themselves in trouble abroad, who can they count on if not their own government?

The latest mistake -- trapping Toronto woman Suaad Hagi Mohamud in Kenya after Canadian officials wrongly denied she was Canadian -- has resulted in a $2.5 million dollar suit against the government. Abdelrazik, the Canadian citizen trapped in Sudan for over six years until a court forced the government to bring him home, will likely cost the government millions more. Money of course doesn't make up for the grief and trauma experienced by the victims.

While we can't personally blame the Minister for every mistake made, it's his inability to speak up and resolve issues that we should question. In some cases, his department is
completely silent when dialogue with a foreign government is clearly warranted. In the case of Abdelrazik, for reasons still never thoroughly explained, his department deliberately created additional roadblocks to prevent the citizen's return home.

The question now is how much more will this Minister cost Canadians before he finds the exit?

Does the left gain when the economy is down?

There’s an interesting debate going on in the Globe and Mail about the role of the NDP and the reason why it doesn’t seem to be making headlines these days despite the economic downturn – the question Lawrence Martin asks (see Letters to the editor responses) in the article that kicked off the discussion is that, when capitalism is in crisis, shouldn’t the left see gains?

It’s logical to think that the NDP should make gains during tough times as people look for alternatives to the economic system that may be causing them hardship. This might partially explain the NDP’s surprising win in Ontario in 1990.

However, it’s also possible that a sinking economy might actually harm the left electorally. In good times, voters may feel more comfortable having their government deal with issues that people perceive to be left: addressing poverty and inequality, expanding social programs, funding the CBC, mandating environmentally-friendly behaviours, etc. In tough times, voters often focus on the economy as the sole issue, and the Conservatives have traditionally been best at branding themselves as economic managers. Besides, in bad times, governments of all stripes will tend to sound and act a little like New Democrats: showing concern about rising unemployment, wanting to curb or prevent poverty, speaking about education and training, penalizing arrogant corporate leaders, and actively intervening in the economy where it’ll save some jobs and earn points with voters.

I decided to see if I could see any relationship between economic ups and downs and federal voting behaviour for the past several decades. There are two charts I've created (click to enlarge). The one on top shows the share of popular vote received by right wing parties (Conservatives, Progressive Conservatives, Canadian Alliance, Reform party and Social Credit/Ralliement créditiste) and left wing parties (one bar shows just the NDP; another shows the NDP grouped with the Greens and the Bloc, which assumes we can lump those parties in as left) since 1972.

In the chart, the right-wing vote appears relatively consistent outside of the two big Mulroney victories in the 1980s. The drop in the NDP vote from 1993 to 2000 also stands out, but its vote is otherwise remarkably consistent from 1972 to 2008. The combined "left" vote begins to differ from the NDP as the Bloc emerged in the early 90s. The grouped left vote stands out as very strong in each of the last three elections, with 2008 representing a high water mark.

I included in the bottom chart two economic indicators. The first is the annual unemployment rate and the second is the quarter-over-quarter real GDP growth rate.

The unemployment rate curve shows two dramatic peaks – one in 1983 and one in 1993. Interestingly, the two biggest electoral shifts over the period also occurred around those times. The first, in 1984, swept Mulroney to power with the largest majority in Canadian history. The second, in 1993, did the opposite, nearly wiping out the Progressive Conservatives and vaulting the Chrétien Liberals into power.

What's striking about the GDP growth curve is the relative flatness since about 1981 and especially during the 1990s. In the past ten years, quarter-to-quarter growth has been mostly positive, but is relatively inconsistent, with 9/11 having a noticeable negative impact in 2001. The plunge at the end of 2008 appears dramatic when compared historically.

So can we conclude any relationship between swings to the left or right and economic downturns? Not likely, at least not based on the data I've presented. Interesting shifts in the popular vote do appear, but they don't seem to be dependent on economic upturns or downturns. Economic shifts probably do affect voter behaviour, but not in ways that are entirely predictable. Furthermore, the traction that a party may get politically isn't always evident in the electoral numbers. Having an influence on the policy process and in the marketplace of ideas – regardless of which party ultimately takes credit – is something that can’t be measured here.

Manitoba's new electoral boundaries

As some fellow bloggers (Curtis, PolicyFrog and The Hack) have already pointed out, the new provincial election boundaries have been finalized. While most of the outgoing constituencies will be replaced with fairly similar new counterparts, there are a few big changes. Most notable is the loss of one seat in southwestern Manitoba and the gain of another in southeastern Manitoba.

As PolicyFrog also noted, there are some interesting name changes and I like what I see. For example, most of Inkster, a constituency named after a street, becomes Tyndall Park, a constituency named after a community. Rupertsland becomes Kewatinook (Cree for "from the north"), in a nod to the constituency's large aboriginal population.

A few nomination battles could well result. For the Conservatives, five sitting MLAs will have to fight it out over the four seats that remain in southwestern Manitoba. In south Winnipeg, the NDP-held seats of Fort Garry and Lord Roberts unite to become Fort Garry-Riverview (a much better name than the ugly Pembina-Jubilee moniker that appeared in the draft proposed maps). NDP-held St. Norbert loses Fort Richmond but gains some Tory territory from Fort Whyte.

I'll have more thoughts soon. In the meantime, those wanting to take a look for themselves should consult the boundaries commission site and report.

The prorogation and 2009's limping victor

So after a debate that split the country and amid rallies in which words like "coup" and "antidemocratic" were tossed around, a group of opposition legislators announce they have secured a majority in the House and plan to take power.

But enough about Thailand... Here, in Canada, some coalition supporters might be disappointed that our Governor General accepted Stephen Harper's request to prorogue, or suspend, Parliament until January 26.

The Prorogation

While I'm a supporter of the coalition, I don't find her decision at all unreasonable. After all, if the opposition coalition can't stay together through seven weeks of Tory apologies and/or anti-coalition PR, what would have been the odds of it sticking it out for the promised 18 months? If it is able to hold together until the end of January, and if the Liberals can sort out their leadership issues without clobbering each other over that time, then there's a good chance it can form a workable government. And, if it does hold together, it'll be entirely within its right as a majority-group of MPs to pass non-confidence in the current government and to form an alternative one.

Of course, there'll be no clear winner and loser, even after the budget/confidence vote. Whether the Tories cling to power or the coalition takes over, Canadians will be left with an exceptionally weak federal government.

If the Tories Survive

Consider that, if the Tories do hold on, they'll be chastened and cautious. Harper will be weakened and his hold over the party will be much more tenuous than it was before all this drama -- his reputation as a brilliant tactician is in tatters. And, as part of its effort to survive, the government will likely have committed to a budget that has a more centrist or left-leaning flavour than the Conservatives would really like. Many divisive Tory policies, such as dismantling the Canadian Wheat Board, may have to be shelved. At the same time that Conservative supporters see their hopes deflated by the continued backpedaling of their own party, other parties will be able to accuse the Tories of having a hidden agenda and have many voters believe them. The Conservative Party will also have much rebuilding to do in Quebec and they'll be taken to task nationally for having risked opening the sovereignty/national unity can of worms. Finally, they'll be at the helm of a Canadian economy that's on its way downward, something they may have to rightly or wrongly shoulder the blame for the next time they face voters.

If the Coalition Succeeds

Of course, it won't be all fun and games for the coalition if it assumes power. After all, it will likely be the weakest minority government ever to preside over the country. It will be led by the Liberals, a disorganized and money-strapped shell of what was once the country's natural governing party, in partnership with the NDP, whose inexperience in federal cabinet may well show. With a mere 114 seats to the Tories' 143, the coalition will have difficulty passing bills that aren't confidence motions, since the Bloc is not bound to vote with the government on every bill. Ditto for having control of the House committees. And, like any government that holds office through 2009, it will preside over a sinking economy and a federal deficit, all of which the Conservatives will be only too happy to blame on the coalition's supposed fiscal mismanagement. Then, when the coalition parties eventually do face an election, some voters will rightly or wrongly punish them for having worked with the Bloc, not to mention for the above mentioned economic woes.

Battle Stations

These issues must be on the minds of those considering their options right now, particularly by Michael Ignatieff and his supporters, as they consider how to ease the honourable yet inept Dion out of his leadership role. Meanwhile, coalition solidarity is being driven by Dion, who desperately wants to become Prime Minister even if for just one day; Bob Rae, who's support of Dion and of the coalition is really a proxy for his own bid to stave off Ignatieff and win the leadership for himself; the NDP, which hopes to bolster its own legitimacy by sitting in a federal cabinet for the first time ever; and a diverse array of interest groups, including labour unions, women's organizations, human rights groups, wheat board supporters, arts organizations and others who abhor Tory policies and who see opportunity in the coalition.

From the Prime Minister and his crew, who seek to hold power, we should fully brace ourselves for all of the following:

- Bend-over-backwards apologies for Financial Update misdeeds (note the statement's initials -- from a joke making its rounds this week);

- Promises of a new era of cooperation (no doubt to be accompanied by a strong sense of deja vu among Canadians...)

- A budget so steeped in Liberal and NDP policies as well as treats for every Canadian that the opposition will risk embarrassement and/or the wrath of Canadians by voting against it to defeat the government;

- More national-unity-be-damned "the separatists are at the gates" hysterics and other Tory coffer-funded PR aimed at turning popular support against the coalition;

- PR aimed at driving wedges between the two Liberal Party camps; and

- A push to have the coalition accept a return to the polls if it chooses to defeat the government on January's budget.

Bennett replayed

Wow, R.B. Bennett is back.





At the very time when fearful and uncertain Canadians are looking to elected leaders to put aside their petty squabbles and work toward staving off a looming economic recession, what does our newly elected Conservative government do? They pull a complete flop on the economic front and use the crisis instead as an opportunity to attack their opponents.

It sounds like an earlier Tory Prime Minister, R.B. Bennett, who came to power amid the Great Depression only to declare it over in 1930 when it was really just getting underway. His then-refusal to provide anything in the way of economic stimulus sounds like our current finance minister's declaration that no more spending is presently needed and, in fact, that cutbacks are the answer!

Bennett's ideological devotion to laissez-faire-style government and his belief that "the sole function of government is to favour private enterprise" is strikingly similar to the thinking of the current government, whose worship of tax cuts as the cure for all ills is so devout that they actually believe that last year's tax cuts will somehow prevent next year's recession.

Another tenet of R.B. Bennett's Tories was that government assets = bad. Modern day Tories believe the same and so have proposed a fire sale of $2.3 billion of crown corporations and other federal property in a supposed attempt to prevent a deficit. As blogger NDP Outsider suggests, maybe the best time to sell one's assets isn't in a buyer's market. Once again, blind ideology trumps common sense.

R.B. Bennett also took the opportunity to beat up on anyone he thought a political opponent. Under the guise of preventing communism, he revised Section 98 of the Criminal Code to do away with the fundamental democratic right of being innocent until proven guilty where association with supposedly subversive organizations was concerned (you could be put away for simply showing up at a rally or meeting). This was used to arrest members of far left organizations as well of members of that old Tory bogeyman: labour unions.

The thinking among Tories apparently hasn't evolved much since Bennett's days: they made sure to ban strikes and bypass collective bargaining for public sector workers in this week's economic update, something that's puzzled even the Globe and Mail, which is hardly a pal of the unions. Maybe the Tories didn't want to be outdone by Bennett in repealing rights (collective bargaining is a charter-protected right) or attacking political opponents. Why bargain when you can simply take out the club?

The federal Conservatives also decided to open a new front against the opposition by doing away with federal public financing of political parties, hardly an issue at the top of the public agenda. So much for the new era in civility that the Tories seemed to be all in favour of a mere two weeks earlier. So much for putting aside the House's characteristic squabbling to focus on our most pressing common problem. So much for real leadership.

One might have thought that here was Harper's golden opportunity to cement his brand as statesperson and leader by reassuring Canadians, by listening to ideas from all sides, and by working together to move forward. In such a scenario, it wouldn't be hard to envision him being rewarded with a majority government in our next trip to the polls. Instead, he squandered the chance and now faces the prospect of losing power to an opposition party coalition no one dreamed possible a week ago. Thursday's smugness became Saturday's backpedal. My favourite reporter question to a fuming Harper: “Sir, did you make a mistake?”

Of course, R.B. Bennett eventually relented and opted for a big fiscal dividend in an effort to boost the economy, but by that time, Canadians had suffered through more than five years of tough economic times. In what we can only hope is another parallel with R.B. Bennett's Conservatives, the Tories went on to be crushed in the following election and then spent the following 22 years in the political wilderness. Let's just hope we don't have to endure five years of clueless leadership before repeating that history.

Further reading: The economic update and responses by Jeffrey Simpson, Dan Lett, Thomas Walkom, The Globe, and Pierre Berton's book The Great Depression.


Photo: A Bennett Buggy, named after Depression-era Prime Minister R.B. Bennett, was the term used for a car pulled by a horse, after the owner could no longer afford gasoline.

Election Oracle 2008

Prairie Topiary's Election Oracle is back!

I'll post detailed province-by-province predictions here on Monday afternoon after I take a glance at the last of Nanos's daily tracking polls.

This weekend's polls show the Conservatives recovering some of the points they lost to the Liberals in the past week. The Conservatives are still down significantly in Atlantic Canada and Quebec, while the NDP looks to be down a few points in BC. Nanos shows the NDP's numbers holding strong at 22% nationally, which is probably the highest they've been all campaign. I suspect that the NDP pretty much neutralized any strategic voting lure of the Liberals, though a decline in their numbers tomorrow might suggest otherwise.

Of course, accurate predictions require something more than just poll numbers. They have to include consideration of regional swings, the influence of "star" personalities and the added recognition factor that comes from being an incumbent, as well as the role of strong local organization and "top of mind" brand status (e.g., Greens are less "top of mind" and tend to worse than the polls suggest on election day, while the opposite is often the case for the Liberals). Anticipating last minute shifts in support can also be key.

I may yet change these numbers, but right now I'm predicting the following:

Conservative minority (141 seats)

Liberal Official Opposition (76 seats)

Bloc (49 seats)

NDP (40 seats)

Independent 2

Green 0

That's a notable increase in seats for the Conservatives and NDP at the expense of the Liberals. It's not inconceivable that the NDP could surpass its highest ever popular vote (20.4% in 1988) and seat count (it held 44 seats following a win in a 1989 byelection). Passing the Bloc to become the third largest party in the House might also be possible, but passing the Liberals is unlikely, as that could only come through a Liberal meltdown in Toronto and Atlantic Canada, two areas where Liberal numbers appear to have been strengthening in the last week.

Stay tuned for more details tomorrow.

Photo: A female bowl bearer or mboko from the Luba culture in the Congo. Traditionally, bowl bearers are used by royal diviners to predict the future.

Using bad policy to troll for votes

I very rarely agree with the Globe and Mail's Margaret Wente , but her piece today on the Tories' motivation for cutting arts programs and treating young offenders as adults is right on the money. Whether you think the policies are misguided or not (I do for reasons such as this and this), they're more about winning votes than solving problems.

It's possible that the arts cuts have won some votes for the Tories in Ontario's 905 belt, but they've sure backfired in Quebec, where the Bloc's numbers have just shot up about ten points at the Tories' expense.

Dreaming big

Following a stream of historically poor Liberal poll numbers, some campaign observers are beginning to ask whether the NDP is about to surpass the Liberals (see here, here and here) and form Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition in the next parliament.

Indeed, the big fantasy of the federal NDP, and likely a prerequisite for the party to ever become a true national contender for power, has always been to surpass the Liberal Party. New Democrtas believe this milestone would give rise to a new political polarization between the right and left, thus damning the Liberals to the political wilderness forever.

This thinking is never far from the minds of NDP strategists, who face the tricky task of fighting the Tories without inadvertently sinking themselves by helping the Liberals who, for their part, adeptly hug the middle, adopting the rhetoric and policies of the right or the left in whatever combination is most likely to win them power.

The model of political polarization the NDP seeks emerged in Britain in the first half of the 20th century as the Labour Party surpassed the Liberals, who were never again to taste power. Canadian examples can be found in Saskatchewan, Manitoba and BC, though sometimes this is in a two-party system with the Liberals on the right (e.g., Saskatchewan's anti-medicare Liberals of the 1960s and 1970s and the current right-leaning Liberals in BC, who replaced the Social Credit Party there). Polarization is arguably occurring in Nova Scotia where the NDP appears close to winning power and the Liberals slip further into third place every election.

The big question: can it happen federally? As things stand, the New Democrats are likely to make gains and the Liberals likely to suffer losses, but can the shift be dramatic enough for the NDP to form Official Opposition? Some polls show the gap between the two parties to be as little as 3%, a level of competitiveness not seen since around 1990.

So what would it take?

First, it's important to note that the NDP need not necessarily surpass the Liberals in popular vote to surpass them in seats. This is because, generally-speaking, the Liberals' votes tend to be more evenly spread than either the Conservatives' or the NDPs' votes, which tend to be concentrated in particular areas. This tends to make the Liberals more efficient than other parties at converting votes into seats when they're popular but less inefficient than other parties when they're unpopular. In 1984, the Liberal-NDP gap was 28% to 19%, but the seat gap was only 40-30. Another percentage point or two might have pushed the NDP into second.

To come in second in this election, the NDP would likely have to win at least 60 seats or so, with the Liberals falling below that number. The losses for the Liberals in Ontario, where they won 54 seats in 2006, would have to especially large. Specifically, we'd need to see the following:

Ontario

Liberal numbers would have to drop below 30% from the mid-to-high 30s where they are now, while the NDP would have to climb 5 points or so to the low 20s, with noted strength in northern Ontario. The Tories would break 40%. Liberal losses to both the Conservatives and NDP, plus bleeding to the Greens in vulnerable suburban ridings, would result in a seat count of something like this:
Con 55 / Lib 28 / NDP 23 (2006: Con 40 / Lib 54 / NDP 12)

Quebec

Bloc numbers would have to stay over 30%, around where they're hovering now, as continued Bloc leakage to the Tories and NDP will produce new victories for the Liberals. The Tories would have to stay around their current 30% while the the NDP approached 20% (up from about 15% now). This might yield something like this:
Bloc 33 / Con 23 / Lib 14 / NDP 4 / Ind 1
(2006: Bloc 51 / Con 10 / Lib 13 / Ind 1)

Atlantic Canada

The Tories would need to gain only a few points (to maybe 36%) at the expense of the Liberals for them to steal a number of close Liberal seats in Nova Scotia, PEI and especially New Brunswick. This would offset Tory losses that are all but guaranteed in NL (a victim of Danny Williams's ABC campaign). The NDP, who are already up a few points over their 22% in 2006, would have to eke out a few new victories in St. John's and Nova Scotia. In seats, that would probably come out to something like this:
Con 14 / Lib 10 / NDP 7 / Ind 1
(2006: Con 9 / Lib 20 / NDP 3)

Prairies

On the prairies, a couple of points gained for the NDP over their 2006 numbers could give them up to five more seats (I can't see the party winning more than three in Saskatchewan). The Tories would have to win some, lose some, leaving the Liberals with 1-2 seats in total on the Prairies. That would leave something like the following seat count:
Con 46 / NDP 8 / Lib 2 (2006: Con 48 / NDP 3 / Lib 5)

BC

NDP numbers have been strengthening in BC in the last week. Two or three more points would put them over 30% and win them a few new seats at the expense of both other parties. The Liberals, who are bleeding to the Greens in suburban Vancouver, would see some seat losses to the Tories. That could leave the situation something like this:
Con 18 / NDP 17 / Lib 1 (2006: Con 17 / NDP 10 / Lib 9)

North

A territorial seat for each party as the Cons pick up Nunavut:
Con 1 / Lib 1 / NDP 1 (2006: Lib 2 / NDP 1)

Nationally

In order to make the above happen, the NDP would need something in the range of 22%, while the Liberals could have no more than about 26%. In addition, the shift in numbers would have to be in the right regions. The above seat counts total as follows:
Con 157 / NDP 60 / Lib 56 / Bloc 33 / Ind 2
(2006: Con 124 / Lib 103 / NDP 29 / Bloc 51 / Ind 1)

The above exercise, apart from being fun (it's still more fun than realistic at this point), suggests it's narrowly possible for the NDP to surpass the Liberals. I would suggest that it remains an uphill battle for the NDP and that they shouldn't underestimate the Liberals. Still, a lot can happen in the one month of campaign that remains.

If the Liberals somehow do tank and make a historically poor showing on October 14, they really shouldn't blame Dion, who seems to be a rather decent, intelligent politician. Rather, for a number of reasons, they can place the blame squarely on this fellow.

Photo: The House of Commons (facing the government side)

If I were a rich man...

I wonder if this scene from the musical Fiddler On The Roof is what Dion had in mind when he announced on Tuesday that he's not a rich man.

It does make me wonder: did the Liberals not see this campaign coming? First, they were forced to scramble to secure a campaign plane (and ended up with a real gas guzzler). Now, they've suddenly realized that Dion's image needs a makeover and are trying to recast him as just a regular guy -- why didn't they do that a year ago?

Some other thoughts and observations on the campaign thus far:

• You have to wonder about Ontario Liberal Premier McGuinty's decision not to endorse his federal counterparts. Apparently, he doesn't want to worsen his already abysmally poor relationship with feds. If that doesn't tell us how far ahead the Tories are in this campaign and how unlikely the Liberals are to win, I don't know what does.
  
  
• The puffin poop Tory ad that was all over the new today blew up in the Tories' faces, as it well should have. Have they forgotten how their ad making fun of Chretien's paralysis backfired several years ago? Perhaps the Tories' punishment should fit the crime -- straight to bed with no dessert, plus grounding for one week.
  
  
• I was somewhat surprised that May was barred from the televised debates given that the criteria for entry has always been to have a minimum of one MP, which the Greens have now met. Ironically, the Liberals, who pushed for May's inclusion, would likely have the most to fear from May's participation, as polls show it's them bleeding the most to the Greens, particularly in Ontario (confirming some comments I made previously).
  
  
• One new EKOS poll puts the Liberals at the historically low level of 24%, only narrowly ahead of the NDP, at 19%. Similarly, a second poll (by pollster Segma Unimarketing, which I've never heard of until now) put them at 25% to the Conservatives' whopping 43%. The federal Liberals, one of the most successful political parties in the western world, have only received that low a share of vote once -- in 1867! In 1984, their next worst performance, the Liberals converted 28% of the popular vote into just 40 seats.
  
  
• The NDP might be the only party to run a full slate of 308 candidates in this election. The Tories have bowed out of Portneuf-Jacques-Cartier to help Independent MP André Arthur in Quebec, while the Liberals are of course not running against Elizabeth May in Central Nova, whose party isn't fielding candidates against either Stephane Dion in Saint-Laurent-Cartierville or former Conservative Bill Casey in Cumberland-Colchester-Musquodoboit Valley.
  
  
• On Monday, Young Liberals heckled Jack Layton for borrowing Liberal votes in the last election instead of focusing on Harper. They claim that attacking the Liberals in 2006 split the anti-Harper vote and helped elect him. Now, if they really believed that, would they not be busy heckling at Tory rallies instead?
  
  
• With PQ leader Pauline Marois undergoing surgery, the Bloc loses an important campaign ally (Marois had planned to stump for Duceppe). That party is desperately struggling to stop the loss of support to the Conservatives and, to a lesser extent, the NDP (a just-posted Globe article suggests the Bloc may have slowed the Tory momentum in Quebec).
  
  
• New Stephane Dion website: http://www.thisisdion.ca/. I wonder how many fans looking for this website will accidentally wind up at the Liberal leader's site.
  
  
• Finally, there are some great online resources for political junkies who just can't get enough. Pundit's Guide is an amazing database of candidates, contests and results. Paulitics and niXtuff provide regular tracking of polls. The Globe's, Canwest's and the CBC's sites provide additional articles, polls, and punditry. Independent sites nodice.ca, Election Prediction Project are also great resources. Democratic Space will launch its election coverage on Sept. 14.
  
  
  

A two-horse race and other pre-election myths

Today's Globe and Mail pretty much stole the headline I was planning for a blog post: Harper Tories On The Brink Of Majority. This might come as a shock to some pundits who keep looking to tied polling numbers as the be all-end all source of election analysis, so let's bust a few pre-election myths.


Myth: Harper's calling an election, but even he doesn't think he'll get a majority

Reality: The Canadian public are majority-wary and the Tories know this, so of course they're going to downplay their chances. Even if some polls show them hovering somewhere between 32% and 35%, that's only a few points short of majority territory, and they're extraordinarily well-organized and flush with cash. While they sure wouldn't mind a stronger minority and sticking it to the Liberals, as Tom Flanagan suggests, make no mistake -- they're gunning for a majority government and they just might get it.


Myth: The Liberals are neck-and-neck with the Tories and have a decent shot at winning

Reality: Party leaders rarely make gains in their first election campaign, and the odds are even worse for a leader going into the campaign with baggage in the form of a poor image, an unpopular campaign plank, fundraising challenges (now that the days of handouts from corporate Canada are gone), and close to a quarter of the caucus opting not to run again. Those who think the Liberals are in the game to win might want to ask why the party has done absolutely all it could in the last year to avoid an election.


Myth: The NDP is losing ground to the Greens

Reality: Most polls show the NDP holding all or nearly all of its 2006 levels of support and, while the Greens are still up a little over their 2006 levels, most of this added support is in Liberal-friendly suburban Ontario (though even that may vanish as the Liberals continue their fine tradition of "borrowing" the policy planks of other parties).

The NDP hopes to build on its 2006 support with a now-seasoned and well-recognized leader (no campaign gaffes as in 2004), the best-financed and most competitve campaign in the history of the party, a surprising number of "star" candidates who have emerged to run for the party in non-traditional areas, and Liberal slippage to the right (Tory success tends to throw NDP-Liberal battles to the NDP). This should produce new victories in Montreal and Gatineau, northern ridings, industrial Ontario (especially in the wake of news like this), and pockets of support in the West.


Myth: Winning or not, the Greens are more principled than the other parties

Reality: Desperate to do anything to meet the one MP threshold to join the leader's debates, the Greens recently welcomed into their ranks an MP who was kicked out of the Liberal Party for spending irregularities. With their hug-a-Liberal strategy backfiring as the Liberals steal their carbon tax plank, expect the Greens to make a lot of noise and gain a few points in the popular vote, but wind up with a big donut for seats.

A very rough early prediction:

Cons ~152
Libs ~85
NDP ~39
Bloc ~32

Image: Thomas Kelly, "The False Start," 1858. Hand-colored lithograph depicting Jerome Park Racetrack, New York City.

More Tory spam

I arrived home last night to find not one, but two MP mailings in my mailbox. Both came from Conservative MPs in other provinces.

I had to laugh when I saw Calgary MP Rob Anders's piece about ending the Wheat Board's monopoly on barley and asking who I think is on the right track for farmers. I live in Winnipeg Centre, which is neither a Tory target nor does it feature very many barley farmers. In fact, if the neighbours are growing any crops at all, I can bet you it isn't barley. Slick targeting, guys.

The other mailing, from Edmonton Tory MP Rahim Jaffer, features typical Tory-style incendiary statements on crime.

Both ten-percenters, as they're known, are outrightly partisan pre-election mailings sent courtesy of Canadian taxpayers (so much for the party of "fiscal prudence"). Each one ends neatly with a picture of a ballot featuring four political party leaders.

I have no problem with MPs sending out informational mailings nor even of some political party financing, but this is way over the top. Aside from the wastefulness, are Jaffer's and Anders's constituents not being ripped off where MP communications are concerned, as what would otherwise stand as information from their MP appears instead as crass political advertising in other provinces?

In the case of Jaffer, the only Alberta MP with a reasonable chance of being defeated in the next election (by the NDP's Linda Duncan), he might be wise to keep his focus a little closer to home.

In the coming days, as we approach an election call, I'm fully expecting to see planes flying overhead and blanketing the earth with a payload of Tory ads all courtesy of some faraway MP.

The odds on carbon taxes...

The high-stakes poker game that's leading up to the next election is playing itself out, with each party playing their hands well. The current round: carbon taxes.


The Liberals

Their "green shift" carbon tax proposal is a risky play of political strategy, but it's one that may well have saved them from losing a massive number of seats in the next election. With about a fifth of their caucus not running again, party debts and an apparent inability to fundraise (they're now third in the country in fundraising, behind both the Conservatives and the NDP), stagnant polling numbers, a perception of poor performance by Dion, and a couple of embarrassing byelection losses, many in the party were fearing historic and dramatic losses in the next election. Since the carbon tax proposal, things have cooled down somewhat.

The carbon tax -- even if it may be a tough sell for some Canadians -- finally gives the party the chance to differentiate itself from the Conservatives via a policy it can articulate. For them, that beats the non-strategy of reflexively opposing everything the Conservatives do, or worse, talking down the Conservatives but then tacitly supporting them anyway (the story for most of the past year). Differentiating itself from its opponent across the floor was something the party desperately needed after nearly a year of looking watery, timid and indecisive. What right-leaning voters would want to support a weaker, disorganized version of the governing party?

Differentiation is also something the Liberals need to fend off an attack from the NDP, who most benefits when it can paint the Liberals and Conservatives as interchangeable. The carbon tax proposal, combined with the Dion-May deal, also steals the thunder of the carbon tax-favouring Green Party. Suburban eco-conscious voters who would otherwise have considered voting Green will now find they have little reason to support that party when voting Liberal (as they likely did last time) will be just as likely to bring them "green" policy.

It's the same sneaky strategy the Liberals have used to curb the strength of the NDP for much of the past 50 years: steal the best ideas from their platform and use your organizational machine to take all the credit for them. The Greens have little on-the-ground organization to make up for having the carpet pulled out from under them, especially at a time of likely declining enthusiasm for what many perceive to be their core policy strength. Expect to see their numbers continue to slip to something much closer to the 6% they received in 2006.

Some might ask why Dion is trying so hard to sell the carbon tax in Alberta where the party has no seats and is unlikely to win any in the near future. Why? It probably has less to do with believing oil companies should get on board (suggested in Jeffrey Simpson's article on the carbon tax, Suncor and carbon capture technology) than winning more supporters in Ontario (as Chantal Hébert suggests, noting that this is the same strategy Dion used to win votes in Ontario by trying to sell the Clarity Act to skeptical ears in Quebec).

While I'm certainly no fan of the party, no matter how much they're down, the first rule in federal politics should always be to never underestimate the Liberal Party, one of western democracies most successful political parties.

Risks for the Liberals: Carbon taxes may sell well in some Toronto and Vancouver suburbs, but the party could lose a lot in the rest of the country where they're currently struggling. For them, the worst case scenario: Liberals hang on to Official Opposition status, but not by much. Dion is turfed as leader.

The potential prize: The Liberal strategy gains them few seats, but it also prevents any NDP, Conservative or Green growth. The Liberals come out of the election re-energized and Dion gains a firmer grip over the party leadership.


The NDP

The NDP has probably played its hand well -- at least strategically -- by opposing the carbon tax. It's betting that the negative impact of criticism by David Suzuki and other environmentalists (though many of them like the NDP's cap and trade proposal, and even Suzuki admits that a carbon tax would only be one of a host of solutions necessary to bring about a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions) will be offset by the gains made in non-NDP ridings of the sort where voters are unlikely to be enamoured with any sort of tax on fuel. In particular, the NDP is looking at potential gains in northern regions and especially northern Ontario, rural BC, Saskatchewan, Edmonton, Atlantic Canada, and hard-hit industrial regions of Ontario, such as Oshawa.

As the traditional party representing lower income folks, remote communities, and workers, the NDP is probably also right to put the onus on the Liberals to prove that the consumption-based carbon tax won't in the end hurt those most vulnerable. And, while many have criticized the NDP for preferring to target industry, it is industry that's responsible for the greatest share of emissions.

The risks: Despite some high-profile environmental candidates running in the next election and the party's emphasis on a cap and trade plan, they've allowed the Liberals to take the environment for themselves as an issue of perceived strength (too bad, given the whole lot 'o nothing the Liberals did when they were in government, including when Dion himself was environment minister). Even despite plans for a strong campaign, the NDP risks losing several seats.

The potential prize: If the Liberals fumble and run a disorganized next election, and the NDP manages to connect with voters in Ontario and elsewhere, it isn't inconceivable that they could pick up as many as 30 seats across the country. The party might also capitalize on the BC NDP's opposition to the tax (pity the carbon tax-toting provincial BC Liberals who share voters with the anti-carbon tax federal Conservatives), though that battle is still playing itself out.


The Conservatives

The Conservatives are betting that concern about the economy will take the environment right off the agenda and, where the environment is still an issue, will focus on leaving "market" (i.e., oligopolistic) mechanisms as the best vehicle for reducing carbon emissions. After all, how much will a carbon tax of a few pennies per barrel drive down emissions when the cost of fuel is up over 50% in a year?

Of course, Flaherty has tried to use the economy as a hammer to knock Premier McGuinty (of Ontario, the one place the Liberals are strong these days) with. That strategy's so far failed, but there are signs that the environment is being all but forgotten by voters given their growing economic concern. The Conservative strategy: bide their time while acting like a moderate group of managers, all the while raising big dollars, embarrassing and/or co-opting the opposition as much as possible, and hope that they'll be rewarded in spades come the next election.

The risks: "Wait and see" might be a tough strategy as the economy worsens -- governing parties don't typically do so well when the economy tanks. And now that they've let the Liberals find an issue with which to distinguish themselves, they may have allowed that party to climb back from the near death it would have found itself in had the election been held in early 2008. There's also potential that the NDP could cut into Tory support in certain pockets of BC, Edmonton, Saskatchewan, and Atlantic Canada, thereby offsetting any Conservative gains made at the expense of the Bloc or the Liberals.

The potential prize: The Liberals flounder and Conservatives pick up support in enough suburban and rural seats to make big gains, possibly so far as to claim a majority.


Thoughts and conclusions

Canada certainly needs to move toward curbing emissions. While a carbon tax is an intriguing idea, it's certainly just one tool in the wider toolbox of strategies that can and should be used -- the overwhelming focus on carbon taxes makes it appear as if it were the one and only option ahead of us.

If a carbon tax is implemented, the revenues should be used to alleviate the hit for low income and northern citizens as well as subsidize energy retrofits, mass transit, and green technology, rather than just given away in some supposed "revenue neutral" plan.

Either way, a cap and trade system should be implemented and looks like the way to go, given the support for such a system among most Canadian Premiers, the Conservatives and NDP, and both US Presidential candidates.

The environment certainly should be an election issue, though who knows which way the winds will blow by that time? Fears of economic meltdown may yet dwarf the environment as a primary concern in most voters' minds.


Further reading

By the way, for those following the carbon tax debate, I highly recommend the Progressive Economics Forum blog. Some of the posts on carbon taxes:

Where do greenhouse gases come from? It turns out that households emit one-fifth of Canada's greenhouse gas emissions, while businesses account for five sixths of emissions.

Where do non-fuel emissions come from? Interestingly, Dion's carbon tax scheme has no impact on non-fuel emissions meaning that, for example, one-third of the oil industry's emissions would not be affected.

Responses to high gas prices How elastic is the demand for driving in response to fuel costs? In response to the overall cost of driving? Links to some articles with important implications for understanding behavioural change from driving toward other forms of transportation, such as transit.

Dion's carbon revenues How much do the Liberals propose to raise through carbon taxes and why do forecasts not show this to be a declining revenue stream (assuming that carbon taxes work)?

Carbon taxes, distribution and politics Should the carbon tax really be revenue neutral? Beyond relief for low income folks, perhaps it would be more effective if the revenues were used to subsidize mass transit, energy efficiency retrofits, and green technologies. See also Duncan Cameron's article.

The carbon tax we pay to the oil companies Jim Stanford notes that many of us get angry at the thought of the government taking a couple of cents a litre out of our pocket for a carbon tax, but yet calmly hand over the dough when it's the oil companies asking for 50 cents more per litre.

Dion's green plan or Mintz's tax plan? Is Dion's plan a sly way to simply cut income or corporate taxes? Does it adequately protect lower income folks?

Canada's ecological footprint by income decile Canada's richest 10% have a dramatically larger ecological footprint than even the next decile down, meaning that they may simply buy their way out of changing. Given this, is income tax cuts the most effective use of carbon tax revenues?

Some perspective on carbon taxes BC's carbon tax of $10 per tonne amounts to 2.4 cents per litre. In the past years, the cost of fuel has doubled -- the same as if a carbon tax of $270 per tonne had been levied.