…and some extraordinary writing.

Comments (3)

In politics, body language is important.

In particular, the body language of Messrs. Harper, Mulcair and Trudeau.

One of them does not seem worried; the other two look like they are taking nothing for granted.

Some pollsters, naturally, tell a somewhat different tale. If you believe successive polls — and after the industry’s dramatically wrong prognostications in elections in British Columbia, Alberta, Manitoba, Quebec and (to an extent) nationally — no one should anymore.

Notwithstanding that, myriad pollsters insist Justin Trudeau’s Liberals are ascendant, and cruising towards a colossal majority victory in 2015. Stephen Harper’s Conservatives are locked in a downward spiral — while the New Democrats will be lucky to hold on to much of what they’ve got.

One much-quoted outfit, Forum — which predicted gigantic Wildrose and New Democrat wins in Alberta and B.C., respectively — told The Globe and Mail: “Of those surveyed, 44% said they supported the Liberals, 27% said they supported the Conservatives and 20% said they supported the New Democrats.”

If Forum’s numbers are right, Justin Trudeau should be lolling in his seat in the House of Commons, eating bonbons and playing Angry Birds.

But he isn’t.

Nor, for that matter, is Thomas Mulcair, who presides over the biggest opposition caucus in his party’s history, and who is allegedly within striking distance of the governing Conservatives.

Trudeau and Mulcair are working hard, pushing Harper in question period and pounding the pavement outside Ottawa.

Meanwhile, Stephen Harper looks irritated, but not at all terrified, by the ongoing Senate scandal.

His party is preparing to do what it always does in times of crisis: Toss assorted staffers and parliamentarians under the proverbial bus and walk away. It has worked in the past, and it may well work again.

The body language of our three federal leaders, then, speaks volumes.

None seems to be too preoccupied with what the pollsters and the pundits have to say about the future, near or long-term.

The reason relates to bodies, not body language. At present, Harper has a commanding lead in bodies occupying parliamentary seats. And Mulcair knows he cannot hold on to many of the ones he’s presently got — whilst Trudeau needs many, many more to get to where he needs to be.

The May 2011 general election resulted in the Conservative Party taking 166 seats, 23 more than they had at Parliament’s dissolution, and more than enough to seize power in a 308-seat Commons.

The New Democrats won 103 seats, an astonishing result, given they had only 36 when the election commenced.

The Liberals, meanwhile, ended up with less than the NDP had at dissolution — 34 seats, losing half of what they had. Michael Ignatieff and his oxymoronic brain trust led the once-great Grits to their worst showing in history.

Polls might lie, but the above numbers don’t: To do what some pollsters like Forum say is doable — that is, a big majority — Trudeau needs to find at least 130 seats.

To be sure, scandal, factionalism and ennui are chipping away at Harper’s coalition. He will lose some seats, and the recent Labrador byelection suggests that he may even lose a lot.

So, too, Mulcair. He knows that his party’s historic May 2011 achievement was entirely due to the appeal of the much-loved Jack Layton, now gone. He will lose MPs, too, mostly to Trudeau in Quebec.

But, as I regularly ask bright-eyed Trudeaumaniacs who will listen: “To win a majority, you need to shake loose 130 seats. That’s a huge number of bodies. Where are they, right now? Name the ridings.”

And they can’t.

Thus, the tale’s moral: The polls say one thing. But the body language — and the parliamentary bodies — say something else entirely.

Comments (51)

If you start criminally investigating every pol who deletes email, you’d better build a lot more jails. They’re gonna fill up fast. #onpoli

Comments (17)

This week, Ontario’s “Information and Privacy Commissioner” – her oxymoronic title neatly lays out the point I am about to make – excoriate some of the folks I know pretty well from the Dalton McGuinty government.  She ripped those folks from stem to stern, for deleting – or even apparently thinking about deleting – emails.

You can read her report for yourself, here.  Personally, I found her approach and tone to closely resemble that of former Justice John Gomery, the Westmount hobby farmer who seemed to be far more interested in publicity than the public good.

Here’s some of the problems I have with Cavoukian’s report:

• She did not even bother to contact some of the people being smeared (even Gomery gave people a chance to tell their side of the story);
• She did not give a moment’s thought to Ontario law, which “prohibits employees from disclosing confidential information” even after someone leaves government;
• She pays no heed to the fact that records of emails concerning government business were kept by officials, and/or the government server, for many months and ultimately deleted only by them;
• She ignored the fact – the fact – that the rules permit the deletion of transitory records, records that have no historical value, and records that exist in duplication (I know from my time on the Hill that most records would fall into those categories);
• She gives no credit to the important points raised in the Globe and Mail editorial below.  Which I quote:

“While officials should certainly create written records of actual decisions, cabinet ministers and their closest advisers should be free to talk about the reasons for a decision without making a paper or electronic memorandum. Their motives and purposes are best scrutinized in parliamentary debate, question periods and legislative committees…Ministers and their staffs should be able to deliberate informally, without having to disclose their every passing thought.”

That’s what I think, too, and it was what I was attempting to say on Sun News the other day (when I could get a word in edgewise, that is).  As Cavoukian’s title makes clear, there is a glaring contradiction at the centre of this false controversy: political staff are told – indeed, threatened with prosecution if they don’t – that they must keep confidential information confidential.  They are also told by publicity-seekers like Cavoukian they must simultaneously do the polar opposite.

That’s dumb; that’s idiotic.  Politicians, and policy-makers, need to choose.  Total openness, nothing held back – or some degree of confidentiality, to ensure that government (and citizens, and business, and unions, and associations) can continue to do its work.

Which is it?  I know what I pick.

Comments (14)

Quote:

One resident of the home where Mayor Rob Ford was photographed with murder victim Anthony Smith has been convicted of trafficking cocaine.

Comments (4)

My ex is riding a bike tomorrow all the way to Niagara Falls.

She won’t be alone.  Lots of folks are doing likewise, for the Princess Margaret Ride to Conquer Cancer.

Suzanne’s personal page, where you can read her story and contribute, is here.  She’s been training for months, and she – and all of the other participants – deserve support and admiration. Cancer took my Dad eight years, 11 months and 357 days ago, and I strongly support this event.  You should, too.

Comments (1)

A must-read:

Ontario once ran 16 of these institutions. All are closed now. But shutting the doors doesn’t undo the damage provincial employees did to thousands of cognitively disabled youngsters.

The province has silenced them for half a century. But their day of reckoning will come — no matter how many legal roadblocks the government erects.

Comments (2)

Sure hope Carleton’s History Department, or any students, don’t see this.

Comments (1)

From Gawker. A certain chief magistrate won’t be sleeping well, tonight:

We have also learned that the video of Ford smoking crack cocaine was recorded inside that home on the same night the photo was taken…

A source who knows both Basso and Ford tells Gawker that the men are longtime friends, and that Ford has been a frequent visitor to 15 Windsor over the years. According to this source, the video of Ford smoking crack was recorded there at some point six to eight months ago during one of Ford’s “binges.” “He’s been doing it for years,” the source said of Ford’s trip to the house. “They go down in the basement and party.” The source said he would frequently hear Fabio complain, after Ford’s visits, “Rob and my sister kept me up all night.”

On the night the video was recorded, the source said, Basso’s mother was out of town. Ford came over, and “some kids from the neighborhood”—by which the source meant the nearby housing complex at 320 Dixon Rd. where Ford would later tell his staff he believed the video was being stored—were called over to supply the group with crack. At one point, the group—which included Anthony Smith and Muhammad Khattak, who were later shot in March outside a Toronto nightclub—asked Ford for a picture. (I should note here that one of our sources on this story has repeatedly insisted that Smith was not personally involved in the drug trade.)

When Fabio objected to a photograph being taken inside his home, someone suggested they go outside. “Ford ran outside like a schoolgirl to have that picture taken,” the source, who was not present but heard about the evening’s events later, told Gawker.

Ford and the boys at 15 Windsor Road, the night the video was shot.

Comments (22)

Hear, hear!

Comments (5)