Speechy Warriers Get Sweet FA Outta Throne Speech!

Jay Currie, on who's winning the Speechy Wars:

So, while we appreciate the polite efforts and advice of the adults, excuse us while we play a winning game. And, yo, adults, the fact is that a fair number of us speechers have a fair bit of experience in politics, journalism, publishing, marketing, organization and public relations. Possibly more than you do.

Here's more Jay Currie, on what it would take to finally win the Speechy Wars:

All Nicholson has to do is insert one line into the throne speech and introduce a three line bill [striking down section 13 of the CHA] which already has a measure of bi-partisan support. And do it in the face of an entirely disorganized Opposition which is terrified of an election. How hard can that be?

And here's what the throne speech said about section 13:







All quiet over in the Speechysphere. Its as though they don't yet realize, after all the work they put into passing p-203 at the Tory convention, that they've been sodomized again.

Anyway, thanks for sharing your awesome genius with us, Jay.

Jay Hill: Expect Cuts

In the meantime, Ministers and their departments and staff are already in the midst of intensive activity, review and analysis with the ongoing objective of enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of federal programs and services. Canadians elected us with the expectation that we would look for savings wherever we can to ensure fiscal integrity in government through difficult economic times.

Not too surprising, I guess. But, given the new rhetoric of moderation out of Hill and the CPoC I don't expect these will be large enough to 1) stir up any more than modest outrage, or 2) do much good.

Jay Hill, Then And Now

From today's Prince George Citizen:

Prince George-Peace River MP Jay Hill says he's surprised and disappointed at Stephane Dion's decision to not bring down the minority Conservative government over the throne speech.

"It's not a very principled reaction I would suggest," Hill said from Ottawa

Jay Hill's weekly column, Sept. 27th:

The underlying myth in this debate about whether there will be an election this fall is that the Conservative Government must attract the support of at least one of the opposition parties to survive. They’re wrong. There is another option.

Conservatives set an historical precedent when we abstained from voting on the Liberal’s 2005 budget, allowing Paul Martin’s minority government to survive. At that time, our leader Stephen Harper said there were many aspects of that budget we fundamentally couldn’t vote to support. Yet, we respected the will of Canadians which strongly indicated they didn’t want an election.

Mr. Dion, as leader of the Official Opposition, could take the same, responsible course of action now. Canada’s economy is performing very well. Unemployment is at its lowest in 32 years. Taxes are down. Consumer spending remains robust and Canada is regaining its good reputation on the international stage thanks to the strong and decisive leadership of Prime Minister Harper.

You don't get a more pure form of contradiction than that.

Remarkably Timid

Cherniak live blogged the throne speech, and I watched/listened to about half of it. In brief, I think Jason's right, this is remarkably weak coffee from a demi-god who bestrides the Earth. Whole lotta nothin', in fact, as I predicted.

As to what is there,

1) You can't bring down the government over a big tax (GST) cut, no matter how stupid a policy it is.

2) Afghanistan will come back to the House, so there's no point making an issue of it now. Best way to get our troops out of Kandahar is to wait for that vote .

3) The promise re spending powers is quite minimal, if Cherniak is right (I missed that bit). Not enough to get worked up about, maybe even something to support.

4) As to the environmental stuff, I would prefer to look at what concrete actions emerge rather than react to the language about Kyoto.

Time to keep the powder dry, in other words.

Expect Posturing

...from tomorrow's throne speech, and a few insults thrown Mr. Dion's way, but nothing so over the top that it would compel taking down the government. Tom Flanagan:

"Engineering a defeat is not easy because a Throne Speech that would simultaneously provoke the Liberals, Bloc and NDP to vote against it, would probably be a Throne Speech that's not popular with voters," he said.

Well exactly.

And is that a real glass or did they feel the need to "shop" away certain indications of Mr. Harper's aggressive nature?

PS. And I hope the Libs don't demagogue the spending powers issue. There is nothing in Dion's past that suggests he would be against some curtailing of federal spending powers, depending on how the deal was done. He has in fact argued repeatedly against the "infringement of jurisdictions". I would expect (and Dion has promised) a reasoned, measured response to whatever proposals are outlined in the throne speech.

PPS. The argument that some have made for forcing an election now, before Harper can hand out too many goodies in the upcoming budget, does not work for me. The Liberal Party is willing to deny the populace their goodies in order to serve its own narrow self interest? This mis-reads the likely thought-process of the average Canadian voter, which is more likely to be: "Look at all these goodies I'm receiving from a minority government! Why not keep things the way they are?" It would be more of a danger, IMHO, to allow Harper to argue during an election campaign that the only way he can live up to his tax-cut promises is to have a Majority.

Harper Caves!

From CBC:

The federal Conservatives will not "abuse" the right to make pieces of legislation matters of confidence in their minority government, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said on Friday.

"We will use our mandate wisely," Harper told reporters in Ottawa. "I don't think you can consider something confidence that isn't significant enough to fight an election over if you were defeated on it."

...felled by the sheer idiocy of his original position, I imagine. Hopefully, this back-down takes some of the wind from the sails of the pro self-immolation wing of the Liberal Party.

Lets just all wait and see what the throne speech actually contains, shall we? So far it sounds like small-bore stuff with a lot of insults aimed at Dion to cover up its inherent vacuity. Because, remember, Harper is as much constrained a minority parliament as the other parties are.

And remember, losing honorably is still losing. A "good fight" is a fight you win. Retreat now and you can fight again in the Spring, or next Fall, or Spring 2009. If Harper gets his majority, then 2011 is the next important date on the calender.

As for this clown, ignore his taunts. He's been holding up "his end" for the Tory government for almost two years ago, and he's pissed. Apparently, Harper gave him the smelly end.

Throne Speech: Whole Lotta Nothin'?

If Conservative whip Jay Hill's latest column is any indication, there might not be anything in the Throne Speech worth voting against:

Each and every day we are drafting new important legislation we intend to introduce in the House of Commons later this month. This week, Justice Minister Rob Nicholson released draft legislation to combat the very serious and growing problem of identity theft. And Finance Minister Jim Flaherty released draft legislation to implement Registered Disability Savings Plans so that Canadians with disabilities will have access to improved financial support.

Sounds a bit bland so far, doesn't it?

If so, this would confirm rumors heard over the course of the summer that Tory calls for "new ideas" generated very little that was uncontroversial enough to be actionable. Indeed, a quick glimpse of the CPoC website, at least as it stands today, shows how little the Harper government is bringing to the table. So, a lot of bluster to cover up the fact they are birthing a mouse? Well, we shall see what the proposal to limit spending powers amounts to, but folks should remember that much of what Harper proposes can always be sent to die in the Senate.