Canada has fallen into the hands of Harper majority government. It is hard to imagine a worse outcome for the 2011 election, over-shadowing the magnificent victory of the NDP in Quebec where 59 New Democrats were elected (out of a total of 75).
At 11 p.m. EST the Conservatives had won 166 seats, the NDP 103, the Liberals 34, the Bloc four, and the Greens had elected leader Elizabeth May. Some races still awaited a final tally.
Based on polling of voting intentions, Conservative voters turned out in greater numbers than those of other parties. While Ekos showed Conservative support at 34 per cent, and Nanos had them at 37 per cent, election night the Conservatives were registered close to 40 per cent of the vote. Voter turnout was exceedingly disappointing, the CBC projected it to be 61 per cent, only up from 59 per cent in 2008.
The great deception in this election was Ontario where vote splitting elected 72 Conservatives (up from 51) out of a total 106 seats, and ejected 26 Liberals, giving Harper his majority. The NDP have solidified their position in industrial Ontario, natural resource Ontario, and downtown Toronto. But the Conservatives walked through the 905 region, Mike Harris territory, and picked up the seats they needed, scoring over 44 per cent of the Ontario vote overall.
Regional breakdowns do not tell the whole story. Surveys of voting intentions showed women voters consigning the Liberals to third place, with the NDP first. Combined with NDP popularity with youth voters, poor voter demographics reduced the once mighty Liberals to an even smaller rump than the 40 Grits that resisted the Mulroney sweep of 1984.
For many observers the real ballot question was leadership. Ignatieff never had anything resembling the common touch, and failed to impress electors anywhere, losing his own riding. His political career is likely over, though he is waiting to announce his future plans.
Harper held on to his core vote, and grew marginally to win his majority. Liberal blogger Warren Kinsella described Harper on the campaign trail as "looking like an exhausted chartered accountant in a crowded airport trying to get home for the weekend." Seemingly oblivious to the need to win new supporters, Harper applied his control freak methods to the old media to manage the message. Not enough Canadians were online watching ShitHarperDid videos.
Advertising
Jack Layton ran as Jack Layton. Straight from the operating room, onto the campaign bus, waving his cane, he injected some good will into the election by talking about what his government would do for Canadians. Doctors for families, income security for seniors, retrofits to "green" our cities, and a break on fuel taxes, the Layton message was positive, governments can act to benefit citizens.
In contrast Harper ran on tax cuts, hoping people would share his view that the private sector had the answers to what ails Canada. He played on legitimate fears about the economic future. An endorsement from the Globe and Mail must have led some voters to think he had something to offer. The Harper campaign succeeded in knocking down Ignatieff, and picking up some of his voters. The fact his government had been found in contempt of Parliament for failing to disclose how much it planned to spend on F-35 fighter jets, and to incarcerate new prisoners following "tough on crime" legislation did not register with enough voters.
In Quebec, Gilles Duceppe went down to defeat, the Bloc lost party status and its future is not assured. Layton was a main beneficiary of the refusal of Quebec to endorse either Ignatieff or Harper. The orange tide swept that swept Quebec (43 per cent of voters) represents a direct challenge to the neoliberal orientation of the rest of Canada. The NDP needs to build on the energy of the new members, a bunch of talented, very capable people with much to offer parliament. The challenge for the party is to reflect the binational structure of Canada, so as to make the NDP the party that represents Quebec within Canada, and Canada in Quebec.
Widening inequalities are leading to a polarization of the electorate. For most NDP supporters the election of the Harper government represents a major defeat, over-shadowing its promotion to opposition status. The results must spur a new wave of democratic action by social movements. The main challenge is to the trade union movement. The public sector will be the main target of the Conservatives. Cuts to transfer payments, public administration, and to public service employment are at the top of the Harper agenda.
The trade union fight back has to begin with creating broad alliances across society with youth, senior, and women's groups. Arts and culture are on the block. Big banks, big oil, and big business can write their own cheque.
The Harper government was elected by the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, and the National Citizens Coalition (Stephen Harper, former president). These groups promote an anti-union, anti-worker ideology. The response must come from an energized trade union movement, which must reclaim ownership of democratic debate and discussion in Canada.
Duncan Cameron is the president of rabble.ca.
except for the sound bytes on corporate tax cuts, none of the leaders talked about the major systemic fraud. No one challenged Harper on privatizing the Bank of Canada, on the hundreds of billions in ongoing bailouts, or helped the public connect the dots on how those obscene profits give power to bankers and insurers to destroy Medicare, the environment, democracy, lives.
Are May, Layton, a new liberal leader, going to worry more about holding onto their seats again than about saying what needs to be said? maybe if they and other MPs and the media (ha!) start now they will have succeeded in educating sufficient numbers of the electorate in time for the next election.
in the thirties when things got bad, nationalization of finance did get on the agenda and we did get a Bank of Canada- private by the cons, nationalized by the libs. which paid for war. and public supports.
maybe this time we can get politicians to advocate for public credit for peace, clean energy, as well as social services.
'we' being those left alive and with any voice at all.
Unfortunately, the left is the cause of its own failure. And if the left doesn't smarten up, Harper is going to get 3 back to back Majorities, and destroy the country.
The left vote is split on the left, that's it. The center-left needs to reach out to average Canadians, and learn how to communicate. Yes, they have to tell them they are going to cut their taxes, and do it. Average people are generally self-centered, and resent the tax they pay.
They are not thinking about the major issues, like those who think about this for a living. If the center-left doesn't grow up, and merge, and get all of the progressive on one side, then Harper is going to run Canada until 2025. He is going to close everything down, and the average person will have no access to the facts.
If the LEADERS on the center-left don't get over their own self-centered thinking, and organize the center-left into a block, that they can control and not have it hijacked, then we are screwed. Its that simple.
And for gods sakes, those on the left need to hire some experts who understand mass communications. Look at Harper, and Ford. They do slogans, as slogans work for the average undecided voter.
If the center-left does not unite, then we have nowhere to go, and Canada is going to be dismantled. Are Bob Rae and others going to allow the left to unify. No, as they care about their own careers first. Its a terrible situation.
Vote splitting is slitting your own throat. And those who want the NDP to go more left, are crazy, as it needs to go more center. People have to be realistic, or if not, then Harper will rule for 3 Majorities.
people make such blanket statements, like 'harper will rule for three majorities'. or like the Council of Canadians, 'democracy doesn't work that way'.
explanations would help.
also, all the votes 'split' here between three parties still didn't add up to the cons number of votes. same thing in peter kents riding. people need to ask cons why they voted that way instead of listening to pundits and making assumptions.
Didn't take long for Harper to move toward getting rid of the Canadian Wheat Board.....
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/story/2011/05/03/mb-wheat-boa...
I'd like to respond to "thanks".
You asked that people should ask cons why they voted that way. Many progressives are pondering that very quesiton: "how could seemingly "docile" Canadians vote for an "aggressive" leader like Harper?
I'll answer, 'cause I voted for him in '04, '06 & '08 (until this year when I voted (gasp) NDP for the first time. So in short:
According to those on the Right, Harper is the most Pro-Canadian PM we have ever had.
One day, the Left will not be so afraid to love Canada, to even invite a "God" to bless it, and they will find that they will be in power again.
(Sorry about the bad formatting….I'm using Safari (and I'm new here)).
like i said, until people are educated about money creation, they will get sidetracked by all kinds of symptoms. symptoms like susceptibility to equating 'being Canadian' with militarism.
And like i said, educating those in the pews about money creation is important for churches. reminding themselves about 'choosing God or Mammon', mammon being the prioritized power of money, money which private banks create and control, undemocratically. If God the Spirit is in people, as Christians say, then people together ought to have money creation power, rather than a handful who then use the power of money creation to destroy people and the environment.
To prevent the handful from using money creating power for destruction, money, currency, could be created by governments and denominated in hours. I think it would be difficult to accumulate too much of this kind of currency, as there are only so many hours each would have to share.
and it does need to be more than the usual people at babble and elsewhere who talk about money creation. it is too easy to get sidetracked, and groups get their fun/ding from blowing their own horns, environmental groups, civil society groups, unions, churches, anarchist groups, political groups, media, school groups,- they are pressured NOT to talk about government vs. private money creation orthey'll lose donations or support. well this has gone on for too long, and look where we are. majority dictatorial government in Canada. More people in poverty domestically and globally. Arms manufacturing at its peak. Destroyed environment and species die-off. financiers proven to be frauds without conviction, without jail, still running the fraudulent global system they are profitting from at record rates and using those profits to destroy our livelihoods, jobs, economy, lives, and Earth.
people need to educate and encourage for governments of people- community-based, national and international- to create currency of time and remove the power of private finance to create money.