Liberal defector goes down to defeat after crossing floor to Tories last year,
Oct 15, 2008 04:30 AM 'Tess Kalinowski
Liberal tradition trumped Conservative party favours as Mississauga-Streetsville stayed true to its roots by electing first-time candidate Bonnie Crombie last night
Repeated visits to the riding by Prime Minister Stephen Harper weren't enough to persuade voters to back incumbent Wajid Khan, this time running as a Conservative. Khan won as a Liberal in the two previous elections but crossed the floor of Parliament in 2007.
Speaking to supporters after his defeat, Khan said, "I'm proud of the contribution, the benefits I have brought to Canada through my work will never be diminished.
"I don't believe in making things personal," he said. "We worked hard, but at the end of the day it is the constituents who decide and I respect their decision."
For many observers though, the race was personal in the affluent, diverse riding. Throughout the campaign, Crombie had referred to Khan's floor crossing as a betrayal of voters' sacred trust. Wearing a smart, Liberal-red suit, Crombie told supporters last night, "Together we're going to make Mississauga-Streetsville the best place to live in Canada."
Crombie was flanked by her two sons, a daughter, and husband, Brian.
A corporate marketing expert and fundraiser, she capitalized throughout the campaign on her strong local connections in Mississauga.
Despite the Conservatives' dedicated push to win over ridings like in this one in the 905 region, voters here weren't ready to accept Khan's decision to join the Conservative party after the former Pakistani air force pilot had already been named the Prime Minister's special advisor on the Middle East.
The riding had returned a Liberal to Parliament in every election since 1993. Harper signs were planted next to Khan's own blue election signs in the riding and the former car dealer repeatedly deflected campaign questions to the issue of federal leadership, contrasting Harper's style with that of Liberal leader Stéphane Dion.
"The leadership of Stephen Harper has made this country better. Canadians are confident in their government," Khan told supporters last night.
Throughout the campaign, Crombie had talked about herself as "a Liberal of conviction rather than convenience."
Last week, before TV cameras, Crombie countered Khan's support of Harper by holding up a picture of the Conservative candidate standing beside Dion.
In a riding where the average annual household income is about $85,000 and more than 80 per cent of residents own their own home, Crombie said the Liberals had the best experience to deal with the country's economic difficulties.
"Everyone's interested in the economy, the prosperity agenda, and the people of Mississauga-Streetsville are no different," she told the Star in an interview.
http://www.thestar.com/article/517321
Showing posts with label CANADA-POLITICS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CANADA-POLITICS. Show all posts
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
McCallum 'grateful to the electorate' for fourth term
Grit keeps seat despite questions over residency
Oct 15, 2008 04:30 AM
Nicholas Keung
STAFF REPORTER
Liberal incumbent John McCallum was elected in Markham-Unionville last night, despite his opponents' dogged accusations of his keeping an Oakville residence and spending not enough time in the riding.
"I'd like to thank the people of Markham-Unionville for electing me a fourth time in a row. I'm grateful to the electorate and will work very hard for the people in the riding," said McCallum.
McCallum had been questioned by the other candidates about whether he actually lives in the riding – an issue that had been raised since the incumbent, a former banker, was first elected in 2000.
McCallum, 58, admitted he does have three homes but, as opposition finance critic, said he travels a lot and mostly split his time between Ottawa and Markham.
Joan McCallum, who campaigned for her son, was elated. "I'm happy for him."
During the campaign, McCallum attacked Conservative candidate Duncan Fletcher, an advertising executive, especially because of his party's "laissez-faire" attitude toward economics and politics.
The strategy seemed to have worked, as the Liberals picked up momentum toward the end of the campaign, with voters turning their attention to an anticipated recession in Canada.
"The problems are real and we need a plan," McCallum had said at a recent all-candidate debate, emphasizing that the Conservatives had done little to address job loss in Ontario's manufacturing sector.
In the midst of economic crisis, Fletcher had focused on the government record of the last two years. The NDP's Nadine Hawkins had preached her party's plans to control price gouging by cell phone companies, withdraw from the war in Afghanistan and rebuild Canada's immigration system.
http://www.thestar.com/article/517317
Oct 15, 2008 04:30 AM
Nicholas Keung
STAFF REPORTER
Liberal incumbent John McCallum was elected in Markham-Unionville last night, despite his opponents' dogged accusations of his keeping an Oakville residence and spending not enough time in the riding.
"I'd like to thank the people of Markham-Unionville for electing me a fourth time in a row. I'm grateful to the electorate and will work very hard for the people in the riding," said McCallum.
McCallum had been questioned by the other candidates about whether he actually lives in the riding – an issue that had been raised since the incumbent, a former banker, was first elected in 2000.
McCallum, 58, admitted he does have three homes but, as opposition finance critic, said he travels a lot and mostly split his time between Ottawa and Markham.
Joan McCallum, who campaigned for her son, was elated. "I'm happy for him."
During the campaign, McCallum attacked Conservative candidate Duncan Fletcher, an advertising executive, especially because of his party's "laissez-faire" attitude toward economics and politics.
The strategy seemed to have worked, as the Liberals picked up momentum toward the end of the campaign, with voters turning their attention to an anticipated recession in Canada.
"The problems are real and we need a plan," McCallum had said at a recent all-candidate debate, emphasizing that the Conservatives had done little to address job loss in Ontario's manufacturing sector.
In the midst of economic crisis, Fletcher had focused on the government record of the last two years. The NDP's Nadine Hawkins had preached her party's plans to control price gouging by cell phone companies, withdraw from the war in Afghanistan and rebuild Canada's immigration system.
http://www.thestar.com/article/517317
John McCallum
Markham-Unionville
2006: Liberal John McCallum won by 18,616 votes),Oct 09, 2008 04:30 AM
Nicholas Keung STAFF REPORTER
The Markham-Unionville race is between the known and unknown, the experienced and inexperienced.
In a riding where 77.7 per cent of the population are visible minorities, the four major parties' candidates – Liberal veteran John McCallum, Conservative Duncan Fletcher, New Democrat Nadine Hawkins and the Green party's Leonard Aitken – don't reflect that.
Yet, they all feel immigration is a key issue here, where only 40 per cent of residents list English as a mother tongue.
"It is important to fight for immigrants," says Hawkins, 51, a business administrator, who has lived here for 20 years and is running for elected office for the first time. She praises her party's platform initiatives on easing poverty among immigrants, investing in career-bridging programs and developing national foreign-credential accreditation standards.
Fletcher, the Conservative candidate, who is also running federally for the first time, says Markham-Unionville voters are looking for a strong leader and a government that won't impose a carbon tax, referring to the Liberals' Green Shift plan.
"This is especially important to new Canadians who we have fought for and will continue to speak for," says the advertising executive, 43, who has lived here for six years.
The Liberal party pledges $800 million to improve the immigration system, including a new "Welcome Canada Pass," a multiple-entry visitor's visa valid for five years that would make it easier for relatives to visit and for foreign companies to do business here.
"Canadians like the idea of having their families visiting them in Canada. We would be letting people in on merits," says McCallum, 58, who has been an area MP since 2000.
The candidates share similar concerns over the lagging social and municipal infrastructure in the fast-growing riding.
The Greens' Aitken, also running for the first time, says the race is about empowering and engaging voters in government decision-making.
He believes all candidates have a good shot at unseating McCallum.
"People should be voting for a chance to see change, to make a point to say that you are not happy," says Aitken, 45, an information technology consultant who advocates for small local businesses.
Despite his experience, McCallum, a former cabinet minister and the Liberal finance critic, has been criticized for dividing his time among his residences in Ottawa, Markham and Oakville.
McCallum is "not engaged enough locally," Fletcher wrote in his email response to the Star's interview request.
OTHER CANDIDATES
Allen Small, Libertarian party
2006: Liberal John McCallum won by 18,616 votes),Oct 09, 2008 04:30 AM
Nicholas Keung STAFF REPORTER
The Markham-Unionville race is between the known and unknown, the experienced and inexperienced.
In a riding where 77.7 per cent of the population are visible minorities, the four major parties' candidates – Liberal veteran John McCallum, Conservative Duncan Fletcher, New Democrat Nadine Hawkins and the Green party's Leonard Aitken – don't reflect that.
Yet, they all feel immigration is a key issue here, where only 40 per cent of residents list English as a mother tongue.
"It is important to fight for immigrants," says Hawkins, 51, a business administrator, who has lived here for 20 years and is running for elected office for the first time. She praises her party's platform initiatives on easing poverty among immigrants, investing in career-bridging programs and developing national foreign-credential accreditation standards.
Fletcher, the Conservative candidate, who is also running federally for the first time, says Markham-Unionville voters are looking for a strong leader and a government that won't impose a carbon tax, referring to the Liberals' Green Shift plan.
"This is especially important to new Canadians who we have fought for and will continue to speak for," says the advertising executive, 43, who has lived here for six years.
The Liberal party pledges $800 million to improve the immigration system, including a new "Welcome Canada Pass," a multiple-entry visitor's visa valid for five years that would make it easier for relatives to visit and for foreign companies to do business here.
"Canadians like the idea of having their families visiting them in Canada. We would be letting people in on merits," says McCallum, 58, who has been an area MP since 2000.
The candidates share similar concerns over the lagging social and municipal infrastructure in the fast-growing riding.
The Greens' Aitken, also running for the first time, says the race is about empowering and engaging voters in government decision-making.
He believes all candidates have a good shot at unseating McCallum.
"People should be voting for a chance to see change, to make a point to say that you are not happy," says Aitken, 45, an information technology consultant who advocates for small local businesses.
Despite his experience, McCallum, a former cabinet minister and the Liberal finance critic, has been criticized for dividing his time among his residences in Ottawa, Markham and Oakville.
McCallum is "not engaged enough locally," Fletcher wrote in his email response to the Star's interview request.
OTHER CANDIDATES
Allen Small, Libertarian party
Voters keep Tories on short leash
Voters keep Tories on short leash
Oct 15, 2008 04:30 AM
Comments on this story (5)
Carol Goar
Canada has the dubious distinction of being the first country to hold a national vote since the global economy broke loose from its moorings.
Electors made a sober choice: They stuck with what they knew
It was not an unequivocal vote confidence in Prime Minister Stephen Harper. For the third time in four years, Canadians elected a minority government.
It was a carefully reasoned decision. Voters picked the Conservatives as the safest alternative and kept them on a short leash by sending a sizeable opposition force to Parliament.
But there is no certainty in these times. For all their prudence, voters are likely to face a quite different future than the one Harper laid out on the campaign trail.
First of all, the Prime Minister's brave talk about protecting Canada from a recession will soon give way to a candid acknowledgement that all he – or any other national leader – can do is react nimbly to the upheavals as they come.
He'll get a few months' grace. According to Statistics Canada, the country is not yet technically in a recession. But barring a spectacular economic resurgence, Harper's second mandate will be characterized by business failures, job losses and a long plunge in home prices.
When they come, what he said on the hustings will be irrelevant. Canadians will want a Prime Minister who can make the best of adverse circumstances and use the power of the state to cushion Canadians from as much hardship as possible.
Next to go will be the fiction that Canada can remain deficit-free.
When revenues decrease – as they inevitably do when businesses falter and taxpayers lose their jobs; and costs rise – as they invariably do when employment insurance claims increase and welfare rolls swell – no government can balance its budget without slashing public expenditures brutally.
The Conservatives may be able to avoid a deficit this year, thanks to the residual strength of the economy. But next year and beyond, they'll be budgeting amid such uncertainty that a no-deficit guarantee would amount to a vow to sacrifice anything to avoid red ink. If Harper sticks to his doctrinaire stance as Canadians appeal for help, he can wave goodbye to his chances of re-election.
The Prime Minister's vision of Canada as an "energy superpower" already looks out of-date.
The world's appetite for oil has shrunk dramatically in the past three months. Since mid-July, the price of a barrel of crude has dropped by 46 per cent. At $79 (U.S.) a barrel, where it closed yesterday, oil-sands producers were barely recovering their costs. In these conditions, it makes little sense to go ahead with expansion plans.
Weak demand isn't the only threat. Next month's presidential election in the United States could propel Harper into the climate-change era much faster than he expects.
Democratic contender Barack Obama has made it clear that curbing greenhouse gas emissions is one of his top priorities. He has also served notice that America will not buy "dirty oil" (which includes the tar-like bitumen from the Athabaska oil sands) if he becomes president.
Relying on fossil fuels to power the Canadian economy through the recession is not going to work.
Finally, the composition of Canada's 40th Parliament could compel the Prime Minister to adjust his agenda.
All three opposition parties, who collectively hold more seats than the Conservatives, want Ottawa to tackle poverty, penalize polluters, invest in green technologies, build affordable housing and support the arts. None of those is a Tory priority.
Harper will have to accommodate some of their proposals to keep his minority government alive.
There is also a possibility that the Liberals, New Democrats and Bloc Québécois could join forces to defeat the government, then attempt to govern as a coalition. But they'd have to overcome tradition and partisanship.
Canadians who voted for Harper because he is shrewd and competent will probably be satisfied.
Those who picked him because they believed what he said are in for a few surprises.
Carol Goar's column appears Monday, Wednesday and Friday.
http://www.thestar.com/comment/columnists/article/517579
Oct 15, 2008 04:30 AM
Comments on this story (5)
Carol Goar
Canada has the dubious distinction of being the first country to hold a national vote since the global economy broke loose from its moorings.
Electors made a sober choice: They stuck with what they knew
It was not an unequivocal vote confidence in Prime Minister Stephen Harper. For the third time in four years, Canadians elected a minority government.
It was a carefully reasoned decision. Voters picked the Conservatives as the safest alternative and kept them on a short leash by sending a sizeable opposition force to Parliament.
But there is no certainty in these times. For all their prudence, voters are likely to face a quite different future than the one Harper laid out on the campaign trail.
First of all, the Prime Minister's brave talk about protecting Canada from a recession will soon give way to a candid acknowledgement that all he – or any other national leader – can do is react nimbly to the upheavals as they come.
He'll get a few months' grace. According to Statistics Canada, the country is not yet technically in a recession. But barring a spectacular economic resurgence, Harper's second mandate will be characterized by business failures, job losses and a long plunge in home prices.
When they come, what he said on the hustings will be irrelevant. Canadians will want a Prime Minister who can make the best of adverse circumstances and use the power of the state to cushion Canadians from as much hardship as possible.
Next to go will be the fiction that Canada can remain deficit-free.
When revenues decrease – as they inevitably do when businesses falter and taxpayers lose their jobs; and costs rise – as they invariably do when employment insurance claims increase and welfare rolls swell – no government can balance its budget without slashing public expenditures brutally.
The Conservatives may be able to avoid a deficit this year, thanks to the residual strength of the economy. But next year and beyond, they'll be budgeting amid such uncertainty that a no-deficit guarantee would amount to a vow to sacrifice anything to avoid red ink. If Harper sticks to his doctrinaire stance as Canadians appeal for help, he can wave goodbye to his chances of re-election.
The Prime Minister's vision of Canada as an "energy superpower" already looks out of-date.
The world's appetite for oil has shrunk dramatically in the past three months. Since mid-July, the price of a barrel of crude has dropped by 46 per cent. At $79 (U.S.) a barrel, where it closed yesterday, oil-sands producers were barely recovering their costs. In these conditions, it makes little sense to go ahead with expansion plans.
Weak demand isn't the only threat. Next month's presidential election in the United States could propel Harper into the climate-change era much faster than he expects.
Democratic contender Barack Obama has made it clear that curbing greenhouse gas emissions is one of his top priorities. He has also served notice that America will not buy "dirty oil" (which includes the tar-like bitumen from the Athabaska oil sands) if he becomes president.
Relying on fossil fuels to power the Canadian economy through the recession is not going to work.
Finally, the composition of Canada's 40th Parliament could compel the Prime Minister to adjust his agenda.
All three opposition parties, who collectively hold more seats than the Conservatives, want Ottawa to tackle poverty, penalize polluters, invest in green technologies, build affordable housing and support the arts. None of those is a Tory priority.
Harper will have to accommodate some of their proposals to keep his minority government alive.
There is also a possibility that the Liberals, New Democrats and Bloc Québécois could join forces to defeat the government, then attempt to govern as a coalition. But they'd have to overcome tradition and partisanship.
Canadians who voted for Harper because he is shrewd and competent will probably be satisfied.
Those who picked him because they believed what he said are in for a few surprises.
Carol Goar's column appears Monday, Wednesday and Friday.
http://www.thestar.com/comment/columnists/article/517579
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Our waning democratic impulse
Our waning democratic impulse
Oct 14, 2008 04:30 AM
Comments on this story (7)
Martin Regg Cohn
Will your vote really make a difference today?
Are you motivated enough to turn out for the likes of Harper, Dion or Layton?
If your local candidate is way ahead, why bother casting a ballot?
Let me count the ways.
There are 192 countries in the world. Only two or three dozen are deemed healthy democracies, according to research groups like Freedom House and the Economist Intelligence Unit that rank electoral freedoms.
Canada – the country – scores high on the list of democracies.
Canadians – the people – rank poorly as democrats.
We should be proud of our country's democratic tradition. But embarrassed by our apathetic inclinations as a people.
A 2002 study by the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance ranks Canada 83rd in election turnouts, well behind most European democracies. But even that ranking was based on the years 1945-2001, when turnouts still averaged a respectable 74 per cent.
Voter turnout has been steadily declining in Canadian federal elections since the 1960s, flitting between 60.9 and 64.7 per cent in the last two elections. The provincial numbers are even more discouraging, dipping to 52.6 per cent last year. Municipal turnouts are utterly depressing, typically plunging as low as 33 per cent.
As Winston Churchill put it, "Democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." Sixty years after he uttered that memorable phrase in the British House of Commons, the world is still dominated by repressive regimes that make our vote all the more precious.
I take this issue personally.
As a young political reporter covering Queen's Park and Ottawa, watching fatuous politicians up close, I counted on the revenge of the voter at the ballot box. After 11 years as a foreign correspondent, chronicling people's struggle for democracy overseas, I've become even more fanatical about it.
Covering the transformation of Indonesia – the world's most populous Muslim country – from dictatorship to democracy showed me how far people were willing to go to risk their lives on the streets for something Canadians still take for granted.
In a dilapidated second-floor Rangoon office watched by military spies, I interviewed Burma's Aung San Suu Kyi, the opposition leader who briefly emerged from house arrest in 2002. It had been 12 years since she'd won a landslide election, which the military regime simply ignored.
"Our people are very resilient," she told me with a steely laugh. "In a sense, you could say we are battle-hardened."
Which is why I shudder at Canadian complacency about our democracy. I could go on with Third World horror stories, but it's a First World case study that resonated most with me as a Canadian.
From my base in Hong Kong, running the Star's Asia Bureau, I watched a remarkable grassroots democracy movement gain strength in that former British crown colony. No one could have predicted more than 500,000 people would stream through the city's streets for at least two anniversary protests marking the 1997 handover to Beijing.
In a place where the per capita income is higher than Canada's, the people had seemed utterly apolitical and obsessed with property prices. Suddenly they were marching for that most basic human right: One person, one vote.
People power displaced purchasing power as Hong Kong's leitmotif. Unfortunately, Beijing ruled late last year that full democracy won't be permitted until 2020.
The 7 million people of Hong Kong will have to wait another 12 years to exercise the full franchise that we Canadians can enjoy today, on voting day. Right up until the polls close at 9:30 p.m.
Martin Regg Cohn, a long-time foreign correspondent, is deputy editorial page editor.
http://www.thestar.com/FederalElection/article/515978
Oct 14, 2008 04:30 AM
Comments on this story (7)
Martin Regg Cohn
Will your vote really make a difference today?
Are you motivated enough to turn out for the likes of Harper, Dion or Layton?
If your local candidate is way ahead, why bother casting a ballot?
Let me count the ways.
There are 192 countries in the world. Only two or three dozen are deemed healthy democracies, according to research groups like Freedom House and the Economist Intelligence Unit that rank electoral freedoms.
Canada – the country – scores high on the list of democracies.
Canadians – the people – rank poorly as democrats.
We should be proud of our country's democratic tradition. But embarrassed by our apathetic inclinations as a people.
A 2002 study by the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance ranks Canada 83rd in election turnouts, well behind most European democracies. But even that ranking was based on the years 1945-2001, when turnouts still averaged a respectable 74 per cent.
Voter turnout has been steadily declining in Canadian federal elections since the 1960s, flitting between 60.9 and 64.7 per cent in the last two elections. The provincial numbers are even more discouraging, dipping to 52.6 per cent last year. Municipal turnouts are utterly depressing, typically plunging as low as 33 per cent.
As Winston Churchill put it, "Democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." Sixty years after he uttered that memorable phrase in the British House of Commons, the world is still dominated by repressive regimes that make our vote all the more precious.
I take this issue personally.
As a young political reporter covering Queen's Park and Ottawa, watching fatuous politicians up close, I counted on the revenge of the voter at the ballot box. After 11 years as a foreign correspondent, chronicling people's struggle for democracy overseas, I've become even more fanatical about it.
Covering the transformation of Indonesia – the world's most populous Muslim country – from dictatorship to democracy showed me how far people were willing to go to risk their lives on the streets for something Canadians still take for granted.
In a dilapidated second-floor Rangoon office watched by military spies, I interviewed Burma's Aung San Suu Kyi, the opposition leader who briefly emerged from house arrest in 2002. It had been 12 years since she'd won a landslide election, which the military regime simply ignored.
"Our people are very resilient," she told me with a steely laugh. "In a sense, you could say we are battle-hardened."
Which is why I shudder at Canadian complacency about our democracy. I could go on with Third World horror stories, but it's a First World case study that resonated most with me as a Canadian.
From my base in Hong Kong, running the Star's Asia Bureau, I watched a remarkable grassroots democracy movement gain strength in that former British crown colony. No one could have predicted more than 500,000 people would stream through the city's streets for at least two anniversary protests marking the 1997 handover to Beijing.
In a place where the per capita income is higher than Canada's, the people had seemed utterly apolitical and obsessed with property prices. Suddenly they were marching for that most basic human right: One person, one vote.
People power displaced purchasing power as Hong Kong's leitmotif. Unfortunately, Beijing ruled late last year that full democracy won't be permitted until 2020.
The 7 million people of Hong Kong will have to wait another 12 years to exercise the full franchise that we Canadians can enjoy today, on voting day. Right up until the polls close at 9:30 p.m.
Martin Regg Cohn, a long-time foreign correspondent, is deputy editorial page editor.
http://www.thestar.com/FederalElection/article/515978
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)