Fewer Canadians trust the Conservative government than they did a year ago, according to a new public opinion poll.
A survey conducted by Nanos Research for CTV and The Globe and Mail found that 41 per cent of people said they trusted Prime Minister Stephen Harper's government less than they did one year ago.
Nearly half, 49 per cent, trusted it about the same amount, and six per cent said they had more trust for the Tories. Another four per cent were unsure.
Even among the Conservative voters contacted by the pollsters, more than a quarter (26.2 per cent) said they had less trust for the government.
"Even among core Conservative supporters, there's been an erosion of trust," Nik Nanos told CTV News Thursday night.
Trust in the government fell most sharply in Quebec, where 49.3 per cent of respondents said they trusted it less, and in Atlantic Canada, at 47.9 per cent.
With an election call widely expected within days, the poll also asked people whether it was more important to respondents to have a government working to manage the economy, or one with a good record of accountability and transparency.
Respondents to the survey were evenly split on the two priorities, with 48 per cent preferring accountability and 47 per cent leaning towards good economic management.
"It looks like one of those two issues is going to be the ballot box question," said Nanos.
"Depending on how these numbers play out, this could be a leading indicator as to who will have the upper hand. If it's about jobs, the Conservatives will have the upper hand. If it's about ethics and accountability, then the opposition parties will be able to take a run at the government."
Only five per cent of those surveyed were unsure which government priority they preferred.
Support for a government focusing on the economy was highest in Quebec (52.4 per cent) and transparency was most popular in the Prairie provinces (56.1 per cent).
The Nanos researchers contacted 1,216 randomly selected adults across the country by telephone, between March 12 and March 15.
The poll is considered accurate within 2.8 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.
The Conservatives have presented themselves as the top stewards of Canada's economy, ahead of Tuesday's budget and a potential election trigger expected Friday, as MPs respond to a report that found the government in contempt.
The Opposition parties have concentrated their attacks on the government over its spending and ethics.
A Nanos poll released last week found that 30 per cent of Canadians saw the Conservatives as the most trusted in terms of economic policy. Only 21 per cent chose the Liberals, and 16 per cent the NDP.
But 25 per cent of those surveyed were unsure or would not answer that question.
Friday, March 25, 2011
Thursday, March 24, 2011
Bruce Carson ex-adviser to Canada PMO has chequered past!.
Bruce Carson went bankrupt, with thousands of dollars of debt, before becoming one of Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s closest advisers.
Documents obtained by The Canadian Press show Mr. Carson declared bankruptcy in 1993, then was hounded by creditors again in 2002 – shortly before going to work as then-opposition leader Harper’s director of policy and research.
He declared a debt of $103,359 in the 1990s, and $369,000 nine years ago, the records show. No further information is given in the bankruptcy documents.
Mr. Carson – who is being investigated by the RCMP over allegations of illegal lobbying – said his 2002 money woes ended as a “commercial proposal,” which lets a person or business pay back creditors, generally over an extended period.
“The second was not a bankruptcy but a proposal to creditors which I made and it was accepted,” he said in an e-mail Wednesday. He would not comment further.
The Prime Minister’s Office also declined comment.
Mr. Carson has a chequered past. He was disbarred by the Law Society of Upper Canada in 1981, and served time in jail after pleading guilty to two counts of defrauding clients.
Minutes from a July 16, 1981, meeting of the society's discipline committee shed light on why Carson was disbarred.
“He had forged the signature of the president of a corporation and misappropriated over $15,000 belonging to the corporation for which he acted,” the document says.
“[He] forged the signature of a client from whom he misappropriated over $4,000; and misappropriated $4,900 belonging to another client.”
Mr. Carson reinvented himself as a constitutional expert and became a political insider, working under Progressive Conservative prime ministers Joe Clark and Brian Mulroney, as well as Ontario Premier Mike Harris, before going to work for Harper when he became leader of the opposition.
Mr. Carson remained with Harper after the Conservatives won the 2006 election. Around political Ottawa, he was known as “the Mechanic” for his ability to fix tricky situations.
Senate Majority Leader Marjory LeBreton underscored Mr. Carson's worth to Mr. Harper's office during a November, 2006 Senate debate, calling him “a valued employee of the Prime Minister's Office.”
Mr. Carson left the PMO in 2008 to head the Canada School of Energy and Environment, in Calgary.
He later accompanied then-environment minister Jim Prentice to an April, 2009 meeting with the U.S. energy secretary, and he was part of Canadian government's delegation at the Copenhagen climate summit that year.
But the 65-year-old Carson apparently yearned for his old life. Those who know him say he lobbied cabinet ministers last summer to use their influence with the prime minister to get him appointed as Harper's chief of staff. That job ultimately went to Bay Street executive Nigel Wright.
Mr. Carson worked at the Calgary-based think-tank until he took a leave of absence from the job last week.
That abrupt departure came after an investigation by the Aboriginal Peoples Television Network said Carson was allegedly lobbying Indian Affairs and the minister's office on behalf of an Ottawa-based water company that employed his girlfriend.
Michele McPherson, 22, stood to benefit from a plan to sell water-filtration systems to reserves with water-quality problems, APTN reported.
According to the network, McPherson signed a contract last Aug. 31 that would entitle her to 20 per cent of the project's gross sales in a venture Mr. Carson was pushing.
The company, H20 Global Group, released a statement Wednesday saying Mr. Carson never did any lobbying for the company.
“Mr. Bruce Carson has never lobbied for the company and has simply provided advice to assist us in understanding the process.”
The company added it cancelled McPherson's 20-per-cent contract last month.
Mr. Carson has said little since the first APTN story aired.
Businessman Patrick Hill incorporated a business called H20 Water Professionals on July 14. McPherson joined the company last year. On Oct. 22, the company formed another entity called H2O Global Group to deal with Indian Affairs on the First Nations water project.
Property records show Mr. Carson and Ms. McPherson paid $389,500 in December for a house in Mountain, Ont., about an hour's drive south of Ottawa. APTN also reported that Ms. McPherson drives a black Mercedes SUV that Mr. Carson purchased.
The Prime Minister's Office has called in the RCMP over the allegations in the APTN reports. The matter was also referred to the office of the conflict of interest and ethics commissioner and the commissioner of lobbying.
A spokesman for Environment Minister Peter Kent said Mr. Carson broached the topic of water issues in First Nations communities when he met the minister last month.
But the spokesman added Mr. Carson wasn't lobbying the minister on any company's behalf.
Before that, Mr. Carson met senior political staff in the office of Indian Affairs Minister John Duncan on Jan. 11 of this year to discuss a First Nations water filtration project and H20 Professionals, officials in Mr. Duncan's office said.
Mr. Duncan's office said the January meeting involved Kym Purchase, the minister's director of policy, and Ted Yeomans, his director of parliamentary affairs.
Mr. Yeomans is a former assistant to MP Pierre Poilievre, Harper's parliamentary secretary.
“Mr. Carson briefed the staff on the proposed water project,” Michelle Yao, Mr. Duncan's director of communications, said in an e-mail. “Staff provided publicly available information to Bruce Carson and recommended he work directly with First Nations.”
Ms. Yao described the meeting as standard practice. “Minister's staff regularly attend meetings with individuals and stakeholders,” she said.
Mr. Carson also met Indian Affairs officials four times between September and December, 2010. The department says it has not awarded any contracts to H20 Global Group, the company Ms. McPherson worked for.
Documents obtained by The Canadian Press show Mr. Carson declared bankruptcy in 1993, then was hounded by creditors again in 2002 – shortly before going to work as then-opposition leader Harper’s director of policy and research.
He declared a debt of $103,359 in the 1990s, and $369,000 nine years ago, the records show. No further information is given in the bankruptcy documents.
Mr. Carson – who is being investigated by the RCMP over allegations of illegal lobbying – said his 2002 money woes ended as a “commercial proposal,” which lets a person or business pay back creditors, generally over an extended period.
“The second was not a bankruptcy but a proposal to creditors which I made and it was accepted,” he said in an e-mail Wednesday. He would not comment further.
The Prime Minister’s Office also declined comment.
Mr. Carson has a chequered past. He was disbarred by the Law Society of Upper Canada in 1981, and served time in jail after pleading guilty to two counts of defrauding clients.
Minutes from a July 16, 1981, meeting of the society's discipline committee shed light on why Carson was disbarred.
“He had forged the signature of the president of a corporation and misappropriated over $15,000 belonging to the corporation for which he acted,” the document says.
“[He] forged the signature of a client from whom he misappropriated over $4,000; and misappropriated $4,900 belonging to another client.”
Mr. Carson reinvented himself as a constitutional expert and became a political insider, working under Progressive Conservative prime ministers Joe Clark and Brian Mulroney, as well as Ontario Premier Mike Harris, before going to work for Harper when he became leader of the opposition.
Mr. Carson remained with Harper after the Conservatives won the 2006 election. Around political Ottawa, he was known as “the Mechanic” for his ability to fix tricky situations.
Senate Majority Leader Marjory LeBreton underscored Mr. Carson's worth to Mr. Harper's office during a November, 2006 Senate debate, calling him “a valued employee of the Prime Minister's Office.”
Mr. Carson left the PMO in 2008 to head the Canada School of Energy and Environment, in Calgary.
He later accompanied then-environment minister Jim Prentice to an April, 2009 meeting with the U.S. energy secretary, and he was part of Canadian government's delegation at the Copenhagen climate summit that year.
But the 65-year-old Carson apparently yearned for his old life. Those who know him say he lobbied cabinet ministers last summer to use their influence with the prime minister to get him appointed as Harper's chief of staff. That job ultimately went to Bay Street executive Nigel Wright.
Mr. Carson worked at the Calgary-based think-tank until he took a leave of absence from the job last week.
That abrupt departure came after an investigation by the Aboriginal Peoples Television Network said Carson was allegedly lobbying Indian Affairs and the minister's office on behalf of an Ottawa-based water company that employed his girlfriend.
Michele McPherson, 22, stood to benefit from a plan to sell water-filtration systems to reserves with water-quality problems, APTN reported.
According to the network, McPherson signed a contract last Aug. 31 that would entitle her to 20 per cent of the project's gross sales in a venture Mr. Carson was pushing.
The company, H20 Global Group, released a statement Wednesday saying Mr. Carson never did any lobbying for the company.
“Mr. Bruce Carson has never lobbied for the company and has simply provided advice to assist us in understanding the process.”
The company added it cancelled McPherson's 20-per-cent contract last month.
Mr. Carson has said little since the first APTN story aired.
Businessman Patrick Hill incorporated a business called H20 Water Professionals on July 14. McPherson joined the company last year. On Oct. 22, the company formed another entity called H2O Global Group to deal with Indian Affairs on the First Nations water project.
Property records show Mr. Carson and Ms. McPherson paid $389,500 in December for a house in Mountain, Ont., about an hour's drive south of Ottawa. APTN also reported that Ms. McPherson drives a black Mercedes SUV that Mr. Carson purchased.
The Prime Minister's Office has called in the RCMP over the allegations in the APTN reports. The matter was also referred to the office of the conflict of interest and ethics commissioner and the commissioner of lobbying.
A spokesman for Environment Minister Peter Kent said Mr. Carson broached the topic of water issues in First Nations communities when he met the minister last month.
But the spokesman added Mr. Carson wasn't lobbying the minister on any company's behalf.
Before that, Mr. Carson met senior political staff in the office of Indian Affairs Minister John Duncan on Jan. 11 of this year to discuss a First Nations water filtration project and H20 Professionals, officials in Mr. Duncan's office said.
Mr. Duncan's office said the January meeting involved Kym Purchase, the minister's director of policy, and Ted Yeomans, his director of parliamentary affairs.
Mr. Yeomans is a former assistant to MP Pierre Poilievre, Harper's parliamentary secretary.
“Mr. Carson briefed the staff on the proposed water project,” Michelle Yao, Mr. Duncan's director of communications, said in an e-mail. “Staff provided publicly available information to Bruce Carson and recommended he work directly with First Nations.”
Ms. Yao described the meeting as standard practice. “Minister's staff regularly attend meetings with individuals and stakeholders,” she said.
Mr. Carson also met Indian Affairs officials four times between September and December, 2010. The department says it has not awarded any contracts to H20 Global Group, the company Ms. McPherson worked for.
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
University of Alberta Edmonton students go Google
make the switch and “Go Google” today as the university begins to utilize the Google Apps for Education suite.
“This is a huge project that we need to roll out in a staged fashion. Step one is get all the students switched over correctly,” said Jonathan Schaeffer, the university’s vice provost (information technology). “Students are Internet savvy; they’re leading edge. In many ways, today's students are driving change.”
More than 38,000 students—graduate and undergraduate—are the first to have the new suite available to them.
The U of A announced in December 2010 that it came to an agreement with Google to provide the university’s faculty, staff and students the use of the free education edition of Google Apps. The agreement means the university community will begin using Google mail, calendaring, document preparation and other tools.
“Most students are already living and working in a mobile, web-enabled world,” added Schaeffer. “Nearly all carry a cell phone and within the next five years almost all will carry a smart phone.”
Those students will benefit from the switch, said Joshua LaForge, a fourth-year PhD student in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, who was part of the Google project’s beta testing group.
“I think if you're a student who mainly uses the webmail interface or is doing a lot of communication from a mobile device, there's a huge benefit to this new system,” he said. “The web interface for Gmail is just one of the best ones out there right now.”
And Gmail allows for larger file attachments (25 megbytes) and more storage space (7.5 gigabytes) than the U of A’s current webmail client, said LaForge. For those who just want their email to be email, the switch to Google shouldn’t cause too many ripples, he added.
“Functionally, the transition was really easy—seamless. Just point Outlook, or whatever you're using for email, at the new service and it just goes. You're probably not going to notice much of a change.”
But, in the testing phase, many of those who were resistant to change ended up embracing it, said Simon Collier, one of the project leads.
“We found a lot of people who had initially planned to stay with their original email client ended up switching over to the web client after a while, because then it's a consistent experience no matter where you are,” he said.
The U of A project team ran the project using the communication and collaboration tools in the Google Apps suite, to put the utilities to the test, said Collier. The team found that the Google video chat allowed for impromptu meetings that included team members at different U of A campuses, and even occasionally, different time zones. And Google Docs—the online documents and spreadsheets application—slashed the time needed for larger groups when editing documents.
“Instead of creating a document and passing it around—people making their edits and sending different versions of the document back to the first person—it can all happen at once. What might have taken us days is happening overnight,” he said. “It doesn't matter where you are, and it doesn't matter what time it is. That's transformed the way we do work.”
“This improves the email service for everyone at the U of A,” said Schaeffer. “The move to Google Apps for Education and uAlberta Gmail offer tools for collaboration and communication that the university community will embrace and benefit from.
“We are aiming to be transformational, not just transitional, as we roll out new tools and technologies,” said Schaeffer.
“This is a huge project that we need to roll out in a staged fashion. Step one is get all the students switched over correctly,” said Jonathan Schaeffer, the university’s vice provost (information technology). “Students are Internet savvy; they’re leading edge. In many ways, today's students are driving change.”
More than 38,000 students—graduate and undergraduate—are the first to have the new suite available to them.
The U of A announced in December 2010 that it came to an agreement with Google to provide the university’s faculty, staff and students the use of the free education edition of Google Apps. The agreement means the university community will begin using Google mail, calendaring, document preparation and other tools.
“Most students are already living and working in a mobile, web-enabled world,” added Schaeffer. “Nearly all carry a cell phone and within the next five years almost all will carry a smart phone.”
Those students will benefit from the switch, said Joshua LaForge, a fourth-year PhD student in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, who was part of the Google project’s beta testing group.
“I think if you're a student who mainly uses the webmail interface or is doing a lot of communication from a mobile device, there's a huge benefit to this new system,” he said. “The web interface for Gmail is just one of the best ones out there right now.”
And Gmail allows for larger file attachments (25 megbytes) and more storage space (7.5 gigabytes) than the U of A’s current webmail client, said LaForge. For those who just want their email to be email, the switch to Google shouldn’t cause too many ripples, he added.
“Functionally, the transition was really easy—seamless. Just point Outlook, or whatever you're using for email, at the new service and it just goes. You're probably not going to notice much of a change.”
But, in the testing phase, many of those who were resistant to change ended up embracing it, said Simon Collier, one of the project leads.
“We found a lot of people who had initially planned to stay with their original email client ended up switching over to the web client after a while, because then it's a consistent experience no matter where you are,” he said.
The U of A project team ran the project using the communication and collaboration tools in the Google Apps suite, to put the utilities to the test, said Collier. The team found that the Google video chat allowed for impromptu meetings that included team members at different U of A campuses, and even occasionally, different time zones. And Google Docs—the online documents and spreadsheets application—slashed the time needed for larger groups when editing documents.
“Instead of creating a document and passing it around—people making their edits and sending different versions of the document back to the first person—it can all happen at once. What might have taken us days is happening overnight,” he said. “It doesn't matter where you are, and it doesn't matter what time it is. That's transformed the way we do work.”
“This improves the email service for everyone at the U of A,” said Schaeffer. “The move to Google Apps for Education and uAlberta Gmail offer tools for collaboration and communication that the university community will embrace and benefit from.
“We are aiming to be transformational, not just transitional, as we roll out new tools and technologies,” said Schaeffer.
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Canadians see health care, ahead of the economy, as the top issue facing the country
A growing number of Canadians see health care, ahead of the economy, as the top issue facing the country, according to a new poll.
The Nanos Research poll, conducted for CTV and the Globe and Mail, comes on the eve of a federal budget that is expected to focus on job creation and Canada's economic recovery.
It found that nearly 30 per cent of respondents, when unprompted, said health care was the top priority (percentage-point change from last month in brackets):
Health care: 29.2 per cent (+6.3)
Jobs / Economy: 18.1 per cent (-2.1)
Education: 8.8 per cent (+3.5)
Environment: 7.5 per cent (-2.8)
Debt: 3.8 per cent (-1.4)
Unsure: 9.1 per cent (-3.3)
Last April, with Canada still staggering from a worldwide recession, more than half of all Canadians felt the economy was the top issue.
Health care, by contrast, fell below 15 per cent.
The Conservatives have presented themselves as the top stewards of Canada's economy, ahead of Tuesday's budget and a potential election trigger expected Friday, as MPs respond to a report that found the government in contempt.
Health care has seemingly fallen to the wayside as a major political issue, as opposition parties attack the government on spending and ethics.
"The opposition wants an election in order to raise taxes and kill jobs," Finance Minister Jim Flaherty said during question period Monday.
"While they're focused on opportunism and partisanship, we're focused on bringing forward the next phase of Canada's Economic Action Plan and creating jobs and growth."
Last week, Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff criticized Prime Minister Stephen Harper for promising more than $1 billion in new spending, while Harper had earlier slammed Ignatieff for saying a Liberal government would fund arenas.
Fighter jets not popular
The Nanos Poll suggests Canadians may be wary of major spending if it's not linked to economic recovery. The survey asked respondents whether now was a good time for Ottawa to spend as much as $30 billion on 65 new F-35 fighter jets.
The vast majority said now was not a good time because Canada is running a deficit:
Now is not a good time: 68 per cent
Purchase now for the future: 27 per cent
Unsure: 5 per cent
The purchase has become a heated issue on Parliament Hill. The Conservatives say it's a necessary investment for the future of Canada's military. Officials estimate the cost of each jet will be around $75 million.
However, recent U.S. reports put the cost much higher, estimating it could cost about $90 million per jet.
According to the survey, 30 per cent of Canadians see Conservatives as most trusted in terms of economic policy, while 21 per cent chose the Liberals, and 16 per cent the NDP. Unsure/no answer got a whopping 25 per cent on this question.
Methodology
The survey involved 1,216 Canadians 18 years of age and older
It was conducted between March 12 and 15
Results are accurate to within 2.8 percentage points, 19 times out of 20
The Nanos Research poll, conducted for CTV and the Globe and Mail, comes on the eve of a federal budget that is expected to focus on job creation and Canada's economic recovery.
It found that nearly 30 per cent of respondents, when unprompted, said health care was the top priority (percentage-point change from last month in brackets):
Health care: 29.2 per cent (+6.3)
Jobs / Economy: 18.1 per cent (-2.1)
Education: 8.8 per cent (+3.5)
Environment: 7.5 per cent (-2.8)
Debt: 3.8 per cent (-1.4)
Unsure: 9.1 per cent (-3.3)
Last April, with Canada still staggering from a worldwide recession, more than half of all Canadians felt the economy was the top issue.
Health care, by contrast, fell below 15 per cent.
The Conservatives have presented themselves as the top stewards of Canada's economy, ahead of Tuesday's budget and a potential election trigger expected Friday, as MPs respond to a report that found the government in contempt.
Health care has seemingly fallen to the wayside as a major political issue, as opposition parties attack the government on spending and ethics.
"The opposition wants an election in order to raise taxes and kill jobs," Finance Minister Jim Flaherty said during question period Monday.
"While they're focused on opportunism and partisanship, we're focused on bringing forward the next phase of Canada's Economic Action Plan and creating jobs and growth."
Last week, Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff criticized Prime Minister Stephen Harper for promising more than $1 billion in new spending, while Harper had earlier slammed Ignatieff for saying a Liberal government would fund arenas.
Fighter jets not popular
The Nanos Poll suggests Canadians may be wary of major spending if it's not linked to economic recovery. The survey asked respondents whether now was a good time for Ottawa to spend as much as $30 billion on 65 new F-35 fighter jets.
The vast majority said now was not a good time because Canada is running a deficit:
Now is not a good time: 68 per cent
Purchase now for the future: 27 per cent
Unsure: 5 per cent
The purchase has become a heated issue on Parliament Hill. The Conservatives say it's a necessary investment for the future of Canada's military. Officials estimate the cost of each jet will be around $75 million.
However, recent U.S. reports put the cost much higher, estimating it could cost about $90 million per jet.
According to the survey, 30 per cent of Canadians see Conservatives as most trusted in terms of economic policy, while 21 per cent chose the Liberals, and 16 per cent the NDP. Unsure/no answer got a whopping 25 per cent on this question.
Methodology
The survey involved 1,216 Canadians 18 years of age and older
It was conducted between March 12 and 15
Results are accurate to within 2.8 percentage points, 19 times out of 20
Monday, March 21, 2011
Stephen Harper has reason to worry.!
A new poll suggests Stephen Harper has reason to worry as Parliament returns amid such tumult that the government could fall within days, forcing a spring election.
Trust in the Prime Minister’s leadership has waned over the past month, amid charges that the Conservative government is in contempt of Parliament for hiding information; after party officials were charged with breaking the election law in 2006; and now with allegations emerging that Bruce Carson, a former confident of Mr. Harper, sought to win contracts that benefited him and his much, much younger girlfriend.
A poll conducted by Nanos Research for The Globe and Mail and CTV reveals a sharp drop in the past month in Mr. Harper’s leadership index score – a compendium measuring Canadians’ attitudes toward the trustworthiness, competence and vision of political leaders.
That score declined from 99 in February to its current level of 83, eliminating the gains in popularity that the Conservatives had purchased through a saturation campaign of negative advertising.
For pollster Nik Nanos, this is proof of the risk that attends fashioning an election campaign built solely around the party leader.
“It makes it much more difficult to compartmentalize matters when there’s a controversy,” he said Sunday. Just as Mr. Harper’s leadership may be the biggest advantage the Conservatives have going into an election campaign, so too it may be their greatest weakness.
If the mud is starting to stick, this could be a bad week for the Conservatives. As Parliament resumes, expect Mr. Carson’s name to dominate Question Period. How, if at all, did he profit from his past connections to the Prime Minister?
There will also be two parliamentary committee reports finding the government, in one case, and Minister of International Co-operation Bev Oda, in another, in contempt for Parliament for obstructing the work of parliamentary committees.
And there’s the matter of the budget, with its corporate tax cuts that offend the opposition parties. Any of all of this could bring down the government.
On the other side, the House of Commons is expected Monday to debate the government’s decision to deploy six CF-18 fighter jets to the Mediterranean, to assist the efforts to contain Libyan strongman Moammar Gadhafi.
Not only does this remind Canadians that parliamentary shenanigans are petty tempests in a time of uprisings and earthquakes, the deployment also allows Mr. Harper to act statesmanlike, while buttressing his controversial decision to replace the CF-18s with costly new F-35 fighters.
Unfortunately for the Liberals, Mr. Harper’s declining leadership index score is not mirrored in gains for Michael Ignatieff, whose score inched up from 37 to 40. The real winner was NDP Leader Jack Layton, whose score leapt from 44 to 51.
That improvement was also reflected in increased support for the NDP in the West. Nationally, the popularity of the Conservative Party declined by a single percentage point, to 39 per cent, with both the Liberals (28 per cent) and NDP (20 per cent) up one point from the month before. These numbers are well within the margin of error (3 per cent) and suggest little or no change in support for the three national parties.
But in Western Canada, though the much larger margin of error warrants caution, the Conservatives are noticeably down and the NDP noticeably up.
While that means little in the Prairies, where support for the Conservatives declined from the astronomical to the merely stratospheric, the numbers in British Columbia, a crucial battleground, should give the Conservatives pause.
There, support for the Conservatives dropped from 45 per cent to 38 per cent, while support for the NDP shot up from 21 per cent to 30 per cent. The Liberal vote remained largely unchanged, at 24 per cent.
The question during the spring election campaign, if it does come, is whether the grime currently clinging to Mr. Harper from recent weeks will continue to undermine his popularity, or whether he can regain his leadership momentum, and a shot at a majority government.
Trust in the Prime Minister’s leadership has waned over the past month, amid charges that the Conservative government is in contempt of Parliament for hiding information; after party officials were charged with breaking the election law in 2006; and now with allegations emerging that Bruce Carson, a former confident of Mr. Harper, sought to win contracts that benefited him and his much, much younger girlfriend.
A poll conducted by Nanos Research for The Globe and Mail and CTV reveals a sharp drop in the past month in Mr. Harper’s leadership index score – a compendium measuring Canadians’ attitudes toward the trustworthiness, competence and vision of political leaders.
That score declined from 99 in February to its current level of 83, eliminating the gains in popularity that the Conservatives had purchased through a saturation campaign of negative advertising.
For pollster Nik Nanos, this is proof of the risk that attends fashioning an election campaign built solely around the party leader.
“It makes it much more difficult to compartmentalize matters when there’s a controversy,” he said Sunday. Just as Mr. Harper’s leadership may be the biggest advantage the Conservatives have going into an election campaign, so too it may be their greatest weakness.
If the mud is starting to stick, this could be a bad week for the Conservatives. As Parliament resumes, expect Mr. Carson’s name to dominate Question Period. How, if at all, did he profit from his past connections to the Prime Minister?
There will also be two parliamentary committee reports finding the government, in one case, and Minister of International Co-operation Bev Oda, in another, in contempt for Parliament for obstructing the work of parliamentary committees.
And there’s the matter of the budget, with its corporate tax cuts that offend the opposition parties. Any of all of this could bring down the government.
On the other side, the House of Commons is expected Monday to debate the government’s decision to deploy six CF-18 fighter jets to the Mediterranean, to assist the efforts to contain Libyan strongman Moammar Gadhafi.
Not only does this remind Canadians that parliamentary shenanigans are petty tempests in a time of uprisings and earthquakes, the deployment also allows Mr. Harper to act statesmanlike, while buttressing his controversial decision to replace the CF-18s with costly new F-35 fighters.
Unfortunately for the Liberals, Mr. Harper’s declining leadership index score is not mirrored in gains for Michael Ignatieff, whose score inched up from 37 to 40. The real winner was NDP Leader Jack Layton, whose score leapt from 44 to 51.
That improvement was also reflected in increased support for the NDP in the West. Nationally, the popularity of the Conservative Party declined by a single percentage point, to 39 per cent, with both the Liberals (28 per cent) and NDP (20 per cent) up one point from the month before. These numbers are well within the margin of error (3 per cent) and suggest little or no change in support for the three national parties.
But in Western Canada, though the much larger margin of error warrants caution, the Conservatives are noticeably down and the NDP noticeably up.
While that means little in the Prairies, where support for the Conservatives declined from the astronomical to the merely stratospheric, the numbers in British Columbia, a crucial battleground, should give the Conservatives pause.
There, support for the Conservatives dropped from 45 per cent to 38 per cent, while support for the NDP shot up from 21 per cent to 30 per cent. The Liberal vote remained largely unchanged, at 24 per cent.
The question during the spring election campaign, if it does come, is whether the grime currently clinging to Mr. Harper from recent weeks will continue to undermine his popularity, or whether he can regain his leadership momentum, and a shot at a majority government.
Sunday, March 20, 2011
Government information now available for free in Canada
The federal government launched a new open data portal Thursday, making more than a quarter million sets of data available for free.
"Raw information and data that departments accumulate in huge amounts is now going to be available in an accessible manner," Treasury Board President Stockwell Day announced at a news conference in Vancouver.
The site, available now at data.gc.ca, is a one-year pilot making more than 260,000 data sets available from 10 participating government departments. Over time, all departments will be expected to participate, said Day.
Day said the site will assist academics with research and allow companies to create things like smartphone apps that make government data more accessible to the public.
"Government data can be repurposed for any number of uses depending on, really, the imagination of people who want to access it," Day said.
Some of the information already available on the site includes immigration processing times, greenhouse gas emissions and a list of soldiers from the First World War.
David Eaves, an open-data advocate from Vancouver who worked with Ottawa on launching the site, said at Thursday's news conference that it was an "important first step" in making government information more accessible.
However, in an interview later, he said he had serious concerns about the legal licence that governs how people can use the data -a licence he said he hadn't seen until this week.
That licence prohibits using the data "in any way which, in the opinion of Canada, may bring disrepute to or prejudice the reputation of Canada," or identifies an individual, organization or business.
Eaves said both restrictions are "unprecedented" and unlike anything he's even seen on a government open data site.
As written, said Eaves, the licence would seem to forbid public-interest uses of government data such as identifying heavy polluters or companies that routinely violate product-safety regulations.
And the ban on bringing disrepute to Canada could discourage use of the data by journalists and others in ways that criticize the government.
"From a business perspective, and from an accountability and journalistic perspective, those terms are a major impediment," said Eaves.
Asked at the news conference about the restrictions, Day said they were added on the advice of government lawyers to reduce legal liability, and in his view didn't prevent criticism of the government.
"If someone wants to use that data to show that something can be done in a better way, that's absolutely the type of thing we want to see," he said.
Day's spokesman Jay Denney later said in an interview it was never the government's intention to limit freedom of expression and that the section on "disrepute" would be removed from the open-data licence.
Denney couldn't say whether the section on identifying businesses would also be changed.
The U.S. and British governments have had open data portals for several years and the City of Vancouver launched its open data site last year.
The B.C. government still doesn't have one. Premier Christy Clark promised during her leadership campaign to create such a portal.
However, in an interview, the new B.C. minister for open government, Stephanie Cadieux, said while her ministry is working as quickly as possible, she couldn't provide "an actual date or timeline" for when B.C.'s site would launch.
Vincent Gogolek, executive director of the B.C. Freedom of Information and Privacy Association, said while the federal open data site is welcome, it does nothing to address the Conservative government's long record of frustrating Access to Information requests.
At Thursday's news conference, Day was asked about reports that the government is considering increasing the fee charged for Access to Information requests from $5 to $10.
He said the government had "absolutely no plans" to increase the fee
Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Ottawa+launches+extensive+open+data+portal/4462672/story.html#ixzz1H7FMkwiN
"Raw information and data that departments accumulate in huge amounts is now going to be available in an accessible manner," Treasury Board President Stockwell Day announced at a news conference in Vancouver.
The site, available now at data.gc.ca, is a one-year pilot making more than 260,000 data sets available from 10 participating government departments. Over time, all departments will be expected to participate, said Day.
Day said the site will assist academics with research and allow companies to create things like smartphone apps that make government data more accessible to the public.
"Government data can be repurposed for any number of uses depending on, really, the imagination of people who want to access it," Day said.
Some of the information already available on the site includes immigration processing times, greenhouse gas emissions and a list of soldiers from the First World War.
David Eaves, an open-data advocate from Vancouver who worked with Ottawa on launching the site, said at Thursday's news conference that it was an "important first step" in making government information more accessible.
However, in an interview later, he said he had serious concerns about the legal licence that governs how people can use the data -a licence he said he hadn't seen until this week.
That licence prohibits using the data "in any way which, in the opinion of Canada, may bring disrepute to or prejudice the reputation of Canada," or identifies an individual, organization or business.
Eaves said both restrictions are "unprecedented" and unlike anything he's even seen on a government open data site.
As written, said Eaves, the licence would seem to forbid public-interest uses of government data such as identifying heavy polluters or companies that routinely violate product-safety regulations.
And the ban on bringing disrepute to Canada could discourage use of the data by journalists and others in ways that criticize the government.
"From a business perspective, and from an accountability and journalistic perspective, those terms are a major impediment," said Eaves.
Asked at the news conference about the restrictions, Day said they were added on the advice of government lawyers to reduce legal liability, and in his view didn't prevent criticism of the government.
"If someone wants to use that data to show that something can be done in a better way, that's absolutely the type of thing we want to see," he said.
Day's spokesman Jay Denney later said in an interview it was never the government's intention to limit freedom of expression and that the section on "disrepute" would be removed from the open-data licence.
Denney couldn't say whether the section on identifying businesses would also be changed.
The U.S. and British governments have had open data portals for several years and the City of Vancouver launched its open data site last year.
The B.C. government still doesn't have one. Premier Christy Clark promised during her leadership campaign to create such a portal.
However, in an interview, the new B.C. minister for open government, Stephanie Cadieux, said while her ministry is working as quickly as possible, she couldn't provide "an actual date or timeline" for when B.C.'s site would launch.
Vincent Gogolek, executive director of the B.C. Freedom of Information and Privacy Association, said while the federal open data site is welcome, it does nothing to address the Conservative government's long record of frustrating Access to Information requests.
At Thursday's news conference, Day was asked about reports that the government is considering increasing the fee charged for Access to Information requests from $5 to $10.
He said the government had "absolutely no plans" to increase the fee
Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Ottawa+launches+extensive+open+data+portal/4462672/story.html#ixzz1H7FMkwiN
Saturday, March 19, 2011
Health care a skeleton for Tories.
You have to wonder if Liberal Leader David Swann and Premier Ed Stelmach are having regrets about their decisions to retire this year — Swann because he’s leaving too early and Stelmach because he’s leaving too late.
For Swann, things are coming together; for Stelmach, things seem to be falling apart.
And it’s all because of two issues dear to Swann: problems in health care and allegations of government intimidation.
It was Swann’s first-hand experience with government intimidation that propelled him into politics after he was fired as medical officer of health of the Palliser Health Authority in southern Alberta in 2002. Swann’s crime? Speaking up for the Kyoto accord to reduce greenhouse gases.
If intimidation ignited his political career, it was his experience as a physician in the health-care system that provided the fuel — and convinced Liberal members that having a physician as leader would boost the party’s credibility with the public.
It didn’t work out that way. Swann never really clicked with the public, according to opinion polls. He faced dissent within his own caucus and was largely overlooked by the media — leading him to throw in the towel and announce he’s stepping down as leader after the spring sitting, just days after Stelmach announced his retirement (that won’t actually take place until September).
But Swann must be feeling like an investor who has sold all of his stocks right before the market bounces back.
Suddenly, the government is under relentless attack over problems in the health-care system. Doctors are coming forward with tales of intimidation after they advocated for better patient care. The opposition parties held a joint news conference last week — with Swann as lead speaker — to call for a public inquiry into intimidation and untimely deaths in the health-care system.
To top it off, the Alberta Medical Association bolstered Swann’s position by using the I-word — intimidate — in a letter to members about the current round of contract talks with doctors: “For the first time ever, government threatened the loss of programs and services to try and intimidate physicians,” said AMA president Patrick White, deliberately choosing to use the most loaded word in Alberta politics.
Given that doctors were in contract negotiations when White wrote the letter, there’s a hint of gamesmanship here. But there’s also more than a whiff of genuine anger at the government.
A few days later, White called for “an open and full review” of complaints about intimidation of doctors who stand up for patients in the face of administrative and political punishment.
One saving grace for the government was that White used the word “review” and not “inquiry.”
This has become the big debating point in Alberta politics — one that keeps reporters and politicians awake at night and one that puts everyone else to sleep.
The government has ordered the arm’s-length Health Quality Council of Alberta to conduct a review. It will be closed door and will look into complaints of 321 examples of “compromised care” in 2008 and it will determine whether the quality of care for 250 cancer patients was compromised from 2003 to 2006. It will not, according to the terms of reference announced this week, look into Independent MLA Raj Sherman’s more explosive allegation of a double set of accounting books set up to hide hush money paid to doctors over the untimely deaths of patients on waiting lists for surgery.
On the other hand, a judicial inquiry, as demanded by the opposition parties, would be public — with the power to compel witnesses to testify — and would presumably be able to look into everything.
It is the difference between a forensic audit and a public trial.
Importantly, the goal of the health council’s review is “not to lay blame on any one individual or organization, but to look at system-wide issues and opportunities for improvement.”
The opposition parties, on the other hand, want to lay blame. They want a great big finger wagging at the government. They no doubt want to improve the system, but they also want to embarrass Conservatives, whether that’s the minister of health today or the minister of health from 2003 — namely, Gary Mar, who’s now running for the Conservative leadership.
They know they’d have a much better chance of doing that with a public inquiry than a closed-door review.
What we should keep in mind here is that complaints of intimidation are not new. Doctors were complaining about bullying and muzzling 15 years ago. Dr. Anne Fanning, for example, who has been in the news recently talking about government intimidation, was a cause celebre in 1997 after being dismissed as the head of Alberta’s tuberculosis control program.
“I was opposed to health-care cuts,” Fanning told reporters at the time. “That is why I’ve lost my job.”
So, today’s angst can be traced back to the health care cuts made by Stelmach’s predecessor, Ralph Klein.
It is one of the Klein skeletons that has come back to haunt the Conservatives.
A closed-door review will help rebury the body — or at least keep it in a shallow grave until after Stelmach is safely retired in September.
But the opposition will be doing its best to reanimate the corpse to plague the new Conservative leader in time for the next election.
Read more: http://www.edmontonjournal.com/Health+care+angst+Klein+skeleton+Tories/4467610/story.html#ixzz1H1YFMoDN
For Swann, things are coming together; for Stelmach, things seem to be falling apart.
And it’s all because of two issues dear to Swann: problems in health care and allegations of government intimidation.
It was Swann’s first-hand experience with government intimidation that propelled him into politics after he was fired as medical officer of health of the Palliser Health Authority in southern Alberta in 2002. Swann’s crime? Speaking up for the Kyoto accord to reduce greenhouse gases.
If intimidation ignited his political career, it was his experience as a physician in the health-care system that provided the fuel — and convinced Liberal members that having a physician as leader would boost the party’s credibility with the public.
It didn’t work out that way. Swann never really clicked with the public, according to opinion polls. He faced dissent within his own caucus and was largely overlooked by the media — leading him to throw in the towel and announce he’s stepping down as leader after the spring sitting, just days after Stelmach announced his retirement (that won’t actually take place until September).
But Swann must be feeling like an investor who has sold all of his stocks right before the market bounces back.
Suddenly, the government is under relentless attack over problems in the health-care system. Doctors are coming forward with tales of intimidation after they advocated for better patient care. The opposition parties held a joint news conference last week — with Swann as lead speaker — to call for a public inquiry into intimidation and untimely deaths in the health-care system.
To top it off, the Alberta Medical Association bolstered Swann’s position by using the I-word — intimidate — in a letter to members about the current round of contract talks with doctors: “For the first time ever, government threatened the loss of programs and services to try and intimidate physicians,” said AMA president Patrick White, deliberately choosing to use the most loaded word in Alberta politics.
Given that doctors were in contract negotiations when White wrote the letter, there’s a hint of gamesmanship here. But there’s also more than a whiff of genuine anger at the government.
A few days later, White called for “an open and full review” of complaints about intimidation of doctors who stand up for patients in the face of administrative and political punishment.
One saving grace for the government was that White used the word “review” and not “inquiry.”
This has become the big debating point in Alberta politics — one that keeps reporters and politicians awake at night and one that puts everyone else to sleep.
The government has ordered the arm’s-length Health Quality Council of Alberta to conduct a review. It will be closed door and will look into complaints of 321 examples of “compromised care” in 2008 and it will determine whether the quality of care for 250 cancer patients was compromised from 2003 to 2006. It will not, according to the terms of reference announced this week, look into Independent MLA Raj Sherman’s more explosive allegation of a double set of accounting books set up to hide hush money paid to doctors over the untimely deaths of patients on waiting lists for surgery.
On the other hand, a judicial inquiry, as demanded by the opposition parties, would be public — with the power to compel witnesses to testify — and would presumably be able to look into everything.
It is the difference between a forensic audit and a public trial.
Importantly, the goal of the health council’s review is “not to lay blame on any one individual or organization, but to look at system-wide issues and opportunities for improvement.”
The opposition parties, on the other hand, want to lay blame. They want a great big finger wagging at the government. They no doubt want to improve the system, but they also want to embarrass Conservatives, whether that’s the minister of health today or the minister of health from 2003 — namely, Gary Mar, who’s now running for the Conservative leadership.
They know they’d have a much better chance of doing that with a public inquiry than a closed-door review.
What we should keep in mind here is that complaints of intimidation are not new. Doctors were complaining about bullying and muzzling 15 years ago. Dr. Anne Fanning, for example, who has been in the news recently talking about government intimidation, was a cause celebre in 1997 after being dismissed as the head of Alberta’s tuberculosis control program.
“I was opposed to health-care cuts,” Fanning told reporters at the time. “That is why I’ve lost my job.”
So, today’s angst can be traced back to the health care cuts made by Stelmach’s predecessor, Ralph Klein.
It is one of the Klein skeletons that has come back to haunt the Conservatives.
A closed-door review will help rebury the body — or at least keep it in a shallow grave until after Stelmach is safely retired in September.
But the opposition will be doing its best to reanimate the corpse to plague the new Conservative leader in time for the next election.
Read more: http://www.edmontonjournal.com/Health+care+angst+Klein+skeleton+Tories/4467610/story.html#ixzz1H1YFMoDN
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)