01.30.2011 08:12 AM

In today’s Sun: awash in election speculation

Out of the pool, kids!

Look, I’m sorry to be a party pooper and all that, but I just don’t see this spring election thing. In fact, I’m not even sure there will be one this year.

I know, I know, the Parliamentary Press Gallery are all frolicking in the pool, dreams of overtime dancing in their heads – and the politicians are all warily eyeing the horizon, fretting about bad weather, wondering when they should head back into the House to start packing. When Official Ottawa decides something, it’s decided, right?


  1. Brammer says:

    The Libs are finally starting to show some life. So, it seems to me the only way Harper can avoid the election is to back away from his 6B corporate tax cut and to (again) take party funding off the table.

    That’s a huge climb-down, even for the Harpocrite.

    • Namesake says:

      Freudian slip, Gord? your typing fingers were more truthful than you: “every single Canadian would bs taxed more”

      Come on; I dunno about the “every” (and doubt you do, either), and let’s not get too fast & loose about the “more,” either:

      it’s not more than it was just 30 days ago; no one except the CEO’s & major shareholders will notice they won’t be getting as great a winfall in subsequent bonuses & dividends as they’d hoped.

      It’s more accurate to say they won’t be taxed less, if these last two 1.5 point cuts were rescinded, because it is no longer as prudent to reduce those taxes as it seemed to be, in 2007.

      • Namesake says:

        Uh-huh. Well your sudden touching concern for the poor & downtrodden might have a little more credence if it didn’t ignore the fact that the Opposition parties aren’t exactly turning their backs on them: they also want to increase the public pension and old age security systems, and make tuitions more affordable, and require insolvent companies like Nortel to ensure they pay they pay their disability pensions first before any other creditors: changes that will make a hell of a lot more difference than whatever effect you’re vaguely threatening restoring the federal corporate tax rate to its most recent level of 18% would have in the (distant? immediate? give a real example!) future.

      • Namesake says:

        Right, these other social programs aren’t free, which is why we can’t afford to forgo that tax revenue now (esp. after the CPC threw away $8-B of GST revenue a year, and has been ballooning the deficit & size of gov’t like mad, quite apart from the stimulus spending).

        And at least all these low-income & tuition measures I mentioned stay in the country and go directly back into the economy, cuz they’re immediately spent here, which gives them a bigger multiplier for the GDP than corporate tax cuts, according to the Finance Dep’ts own measures. http://www.caw.ca/en/9837.htm

        Unlike the corp. tax cuts under discussion, which are only for the large corp’s (the small & medium true ‘job creators’ are already very low federally, at 11%, no?), many of which have international owners & investors, who’ll either get to get it & spend it or pay taxes on it elsewhere.

        Indeed, as the economist Andrew Jackson pointed out a few years ago,

        “much of the benefit of this corporate rate cut will go to the US Treasury. US companies pay tax on their world-wide operations, and get to deduct corporate income tax paid in Canada. Higher after tax Canadian profits will result in higher taxes payable to the US government as Canadian corporate tax rates fall well below US rates.”


      • Namesake says:

        Again, stop shilling for the Americans, will ya? “QSB” is an IRS category for “Qualified Small Business.”

        Here in Canada — the country where we live and want to do well — the gov’t refers to the smaller, lesser taxed, locally based companies as Small and Medium Sized Enterprises (SMEs). And our goal isn’t to enrich the shareholders of the large international co’s in other countries.

        As for the much vaunted job creation of these last tax breaks, even your cheerleader Mintz only predicts a total of about 100,000 jobs — or about 15,000 a year, which is only 1% of what’s needed — which will take 7 years to produce, which ends up costing $210,000 per job to produce given the foregone tax revenue, with absolutely no guarantee that any of the jobs will last, esp. since these low-tax shopping corp’s are apt to just flee again to other jurisdictions as the race to the bottom continues.

        http://rppe.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/can-you-create-a-job-for-less-than-210000/ (and see his previous post, “The 1/10th of 1 Percent Solution”)

      • hugger says:

        “Your cost calculations are kablooey too as hopefully many of these jobs are perpetual”

        Ouija boards and faith. What a maroon

        I’m still waiting for those numbers you Bulk Slogan slinger. Or BSer for short if you prefer.

    • W.B. says:

      Maybe the banks will take out of profits or the 8.5 million per year CEO salary.

    • PETE says:

      You are correct. there is no free lunch. therefore the opposition’s line eorks just fine. The Libs would rather put the money directly into programs that benefit ALL Canadians. Corporations just bank the money saved for a rainy day or pay higher dividends where management benefits most.

      • Travis Fast says:

        Bullocks go look at the data. Share ownership is *highly* concentrated.

      • Namesake says:

        Sound like you’re selling homeopathic economic medicine, here, Gord:

        tiny droplets of investment in Cndn. corp’s spread in a giant pool of pension portfolios hypothetically to be paid out in small doses to millions of Cndns some decades down the road?

        versus the very concrete $3-B a year less left on the table for the gov’t to put into social programs right here & now.


  2. Ronald O'Dowd says:


    That large cash donation is burning a hole in my pocket. It’s anxious to get to work. But alas, it won’t until we (along with the other opposition parties) stand up to be counted. Oppositions are only effective when they deliberately act from a position of strength — of common resolve.

    Call me nuts but I have this rather peculiar idea that when a party (pick one at random) is seen to be doing this government’s bidding or searching for a way to preserve the political status quo, that such conduct tends to royally piss off the true believers back home. Might explain why some parties have a propensity for dipping polling numbers.

    Get with the program and let’s have at it.

  3. WDM says:

    I don’t see a spring election either. Luckily for the Liberals, I don’t think they’ll be forced to side with the government this time. I think the NDP’s musings about cutting a deal based on some fairly doable things makes an election unlikely. The factor few are considering is the fact there are provincial elections in Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Ontario, Newfoundland and Labrador and PEI this fall. That’s a lot of leg work, money and resources for the provincial wings/volunteers of various parties, even if it is in the fall. 2012 may be the time for the next election.

    • Matt says:

      I’m not so sure why a federal election 6 months after a string of provincial elections is any better than a federal election 6 months before a string of provincial elections. The output of energy, time, resources, cash, volunteers etc etc etc will even out.

      A federal election SHOULD happen the moment a majority in the House of Commons no longer has confidence in the government. Anything waiting beyond that is has the sole purpose of enhancing an individual or party’s chances and amounts to nothing more than pure opportunism.

  4. Cath says:

    “The factor few are considering is the fact there are provincial elections in Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Ontario, Newfoundland and Labrador and PEI this fall. That?s a lot of leg work, money and resources for the provincial wings/volunteers of various parties, even if it is in the fall. 2012 may be the time for the next election.”

    great points WDM – resources at the local level can only be stretched so far. I can tell you that volunteers keen on getting going on provincial campaigns wouldn’t think kindly of having to change gears for a federal election.

    Also, with so many provinces headed to elections a federal election might really tick those provinces off in a way that would ripple into a provincial election.

    One of your best columns WK.

  5. dave says:

    Why do I spend so much time reading stuff about election speculation when I could be studying the odds for the 4th race at Fraser Downs?

  6. Bill says:

    By endorsing Harper twice, I wholeheartedly agree.

  7. eattv says:

    “The sun-stroked punditocracy” – given the name of the newspaper you’re currently grinding for, would that include yourself? 😉

  8. bigcitylib says:

    Mostly agree with column. Also, that’s a much better picture of you.

  9. Brian says:

    Please. Be. Right.

  10. John Mraz says:

    I am not part of the 15% that gives a #$%^.


  11. jon evan says:

    And the maj. of Canadians agree with you!


    That’s why I read your blog Warren, because you get it right in the end!
    And in the end you too will evolve into a Conservative :).

  12. MississaugaLibPeter says:

    I agree WK. I am hearing Layton is not looking good. Prediction: half a percent cut to business tax this year, a few other goodies to N.D.P. Narrative: we heard you.

    Of course, I don’t agree if the current Conservative ads pull Libs to under 25% and Conservatives over 40%. I am sure the ad run is in the 40 closest seats from 2008. The sad part is, the Conservatives have more ads like the ones that are getting airtime. It was because of these quotes and others that Ignatieff had almost no second ballot support in 2006.

    I hate to say it, but it might be time to consider The Dauphin. Have you read Rabble.ca. The NDP love this guy as much as some 40+ Liberal dudes (Curran)!

  13. Namesake says:

    A “shrewd move,” when they still don’t have enough seats b/w the NDP & Libs to survive a confidence motion themselves w/o the Bloc?!

    I don’t think so, and don’t know anyone else who would.

    The only one calling for this is — what could well be you, again, under yet another name — the provocateur Consistent / Observant etc who wrote this latest hateful rant (as ‘Observateur’) earlier tonight, on The Toronto Star

    “There will be another Coalition Troika Junta attempt ..

    …BELIEVE IT!!!…. because the Opposition parties know that divided they fall … so they are forced to unite into another despicable coalition attempt. Their logic and rationale will be that another coalition agreement is legitimate after 2 years of Conservative minority gov’t, and Canadians shouldn’t complain because a coalition gov’t will only last until October, 2012, the completion of the 4 year mandate after the last election. The Opposition scoundrels already have their revised Coalition Accord completed and will unveil it just before they vote no confidence in the Budget. Canada will go up in flames, just like in Egypt and Yemen, as true and loyal Canadians take to the streets to Stop the Coalition Troika Junta ..!!!!”

    comment at http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/930337–tories-planning-spring-election

  14. jStanton says:

    I’m with Warren on this. Mr. Harper can and therefore will continue to coast until the bitter end – he is unbeatable until the parliamentary configuration changes.

    Should a non-confidence motion pass, he will simply win another minority, and continue to travel abroad and otherwise coast. But that is unlikely, because LPC operatives will allow Mr. Ignatieff only one kick at the can before they bring their knives out, and Mr. Ignatieff knows this by now.

    Sure, the Bloc and NDP could connive to pull the trigger, but why would they? They have nothing to gain. Liberal or Harperite government; its all the same to them, and at least Mr. Harper doesn’t undermine them by stealing their discourse – like those darn Liberals do!

    No, we’re stuck in this rut for the foreseeable future. I’m going to stick knitting needles in my eyes now.

  15. new says:


    Do not put your shoes in some one else idea and opinion just listen take good one and ignore the bad one
    you talk like snake ready to bit with hate where you come from man it show you are very angry for no reason

    hay I can imagine you big tommy old guy man or one old lady snitching here i am sure not english background!
    why do you teach censorship and why not handle different view or people in Canada

    Is hearing some one else view is bothering you or just another rat Canadian and ready to bring hate if new idea come up

    You are talk like that racist old lady kate McMillan in SDA or Kathy Shiedle in five feet of furry anti Muslim big but.tomy
    why you like to know email of people to send them your stupid email or love letter
    because they are smart and you are stupid

    Do not be jelous

    • Namesake says:

      If that’s re: my comment asking Mr. Kinsella to install a filter to weed out the person posting as Consistent/Observant etc. & my other comments directed at him, the reason for that is:

      that individual repeatedly posts false aspersions (i.e., harmful lies, i.e., libel) about Michael Ignatieff in the effort to cripple the Liberals’ chance of re-election, and he has made threats against Mr. Kinsella’s own family, so he is persona non grata on this blog, but it is tiresome to keep having to find him out again as he uses a series of false identities.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *