The Ad Game

Well, the major parties have unveiled their TV ads over the past week or so, and I've finally gotten around to watching them. I have to say that for the most part, I was left uninspired, and unimpressed, so here's my colour commentary.

I started off looking at the ads put out by the political party that left me by the wayside: the Conservative Party of Canada. Now, if you're one of the millions of Canadians who think that Stephen Harper is stiff, impersonal, overly academic, and flat out not real, then the CPC ads will do plenty to reinforce that viewpoint. All we get out of their English language ads is a fake TV news interview on a ridiculous set, complete with a clearly fake interviewer and contrived video questions from "ordinary" Canadians. I wonder what they got paid for their "questions." The CPC's French language ads fared a bit better in my mind, attempting to paint the Tories as an alternative to the Liberals and the Bloc. However, any goodwill generated will be lost on most people in Quebec after they see the end of the ad, which is the bit about who authorized the ad. What got me was the way they worded it, and their effort to note that their advertising was paid for with "l'argent propre," or "clean money." I have never seen such a cheap and insulting use of negative advertising. It proves flat out that the Tories aren't interested in being positive and proactive. They are relying on being so negative as to give voters nowhere to turn but to Stephen Harper's warm embrace. Perhaps, once the man gets a pulse, he might be a bit more appealing. In the meantime, keep looking.

On to the NDP. Their "TV" ads have yet to hit the airwaves, but instead are on NDP Online TV, which is to say, a short page on their website. The ads are simple, which can be a good thing. They feature NDP Leader Jack Layton (I still think that the mustache makes him look like a used car salesman), talking about the Liberals. Again, we see political advertising devoid of any vision, and devoted to spin and half-truths about the past, instead of vision for the future. The ads seem to be a bit dark as well, but clearly the NDP didn't spend much money making the ads, so I doubt they spent much on post-production either. In any case, for a party that seems to think so little of the Liberals, it's really quite remarkable how long Jack Layton's NDP voted with, stood up for, and defended said Liberals. I guess we're supposed to forget about that.

Now, on to the Liberal ads. There are 3 ads out so far. The first one I actually have to give top marks to. It's brilliant in its simplicity. The ad features snippets from various newspapers touting the accomplishments of Paul Martin's minority government. We see figures on job creation, the economy, softwood lumber, etc. The choice of music evokes the right feelings, and the short, but simple voiceover at the end drives the message home. In political terms, it's classic sunshine and puppydogs. The next two ads are basically the same ad, with a different cast. We see a bunch of Liberals talking about why they plan on voting Liberal this election. It's a little cheesy, and a bit contrived, but still head and shoulders above what we've seen from the other parties.

So, here's my advice. To the Liberal ad crew, well, you guys don't need my advice, so I'll move on. To the NDP: check your lighting levels, and don't forget who you worked with to get what you wanted for the last 17 months. To Stephen Harper: fire your publicity people...again. It'll give you a chance to break in that revolving door in the CPC Leader's Office. In any case, after you fire said crew, hire some people who can give you an image makeover so that your ads are warmer than winter in Medicine Hat.

Odd Job Jack

Well, Jack Layton has opened his mouth, and Canadians wish he'd just have kept it shut. I'm referring, of course, to his electoral reform package. What a joke. Every single proposal Mr. Layton has made undermines political accountability, and takes representation further away from the people. I simply don't understand how stupid Odd Job Jack thinks we are, if he expects us to actually buy his BS.

Let's look at what he's proposed. First, the introduction of PR to the House of Commons. Well, isn't that nice. Assuming that take some logical conclusions from his remarks, we're looking, most likely, at a Mixed Member Proportional system. Either the Commons gets bigger to maintain current riding sizes, while allowing the PR reps to get their seats, or ridings become even bigger than they really are, causing major hardship to those in rural ridings who may already live a day's drive from their MP. Beyond that, the creation of this system creates MPs who are only accountable to their own Party's leadership. Who do the PEOPLE get to hold accountable when one of those MPs screws something up? What's stopping those MPs from abusing the public trust when they don't have to answer directly to the people? "Trust me," says Jack. Right.

Then the next proposal: forcing MPs who change political affiliation to stand in a by-election. At first glance, it's not a bad idea. But the fact of the matter is that in our system, we vote for people, not parties. It is the political establishment that has twisted and perverted the system to further partisan interests, that has made us forget about this. One of the worst culprits in the matter is the NDP, which has a long history of refusing to allow its MPs to represent their constituents, that censors what they say, and that forces them to follow the party line, right down to the letter. We saw that Jack Layton put partisanship ahead of Canadians when he brought down this Parliament, so I guess it should come as no surpise that he's willing to ignore the Constitutionally guaranteed Freedom of Association that was so dearly fought for. This latest development marks one of the darkest chapters in Canadian political history, where three out of the four officially recognized parties have announced their intent to put the Constitution through the shredder. Anyone who believes in the promise of Canada should be incredibly alarmed.

The NDP Credibility Gap

Well, what a weekend it has been, and, what a week it's shaping up to be. You may have noticed that the Canadian Post did not put out any articles over the weekend. I'll keep an eye on happenings, and if things happen, I will put out posts on weekends as well. As it happens, watching paint dry in my apartment was pretty much the most exciting thing happening.

Sunday night marked a rather interesting development as far as politics goes. Svend Robinson, who lives in and has represented Burnaby-Douglas for decades, retired from politics a year and a half ago after he was caught stealing a $60,000 ring. He admitted that he was imbalanced, and retired from politics. It was the right thing to do. I do not begrudge Mr. Robinson for his medical condition. Mental illness is a very serious matter, and far too often, we stigmatize people who suffer from various mental conditions. However, it is worth noting that public life is incredibly stressful, and those who are not of sound mind are probably better off in a less stressful environment. Mr. Robinson had a spotty track record in Parliament, and while I do believe he served the people of Burnaby-Douglas well, I believe his positions on a number of issues were irresponsible and outright reckless.

Now, just 18 months later, Mr. Robinson has decided to attempt a return to the House of Commons. Well, I'm sorry, but if Mr. Robinson wants to run, he should try and get himself nominated in his own riding. The last thing the people of Vancouver Centre need is a nutjob politician who doesn't even enjoy the total support of his own leader. Svend Robinson proved himself to be a loose cannon in Parliament for over 2 decades. He's been on and off of the NDP frontbench more times than I can keep track off. But, if the NDP is so short on talent that it has to resort to shipping in a carpet-bagging radical, then that surely says something about the dead end that they have reached under the dubious leadership of Jack Layton, who would be more at home selling used cars than sitting in the Commons. Now, let me be frank here. I was one of Hedy Fry's most outspoken critics last time around, but, perhaps I owe her an apology. I made much of her remarks about phantom cross burnings in Prince George. But not long after she made her remarks, RCMP raided a home in BC's interior, and found KKK paraphernalia, as well as a cache of explosives that could have been used for the most horrific of purposes. While she may not score and A in geography, Dr. Fry did British Columbians a valuable service by shining a spotlight on the scourge of racism that still exists in BC, and across Canada. She is to be commended for that, as well as for her commitment in representing what is likely one of the most diverse ridings in the country.

Dr. Fry has now represented this riding for over a decade. That the NDP can't find a serious candidate who knows this riding is an insult to the people of the area. Yes, Svend Robinson is a gay man, and yes, Vancouver Centre is home to the largest gay population in the Vancouver, but I believe that the LGBT community is smarter than the NDP thinks they are, and they will vote for a person who has stood up for them since 1993.

Moving on from Vancouver Centre, Jack Layton has also exposed himself as a man who put his own political gain ahead of the well-being of Canada as a whole. He brought down this minority Parliament, because he claimed that the Liberals refused to take a stand against private healthcare. Now that the damage has been done, and Canadians have been forced into an election that they never wanted in the first place, Mr. Layton has come out and said that he believes that private healthcare is a reality in Canada, and that's just how things are going to be. Well, if Mr. Layton truly believes that, then why on earth did he vote to bring down this Parliament in the heinous manner that he did? The answer is simple. As a charter member of the Axis of Ego, he was required to. Just like Stephen Harper and Gilles Duceppe, he just wasn't satisfied with holding Parliament hostage, and he gave in to his desire to pull the trigger. Well, Canadians will pass judgement on him on January 23rd, and he's in for an unpleasant surprise.

Dial H for Hypocrisy

Well, well, well. It seems that Stephen Harper has discovered a couple of documents that his advisors have been trying to hide from him: The Canada Health Act, and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Well, isn't that nice. A person who has been advocating for more private heathcare in Canada is suddenly Tommy Douglas, Jr. Somehow, I find that just a little bit hard to believe. Mr. Harper simply has no credibility on the issue, especially when he represents a party that has been quietly advocating for a massive expansion of private, for-profit healthcare in Canada.

Now, we hear from Mr. Harper that he has a plan. He's going to protect the public system. He's going to reduce wait-list times. Stephen Harper is the saviour of public healthcare in Canada! Stephen Harper is the saviour of public healthcare in Canada?? Somehow, that rings just a little bit hollow for me. Maybe it's because countless First Minister's conferences have only just begun to make a dent in the issue. Maybe because what few glimpses of his plan we have seen appear to have been written on the back of a napkin while he sipped on a de-alcoholised beer. It's an insult to Canadians for Mr. Harper to politicize public healthcare in the manner that he has, with absolutely no plan to back it up.

But it gets even better. The hypocrisy has only just begun. Mr. Harper made the follwing remark, explaning why his plan is so amazing: "the only way that government can preserve the principles of the Canada Health Act and respect requirements of the Charter of Rights." Respect for the Charter of Rights, Mr. Harper? What about the judgements of 7 provincial appellate courts, and one territorial appellate court? What about the words of the Supreme Court of Canada? I'm speaking, of course, about same-sex marriage. The Courts are the guardians of our Charter, and they have spoken, from coast to coast, with one voice, in defence of Canadian values of tolerance, equality, and compassion. Mr. Harper seems more than happy to ignore the requirements of the Charter on same-sex marriage, but he's more than happy to wave our Constitution when it comes to health care. Well, Mr. Harper, stop hiding behind Parliament, and stop throwing mud at our judiciary. Make up your mind, once and for all, and tell us, flat out, whether we can trust you to defend the Charter, even if it hurts politically. In the mean time, shut your mouth, and stop insulting our intelligence.

Fuzzy Math and Voodoo Economics: a Tory Staple

Once again, Stephen Harper has taken a stand on an issue, and once again, he's come out on the wrong side of things. For a long time, Tories have said that while they don't particularly like the GST, that it's a relatively fair tax, and I can understand where that logic comes from. Now, Stephen Harper is dumping all over a tax created by one of his closest advisors, Brian Mulroney. Instead of pledging to reduce personal income taxes, which would be a huge help to middle and lower income families, Mr. Harper has chosen to pledge to knock one percentage point off the GST, and another after the next election. I doubt that low income people will see any benefit from this; they will save a penny here and there, but watch for Canada's Grinch to claw it back by cutting their GST rebate cheques. In reality, the people who will benefit the most from Harper's tax plan are the wealthiest in Canada, and frankly, they don't need the help right now. People who spend the most will save the most with this tax cut, and a family of 4, living paycheque to paycheque, are not going to go out and buy a new washing machine because they'll save a five dollars thanks to Mr. Harper's "generosity". No, the people who will benefit most from this joke of a tax plan are the people who have money to burn.

Now, Paul Martin has introduced a plan that delivers tax relief to the people who actually need it. We've seen prudent fiscal management in this country for a decade now, with the deficit being eliminated, and with years of balanced budgets and debt reduction. We have seen the Liberals announce plans to correct the imbalance in the EI system so that it is revenue neutral, and we are now seeing a responsible program of tax relief that will direct real, substantial tax relief to the people who need it the most. Getting substantial tax relief to those in the lower tax brackets creates a noticeable and meaningful difference in their paycheques, something anyone living from paycheque to paycheque desperately needs. Kudos to the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance for continuing in the path of fiscal prudence.