Will it be another sponsorship scandal?

This arrived in my mailbox this morning:

Media Advisory

OTTAWA - The 2006-2007 Supplementary Estimates (A) will be tabled in Parliament on Monday, October 30, 2006 at approximately 3:00 p.m. There will be a technical briefing with officials from the Treasury Board Secretariat to provide journalists with an overview of the Estimates process.

Normally, pretty boring stuff. However, you might remember this:

"Members often admitted—sometimes with regret—that they did not pay much attention to the Estimates, that they had only a weak idea of what level of resources was expended to achieve program results, and [that] they did not know what financial instruments departments use to achieve their assigned results. In the series of incidents over the last few years (Human Resources Development Canada (HRDC) contributions program, gun control, Sponsorship), a number of MPs apportioned at least some “contextual” blame to inadequate parliamentary oversight of program expenditures. "

"Each year, some 87 departments and other government organizations provide parliamentary committees with separate spending estimates and related reports, and many of these receive no formal attention in committee meetings. And when meetings occur, they are typically dominated by partisan exchanges with ministers that shed minimal light on the estimates. Consideration of the supplementary estimates, which allow departments to obtain additional funding at specified intervals during the year, has been even less satisfactory. With only a few exceptions, committees regularly fail to examine them at all."

Let's hope the kids we elect read the estimates this year. It might be the most important thing that they can do to avoid another screw-up.

It's what we pay them to do.

Iggy and LPC-Q: Running with scissors....

How can I best describe this?

Bad idea jeans?

Don't play with matches?

Apparently with the support of the Ignatieff campaign, the Quebec wing of the Liberal party feels that the LPC needs to recognize Quebec as 'une nation' and the existence of the desequilibre fiscal.

I've put 'nation' entre guillments, and in italics, because it doesn't mean the same thing in English as it does in French.

The desquilibre fiscal thing means exactly the same thing in English as it does in French. We want more money. I'm not sure why I put it in italics.

But let's deal with 'nation' vs nation.

En anglais, a nation is commonly used as a synonym for an autonomous political entity, like a country. Which is why an awful lot of anglophones go loopy every time they hear some suggest that Quebec is a nation.

Une nation a group of individuals who share cultural links which define them a community. These links might be language, a common history, values etc. Thus, some would argue that le Quebec est une nation, a l'interieure du Canada.

Of course, I haven't heard the last four words linked with the first four words very often.

But that really is a side point, because to deny la province is une nation is to drive an awful lot of Quebecers absolutely loopy. In fact, they start to look like anglophones who have just heard some suggest that Quebec is nation.

Now, I'll bet this is starting to sound an awful lot like distinct society.

I have to say, I have a lot of trouble telling the two apart myself.

A good number of us who live inside and outside of Quebec shake our heads and realize how incredibly disconnected that the political class of Quebec is from the Tim Horton's reality where 99% Canadians live, regardless of language or geography.

Most of us are trying to get through school, pay the mortgage, figure out who will win the Stanley Cup, watching tetesaclaques.tv and understand what really is going on Lost.

Et on s'encrisse si nous sommes une nation, ou bien, un gros donught.... Apparently LPC-Q didn't get the memo.

But distinct society was almost 20 years ago. 20 years ago Culture Club and David Emerson still had a chance a promising career. Pierre Trudeau was still having kids. Harold Ballard still owned the Leafs. S tephen Harper was trying to destroy the Conservative Party, and Bob Rae was trying to figure out how to get re-elected.

Today, Boy George and Bob Rae might still have a chance, but otherwise times have changed.

We've all matured a little bit, or so I'd like to think. Unfortunately, as much as I think mes confreres carres hors du Quebec have little interest or knowledge of the linguistic subtleties of nation vs nation, j'en suis tres sur que mon chum Mikey Ignatieff le sait tres bien.

Which, quite frankly, leaves me a bit ticked at Mr. Ignatieff and his campaign team who just about flat outed admitted in this morning's Grope & Flail that they were trying to distract people away from his mid-east peace initiative.

Iggy appears to have missed the last 20 years of Canadian politics and the divisive debates about distinct society, the referendum, and blah, blah, blah... I am not sure that this will play out as the card that shows he has the political acumen so absent in the last few weeks.

Don't mess around, this is fate of the nation kind of stuff...

* * * * * * * * * *
UPDATE: Buddy at the Waters Edge has nifty post on the motion passed at LPC-Q which is well worth the read.

Surprise: Tory pollsters backs Baird on LRT decision

For those of you who don't follow the Ottawa Mayoral race, TB President John Baird put funding for Ottawa's Light Rail Transit proposal on hold a couple of weeks ago until after the election.

Baird denies that this has anything to do with current Mayor Bob Chiarelli (and former Liberal MPP) support of the project, nor John Baird's admitted Conservative affiliation, nor mayoral candidate (and conservative donor) Larry O'Brien's opposition to the project.

I am certain this is all true.

And a new poll featured in the Ottawa Citizen from the Holinshed Research Group indicates that though most Ottawa residents agree that John Baird was interfering in the election (a charge Baird denies), 49% agree with Baird's demand that the project be ratified by the new council.

The Citizen contained no information on who funded the poll, it is mysteriously absent from the Holinshed web page.

And oddly, I'd never hear of the Holinshed Group, but they are currently hiring.

If you're interested, it's worth a look.

And if you worked in the Conservative Opposition Research Bureau in the mid- to late-nineties, you'll know the president, Frank Hall.

Networking is always key, no matter what you do...

TORIES HOT AIR ACT LEAKED TO MEDIA

"Basically, there is no Clean Air Act. There are some amendments to CEPA, but it doesn't provide any new power of authority to the federal government," Hazell said.

Enviro groups obtained a copy of the proposed Hot Air Act in August, but sat on it hoping the government might improve it. Today, they lost patience, and leaked it to the media.

The results will impress no one.

"We'll be tabling the Clean Air Act next week, and we think it's prudent for everyone to wait when the act is tabled and review it then," Shannon Haggerty, of Ambrose's office, told CTV.ca.

Which is code for: "Uh, darn, they've got the real bill..."

One of the clear signs of a government in trouble is when the civil servants start leaking key documents... stay tuned, more to come....

Emerson on his way out?

From CP wire:

VANCOUVER (CP) _ Federal Trade Minister David Emerson is hinting at a return to the business world after a rocky run at politics that has seen him defect from the Liberals to the Tories.

On Thursday, Emerson said he has not decided whether he will run for re-election, departing from previous commitments to seek another term as a Tory.

Asked about a return to the corporate world, Emerson said: ``Wouldn't mind.''

I guess the reality of trying to win a seat again is sinking in.

Let's hope he's better at business than he is at politics.

On being anti-Isreali

This is consistent with the anti-Israeli position that has been taken by virtually all of the candidates for the Liberal leadership.

Stephen Harper, Leader of the Conservative Party of Canada

Putting aside wisdom of Iggy Pop-Tartief's latest gaffe, there are a lot of things about this statement that should concern people.

First, it's simply not true. Ignatieff's statement on Tout le monde en parle was a strong criticism of Israel, certainly the strongest to date. He did not, and has not, ever questioned the existence of the state of Israel.

Ignatieff, rightly or wrongly, criticized Israel's conduct in the invasion of another soveriegn state. And to criticize a country is not to question its existence, it is to oppose an action or a policy.

Suggesting Ignatieff is anti-Isreal is as silly as suggesting Stephen Harper is anti-American because he feels that the US should come clean on Maher Arar or because he opposes softwood duties.

It is as stupid as suggesting that Stephen Harper is anti-Lebanese for supporting Israel's invasion of Lebanon.

And it smacks of another conservative smear-monger, Joe McCarthy, who used the same ultra-nationalist technique to attempt to silence his opponents.

Moreover, Ignatieff's comments are not in-line with other leadership candidates who have all clearly supported Israel's position in the invasion of Lebanon, while calling for restraint.

And once again, Harper's statement shows he is willing to use the war in Lebanon for his own political advantage. At every opportunity, he has used the war to divide Canadians in a pathetic search for that elusive bump at the ballot box.

That meaness is truly disturbing - it takes a special kind of heartless, callous politics to use the loss of life in two countries caught between the latest Islamofascist gang for a little boost in the polls.

But that is Stephen Harper.

Study shows Daly Show is legitimate news

A University of Indiana study has concluded that Jon Stewart's Daily Show is as legitimate a news source as the mainstream networks.

In spite of Stewart's well-publicized claims to the contrary, an analysis conducted of the 2004 national political conventions and the first presidential debate by the networks and Stewart's program showed the Daily Show provided as much substance as the Nets, according to author, Assistant Professor, Julia Fox, who also stated:

"... the broadcast network news stories about the presidential election were significantly shorter, on average, than were The Daily Show with Jon Stewart stories..."

What do I think is the most interesting part of the study?

I can legitimately state that Fox thinks Jon Stewart has as much substance as anyone else.

Now if only some one could show Rick Mercer was as credible as the National Post...

Tory friends line up at the trough

PolitcsWatch provides an interesting list of Conservative appointees in recent months, forgetting only two:

Barbara McDougall's appointment as the Chief Federal Negotiator at Caledonia and Gilles Bernier's trip to the Francophonie.

Ah, it's good to be the King... but the King of what?