Wednesday, March 10, 2010

New HD Poll: 4-pt Conservative Lead

Harris-Decima has a new poll out, without any major surprises. But it does show some Conservative strength.Compared to Harris-Decima's last poll taken at the end of February, this is a two point gain for the Conservatives (33%) and a two point loss for the Liberals (29%). The NDP is steady at 16%, the Bloc gains two points (10%) and the Greens lose one point (11%). Note that the margin of error is 1.8%.

Also note that this poll straddles the last poll a little bit. That last poll was taken between February 18 and February 28, while this one was taken between February 25 and March 7. I've reduced the weight of this poll accordingly, as it is already partly represented by the older poll.

The Liberals lead with 39% in Ontario, a good number for them. The Conservatives are at 35%, so still in striking distance. The NDP is weak with 14%.

The Bloc shows a big eight-point bounce (MOE is 3.6) and stands at 44%, one of their better results in a long time. The Liberals poll at half that strength, with 22%. The Conservatives are also hurting at 15%.

The Tories are still showing some trouble in British Columbia with 35%, while the NDP is steady with 25%. The Liberals have dropped nine points (MOE 5.2) to 21%.

All variations in Alberta and the Prairies are within the MOE, but in Atlantic Canada (MOE 5.6) the Liberals have dropped eight points to 34% and the Conservatives have gained nine (30%).

The Conservatives win 68 seats out West, 41 in Ontario, 5 in Quebec, and 9 in Atlantic Canada for a total of 123.

The Liberals win 14 out West, 54 in Ontario, 14 in Quebec, and 18 in Atlantic Canada for a total of 100. Poor performances in BC and Quebec hurt them in this poll.

The Bloc wins 54 seats in Quebec, matching their all-time best.

The NDP wins 13 in the West, 11 in Ontario, 2 in Quebec, and 5 in Atlantic Canada for a total of 31.

Nothing really new in this poll, though it does show a potentially volatile British Columbia. Liberal strength (relatively speaking) continues in Alberta, and they are still showing great numbers in Ontario. But the Tories are not going away in that province.

---

On another note, I recommend you read Manon Cornellier's piece in today's Le Devoir about the government's budget strategy. If you can't read French, Google Translator may help you. Cornellier is one of the more under-rated political pundits in the country. Her pieces are always very detailed and focus more on substance than most pundits do today. Le Devoir also seems to give her more space on the page than the Don Martins, Jim Traverses, and Chantal Héberts of the media world. She really deserves a look.

90 comments:

  1. Eric how you factor in Pollster bias, weighing on individual polls.

    HD was -4 for the CPC in General Election 2008.

    Quebec
    I am curious in October 2008 Bloc are 45% now 44 and you have gains. MOE for Q.C is 3.6, all parties are within same place as 2008?

    Ontario
    In Ontario the MOE is 3.3% making the Lib/CPC tied.

    In 2008 in Ontario the CPC won 51 seats with 39.2%, Lib 38 seats with 33.8%. (So CPC are within their 2008 numbers)


    Do you include in your comments the MOE, the bias, in your analysis on comments for a single Poll?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Each pollster is weighted according to how accurate their 2008 polling was. Harris-Decima is weighted at .7, compared to, say, EKOS at .82 or Angus-Reid at 1.5.

    In October 2008, the Bloc had 38% of the vote, not 45%.

    The 3.3 MOE in Ontario doesn't necessarily make them tied. It could, on the other hand, expand the gap to seven points.

    I mentioned the MOE several times in this post.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The MOE also means that the Tories could be behind the Liberals in Ontario by 12 points and ahead for a massive losses - so it cuts both ways.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Eric,

    I was looking at the HD Quebec numbers and not the results, thanks for clearing that up.

    I drew a straight line on their Polls to look for a trend. I only found a drop from in the Liberals from 2008(Dec 11 2008 - March 2010)
    When MI took over/prorogue.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I'm wondering if we are seeing a bit of "Olympic" bounce here though given when this poll was taken ?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Plus the 100 + 31 out seats the Tories.

    Have to think this is also an unstable poll ?

    ReplyDelete
  7. I don't think this is an Olympic "bounce," because it isn't as if the Conservatives are posting in the 40s or even the high 30s. HD reflects the political atmosphere that other pollsters are showing; a close, around-4ish point lead for the Tories, Liberal strength in Ontario, and volatile BC climate.

    Not a bounce - more like a settling.

    ReplyDelete
  8. What this poll really shows is the polarization of the country.

    Think about this. West of the On/Man border the Tories dominate. East of it the Liberals have the lead.

    This is not good for national unity IMO.

    What do others think?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Shadow,

    I disagree. I don't think there was ever an Olympic bounce, or any sort of bounce, and as for the Liberal "lead," well, I suppose 0.6% of a lead is better than nothing, but it certainly doesn't prove much.

    No, I think the electorate is going into another holding pattern, somewhat around the 2006 levels, maybe with the slight downward trend for the Liberals. We'll see with tomorrow's Ekos. If there is a big jump for the Conservatives, then your theory about the "throne speech/budget bounce" will have some substance.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Peter,

    It's Canada. It's been this way for ages. Go look back at the 1980 federal election with Trudeau. Then go back to 1963 with Pearson. Ever since the Liberal shift to social liberalism, they've always been weaker out West than the Tories or any conservative movement.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Eric that was an interesting article you linked to!

    I agree we are ducking the debate on the size and scope of government. Basically that's because the Liberals are letting the budget pass.

    There's also only so much policy oxygen.

    When the opposition gets bogged down on side issues like cheques, wafers, H1N1, and a detainee scandal they tend to miss out on the big picture.

    Do the Liberals believe in universal childcare or not ?

    If they do then they need to propose a 2% GST increase to pay for it and release a detailed policy proposal.

    Is telecom and broadcast deregulation a threat to our national identity ? Or will it lower prices for consumers ?

    We just don't seem to be having the BIG policy debates like free trade or the GST anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I'll debate with you any time, Shadow.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Big policy discussions like free trade.... might happen again soon if the US decides it needs to revisit it.

    I hope they don't, it has been instrumental in opening trade on both sides of the border.

    But I do fear a mutual dropping of the treaty by the jobs scare people.

    ReplyDelete
  14. We do a lot of that here Volkov.

    I'll be interested to see which Liberals skip the budget vote.

    Any backlash in their ridings back home ? I'm guessing they'll all be "safe" members.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Barcs,

    I doubt it will ever be dropped. It's too profitable for the US. Only extremists on the left and right care to even bring the issue up. Obama's administration, or any administration for that matter, won't even revisit NAFTA, not unless there is a swell of support against it among the population, which I don't see happening.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Hey Peter you linked to a great article on the other thread!

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/how-to-tame-a-pms-prerogative/article1495362/

    I've been saying the same thing for awhile, which is that the opposition should pass a bill explicitly exempting them national security restrictions on documents.

    It would be an end run around the constitutional debate Liberal Errol Mendes is imbroiled in with other scholars, which is whether past parliaments can pass statutes that infringe on future parliaments.

    A reference to the Supreme Court could do the trick too.

    Or just passing Derek Lee's motion.


    Unfortunately it seems like the Liberals have folded like a cheap suit on this issue.

    I heard there's a $10,000 reward for anyone who can find Crosby's hockey stick or Ignatieff's spine.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Shadow,

    My predictions: Dion, Sgro, MacKay, Karygiannis, Kania, Dhaliwal, Russell, Andrews, Etobicoke Centre guy, Bevilacqua, and, for giggles, Rae.

    All either backbenchers or members already absent from a lot of things.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Etobicke Centre

    Borys Wrzesnewskyj

    ReplyDelete
  19. Thank you 49, I couldn't for the life of me remember how to spell his last name.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Ugggh, that Etobicoke Centre guy sickens me.

    Hamas isn't a terrorist organization ?

    Really ??

    Oh well, every party has their outliers.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Shadow,

    My congratulations.

    Bringing some balance to the board.

    You agree every party has there
    wing nuts.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Volkov

    "It's Canada. It's been this way for ages."

    Actually it isn't. What you are ignoring with that statement is the population shift of the last couple of decades. There has been a solid shift west by both population and business. Now the seats haven't kept up with this but they rarely do. So we're looking more and more like the polarization you can see in the USA. Not good IMO

    ReplyDelete
  23. "Or just passing Derek Lee's motion.


    Unfortunately it seems like the Liberals have folded like a cheap suit on this issue. "

    Yeah I agree Shadow and the only reason I can think of is they are not ready to fight an election and

    I suspect they got the word Harper would dissolve if they passed Lee's motion.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Here's a HUGE debate we're not having:

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/ottawa-weighs-net-benefit-of-allowing-amazon-to-set-up-shop/article1495711/

    First Globalalive (sp?), then the free trade deal between Can/US provinces/states/municipalities, then the Colombia, Korea, EU suggested trade agreements and now amazon.

    Canadian protectionism is under attack in all its forms, including CanCon.

    We know the NDP and BQ are opposed. We know the CPC is in favour.

    Where do the Liberals stand on these issues ?

    ReplyDelete
  25. I'm more inclined to believe in just a natural post-prorouge furor bounce or a budget bounce than an Olympic one.

    Also, as a Liberal I would be concerned about this poll but for the fact that this just puts Harris' latest in the same range as EKOS and A-R's.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Shadow/Peter

    I guess this isn't the hill the Liberals wanted Harper to die on.

    People do not wan't an election at this time.
    I guess they concluded, that they should let this pass.

    There will come a day, (soon I think) when people will want an election.

    That's when the Liberals will make their move.

    You have to pick your battles wisely.

    Time is on the side of the opposition.

    (Shadow please show a little class, don't kick us too hard)

    ReplyDelete
  27. I'm inclined to agree with Kevin Sutton. All movement in the polls seems to go too far and then have a little correction at the end.

    This is that correction. This is likely our starting point for the next phase of movement.

    ReplyDelete
  28. 49

    "People do not want an election at this time.
    I guess they concluded, that they should let this pass."

    You know I'm wondering if the politicians aren't getting spooked by this to the detriment of the country.

    It would really depend on who forced it I think. If the Libs/NDP did it would be really bad for them. If Harper did it it would be bad for him.

    So why is Iggy holding back ??

    ReplyDelete
  29. Peter,

    Well, that's what censuses are for. I don't think the "polarization" theory has much weight here, because we've always had a form of polarization. It only takes great huge gasps of anger towards the Liberals in order for the Conservatives to bring about an electoral landslide on par with Diefenbaker and Mulroney and make a truly "unifying" party, which in fact is just based usually on a shaky coalition of interests from our polarized electorate anyways.

    Besides - the West will never have a larger population than Central Canada. Ontario will always keep about 40% of the population, and Quebec will stagnate around 20-25%. All the talk about "population shifts" is great, but ultimately pointless 'cause it ain't shifting that much.

    What is shifting is where the power brokers are. The West is balancing out Ontario and Quebec in terms of where the money is coming from. The days of Desmarais and Bay Street domination are almost gone, and that will lead to some polarization, sure, but not much more than we already have, IMHO. This is Canada - we all basically resent one another. It's what our country was essentially built on!

    ReplyDelete
  30. Volkov,

    The government has negotiated a deal to add seats. Quebec has 75 seats and is not replacing their population fast enough to warrant adding new seats. The Atlantic Region also has too many seats.
    So we are currently underrepresented in Western Canada.
    Why do you think the Liberals and the Bloc are on the same page in decrying the new seats?
    Ontario +23 seats, BC +8, AB +7

    ReplyDelete
  31. Peter,

    Just have a little bit of patience.

    I know it is hard.

    The conference in Montreal is coming up, and let's see what comes out of that.

    There are a lot of issues that will build over the next few months.

    Not in Harper's favour.

    Ignatieff got just about crucified, last fall for his election bravado.

    Have you heard of the old saying

    "Give them enough rope"

    I really believe Harper will do all the work for us.

    ReplyDelete
  32. "Besides - the West will never have a larger population than Central Canada."

    I disagree. The West is getting bigger in terms of people while the East basically stagnates.

    So it's not so much a demographic shift as it is immigration going where the jobs and money are.

    Census every 10 years and then a couple of years for the election commission to set up new ridings so there is always a big delay.

    Remember also that a whole bunch of new ridings both in Ont and the West come into play for the next election. Gerrymandered by Harper of course to favour the West.

    ReplyDelete
  33. 49
    Yes that conference looks to be something which we can all hope will be worthwhile.

    Certainly give Harper enough rope and he will hang himself. But how much damage will he do before that? That's the real question along with how much power and control will Parliament lose permanently if this document issue isn't settled ??

    ReplyDelete
  34. Peter,

    Calm down.

    Take a deep breath.

    Stephen Harper is not going to be in power forever.

    When the conservatives do move to the opposition benches (and they will) when they start squawking about the PMO and power, do you think they will have any friends on the opposition benches to do anything?

    Their behaviour I agree has been reprehensible.

    I am a believer in Karma.

    What goes around comes around.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Peter I hardly think Harper is gerrymandering.

    The new rule is that BC, AB, ON get what Quebec gets in terms of ratio of citizen to MP.

    It hardly favours the West either when its Ontario getting a bunch of seats.

    Liberals will probably pick many of them up you know.

    ReplyDelete
  36. "The new rule is that BC, AB, ON get what Quebec gets in terms of ratio of citizen to MP. "

    That may have been the rule but that isn't what Harper initially put forth.

    Ont was only going to get 18 more seats not the 23 that are now specified, only because the province squawked like hell !!

    Now when is Eric going to factor in those new seats in his totals ???

    ReplyDelete
  37. 49
    "Calm down.

    Take a deep breath.

    Stephen Harper is not going to be in power forever."

    I'm quite calm, I just think hard!

    Of course he isn't. My point is look at how much damage the Progressive Conservatives did under various PM's and think how much worse it will be after the Reform Radical Right get kicked out !!

    ReplyDelete
  38. --- "Now when is Eric going to factor in those new seats in his totals ???"

    When they actually exist. They won't before the next election.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Shadow,

    those seats in Ontario will reflect the census growth outside Toronto. Barrie and cities that have been growing for years will get the extra representation.

    Ontario has been sent 51 CPC @ 39.2% vs 38 Liberals @ 33.8% in 2008. Since 2000 every general election has translated to a negative trendline and has been going very poorly for the Liberals to the benefit of the NDP/CPC.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Eric:

    "When they actually exist. They won't before the next election."

    But they will when that election is called. How about a hypothetical seat projection based on those additional seats. We all know it's not viable until the election is called but drop the writ and they are reality !!

    ReplyDelete
  41. Re: Canadian Sense

    The Liberals party dropped its objection to the riding reforms when they were rewritten to properly reflect Ontario's population.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Peter,

    No, I don't think that is the case. Parliament has to vote on the issue, and then a committee has to be setup to mark out the boundaries for the new seats.

    This will not take place merely when an election begins.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Eric:
    "and then a committee has to be setup to mark out the boundaries for the new seats."

    Unless I am badly mistaken this has been done. Drop the writ and they exist.

    But even if they don't given the present poll scene what effect would for instance 23 new Ont. seats have ??

    ReplyDelete
  44. Kevinsutton, the LPOC joined in with the BLOC in demanding protection for QC with the new seats distribution.

    The Bloc understands they will lose their ability to stop a majority.

    The Liberals will lose their ability to play separtist cards Ontario East vs West game.

    Truly the game is NEARLY over for the Liberals. See Janine Krieber and her facebook post.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Peter, I believe you're wrong. A report on the throne speech a few days ago mentioned how the government intends to give new seats to Alberta, BC, and Ontario, but it is yet to be done and has failed in the past.

    The new seat boundaries have not been drawn up, and as it currently stands I believe Parliament has to vote on the issue.

    As to what it will mean, I have no clue, as I don't know how the electoral map will change. All I have heard is that it could happen in 2012 or 2013. We will certainly have an election before then.

    ReplyDelete
  46. OK Eric

    Thanks for the clarification

    ReplyDelete
  47. The way I would have put it is, "If you can't read French, learn... You'll never be truly knowledgeable about Canadian politics if you can't understand what a quarter of the population is saying."

    ReplyDelete
  48. I prefer to keep the two solitudes separate.

    ReplyDelete
  49. CanadianSense,

    Lol, what? Under most calculations, Quebec would gain seats, not lose seats. And the seats in Ontario and out West still wouldn't change the map hilariously enough to stop the adage of "you can't win a majority without Quebec."

    Why is it Conservatives always bash Quebec? Get over yourselves. Jeez.

    ReplyDelete
  50. The Niquab Question

    What's your opinion?

    Mine is :

    If you come to live in MY country you adapt to US.

    NOT we to you !!

    ReplyDelete
  51. Peter,

    I disagree. The fact is that you can't expect every person who has grown up in an entirely different society to automatically adjust. I wouldn't enforce any rules barring people wearing niqabs or burkas or whatever from schools, jobs, or voting. This is not France, and even Harper isn't the despot Sarkozy is.

    That being said, we shouldn't be expected to bend over backwards. Immigrants need to understand that for certain things, you need to, in the case of the niqab, show your face. This makes sense with voting, with the class that lady was in, etc. We can accommodate, but so must they. It's tit for tat, aye.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Volkov,
    Quebec is getting ZERO seats they are capped at 75.

    Ontario 23

    BC 8

    AB 7

    Not sure how your math is but the CPC were 10 seats shorts.

    Tobin will unlikely repeat his campaign.

    Olympic spirit, Bouchard are taking the francophone separtist game to the woodshed atm.

    In 2009 the Bloc lost another seat to the CPC. Charest will not be fighting the ADQ/CPC this time.

    MCGuinty will not support Ignatieff.

    Both Premiers can see the latest Federal lameduck Liberal leader.

    I lost count how many times Iggy kept flipping on the HST giving Dalton a headache.

    Outside Toronto, Vancouver, English Montreal Island where are those NEW seats?

    ReplyDelete
  53. Volkov"

    "That being said, we shouldn't be expected to bend over backwards."

    Guess what??? You just blew yourself out of the water!

    Because that sentence means you agree with me!!

    Immigrants either conform to our cultural norms or they go back home IMO

    Sarkozy is RIGHT

    ReplyDelete
  54. http://www12.statcan.ca/census-recensement/2006/dp-pd/hlt/97-550/Index.cfm?TPL=P1C&Page=RETR&LANG=Eng&T=101

    Look at Census Stats Canada. Can you link any meeting in fact Quebec is getting an additional seat?

    ReplyDelete
  55. CanadianSense,

    One, you're going off of what the government has put forward so far. If we use Quebec's standard, which is apparently what we're doing, and if the census shows an increase in Quebec's population, guess what will happen. Think hard.

    And, um, think about what you're saying.

    If these new seats come into play, the Conservatives will not be 10 seats short of a majority - they'll be 30 seats short of a majority, since 345/2 = 173. That means the Conservatives will need to gain an extra 31 from their 2008 results seats to get a majority.

    That's a big freakin' swing, and I don't see it happening. And just to clue you in: McGuinty didn't support Martin either. McGuinty stays out of federal Liberal politics, unless it concerns his brother.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Volkov,

    you may have missed the last four years but the Liberals are not standing up to vote against the government.

    Ask Jack and Gilles. Defacto majority exists. See Rick Mercer video Liberal song, Liberal GPS or mine, Groundhog Day, Dreamer -funny stuff

    Famous last words from Iggy,

    It's not my budget, its Harper's budget, my job is to ask the right questions. Yikes! 2009

    2010 it Liberals have too much wine at seal party, 30 MPS can't make budget vote?

    ReplyDelete
  57. Peter,

    That's taking something out of context. I said we don't need to bend over backwards for immigrants - but why should they as well? Why must they drop their cultures, their traditions, their values, in order to conform to Canadian values, which ironically enough, is all about tolerating other's values?

    Sarkozy is wrong for banning niqabs, or even religious jewelry, on the grounds of "cultural preservation." It only serves to tell people that your country not only doesn't appreciate new immigrants, but it doesn't even appreciate its own people. Sarkozy and the Gaullists are not an example to be followed.

    ReplyDelete
  58. CanadianSense,

    I'm not going to talk to you on this matter because I essentially consider you a partisan troll. I questioned your call of Harper automatically getting a fancy new majority once these new seats are in place, based on the fact that oh, they're only 10 short now. I won't go beyond that.

    ReplyDelete
  59. One can make the argument that this sort of dress is degrading to women and not in line with our egalitarian society, that being brought up in a male chauvinistic society has removed choice from the equation, and that it is a cultural expression of sexism and inequality.

    ReplyDelete
  60. Eric,

    I know of that argument - it's one Sarkozy himself brought up.

    But is it also not apart of an egalitarian society to respect the choices of the individuals that have either grown up in these traditions or choose to enter them? I mean, if we are to espouse such an ideal, why are we not banning racy beer ads as well? Where is the government clamp down on that?

    ReplyDelete
  61. Eric everybody is a product of the society they live in.

    In some countries nudity at beaches is common, does choosing to remain dressed reflect the values of our society ?

    Sure, but its still a choice.

    You can't accuse these woman of false consciousness, free will unencumbered by personal experiences and genetics just doesn't exist.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Volkov,

    That's a legitimate counter-argument. But as a state, we've made these types of decisions before. Plenty of cultural practices the world over are unacceptable here, and we've drawn the line.

    (And the racy beer ads? There's plenty of beefcake admiration going on in the advertising and media world as well. Comparing the segregation of women to women appearing in sexy ads is not exactly on the mark.)

    It should be pointed out that Quebec (where this issue has arisen) has never signed on to Canada's policy of multiculturalism. Different states have different approaches to this issue. Multiculturalism is not inarguably the best choice.

    I recently read a very good article which asked a very important question. A lot of ink is being spilled about how we feel about this religious dress, and how those women have the right to choose to wear it.

    But what is being done to protect those women who are forced into accepting these cultural norms they are born into? If they came to Canada hoping for freedom, they were surely disappointed.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Hey Volkov I think you're wrong on the Quebec thing, they're not gaining a new seat anytime soon.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Commons_of_Canada#Members_and_electoral_districts

    Based on their population Quebec is entitled to 68 seats.

    They currently have 75 seats because of the constitution.

    http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/2.html#anchorbo-ga:s_17-gb:s_37


    Currently BC, Alberta, and Ontario are under-represented in the HOC. The proposal is to fix the Electoral Quotient (Average population per electoral district) to be equal to that of Quebec for the three provinces.

    BTW its not a 30 seat "swing". These are new seats, not seats being won from other parties.

    All that would be required in an election is to gain slightly more of these seats than the opposition and maybe swing 5 which is pretty easy because there were that many seats that the CPC lost by <1%.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Eric woman in that situation would not be permitted to leave the house.

    Banning this dress in Canada would make matters WORSE for them.

    ReplyDelete
  65. Valid point, but I don't think anyone has suggested it should be banned entirely.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Eric,
    But what is being done to protect those women who are forced into accepting these cultural norms they are born into? If they came to Canada hoping for freedom, they were surely disappointed.


    We offer them the same things we offer our own citizens - the right of exit, whether it be from marriage, or from these cultural practices, or whatever. That would, after all, be "egalitarian" - the idea that everyone gets the same rights and choices that others do.

    As well, a lot of times the reason why new immigrants do not choose to step away from these traditions, even if they actually want to, is that outreach is little to none in a lot of places, especially among the political parties. I just listened last night to a lady on the radio talk about how the biggest factor in why new immigrants and minorities do not choose to participate and break free of segregated and traditionalist views is because the political class offers little to them other than reassurances of tolerance.

    If you want to help people be able to facilitate the choice of whether or not they want to stay within these traditions, you need to go to them, and not wait for them to come to you. That's a lot of the reason why these issues like reasonable accommodation even come up. How often do you see the PQ or even the PLQ go out and set up real outreach programmes for new immigrants to Quebec?

    The best way to protect these people is to offer and present them the choice. If they don't know it exists, they won't take it.

    ReplyDelete
  67. Shadow,

    That's based on what Wiki calls the "National Quotient." I believe the idea is to move to what is called the "Quebec standard," which I can't remember right now. I think Eric knows more, but Quebec isn't really jipped or overrepresented.

    ReplyDelete
  68. Hey Volkov sorry but we don't agree.

    I think the notwithstanding clause of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms should be invoked to ban any religious face coverings.

    I just think we should be honest to ourselves, show some intellectual integrity, and act in a tough manner.

    (If you prefer brusque language, i'll say that we should have some balls.)

    Let's not pretend we're doing this for the sake of oppressed women.

    We're doing it because we want to protect our culture, because we find the Muslim religion foriegn and alien, and because face coverings are creepy and we like to be able to look at people.

    Is it petty ? Small minded ? Backwards of us ?

    Yeah sure.

    But heck, its OUR country !

    ReplyDelete
  69. Shadow,

    Yes, we do disagree, don't we.

    I fail to see how that will help anything, though. What culture are we preserving? The culture of conform-or-fuck-off? That's an affront to any person who claims to be an individualist.

    You want to preserve your culture? Go ahead. But don't justify your xenophobia with it. We all have a right to work towards cementing our ideals and our culture for ourselves and our children - so why should you have the right to take it away from others?

    ReplyDelete
  70. Volkov,

    Good points, and well argued.

    However, I think we have some basic differences in our views. If I understand correctly, you're a supporter of Canada's multiculturalism - perhaps the real Liberal legacy. I'm a supporter of an integrative nation-state, which is generally the direction that Quebec has taken.

    ReplyDelete
  71. Eric,

    I am a supporter of pluralism, though by all accounts, I get Quebec's stance as well. I mean, it's kinda hard to ignore it, Bloc and all. xD

    However I just don't see the good to come out of following France's lead on these issues. They certainly aren't getting along well.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Hey Volkov, Eric hit the nail on the head.

    "Culture" means different things to different people and is not always a shared experience.

    Offical multiculturalism, bilingualism, and affirmative action have never been part of the Western Experience.

    I question whether they are nessecarily part of the Canadian Experience too.

    Perhaps you're confusing political goals or attempts at social/cultural engineering to Canada's own culture.

    Simply saying the collective experience in Canada is that of multiculuralism/immigration is vacuous beyond belief.

    Canada! Our culture is that we don't have one ! Just keep the one you had before you came !

    I don't know about you but i'm not a Norse-Canadian or German-Canadian.

    I'm not a hyphenated anything. I have very little connection to Northern European customs. I'm just Canadian. So clearly there must be a culture in this country, otherwise I guess i'm a blank slate.

    ReplyDelete
  73. Volkov,

    I'm not sure if that is a cause - it has more to do with poverty. A large portion of French youths are unemployed, and while I don't know the numbers I think it is a safe bet that the immigrant population has an even higher rate of unemployment.

    This sort of thing has already happened in Quebec. A Hispanic youth was shot by the police, and violence erupted in Montreal-Nord. But it wasn't because of language or religion, it was about poverty.

    Arguably, integration is a better method at breaking down those walls between groups. It doesn't always work, but the UK has done a decent job of it.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Shadow,

    You're taking my position way out of context. I'm a Canadian first and nothing after, like I think everyone on this board is. We have tonnes of culture here that is all our own. We need to nurture it and help preserve it, yes - but what gives you the right to stop others from following their own path in Canada as well, so long as it doesn't harm anyone?

    And again, I truly dispute this idea that "it's just a Liberal thing." I don't think it is. I think it's a Canada thing. Canada was built on accommodation of different cultures and creeds. Ontario wouldn't have Catholic schools otherwise. John MacDonald's legacy after Reil and the Manitoba Schools Question wouldn't have been so tattered if these questions were not apart of our culture, or at the very least, our political culture. Our rights culture.

    Or, at the very least, it's my vision of what Canada is. But if this conflicts with yours, are you going to take it away from me? If I come to this country, obey the laws and keep all my decisions about tradition and culture within the realm of my person, is it truly your prerogative to say "no, you cannot do that"? What gives you the right to crush mine?

    ReplyDelete
  75. Volkov,

    the "troll" defense reflex does not change the facts in my post about Quebec not getting new seats.

    Or the Liberal Premiers being opportunists who they are hitching their wagon too.

    Quebec should be fiscally responsible and pay for their own social services.

    I am in favour of scrapping, reducing equalization 10% per year to wean off the have-nots to become self sustainable. Ontario needs to fix our own problems without supporting Quebec indefinately.

    In QP I only hear attacks on Alberta, Ontario from the Bloc and demandds for more money.

    Quebec is our Greece. (Simple math again)

    ReplyDelete
  76. Eric,

    You are right, however, it also has to do with accommodation in France. The reason a lot of why new immigrants are in conditions of poverty is because they aren't reached out to. The same thing happened in Montreal-Nord, where now the police are attempting to step up outreach and yes, integrate with the community.

    But you can't do that kind of thing without respect of those people, of their situation, and of their experiences, cultures, and ideas - and that is the problem with Sarkozy's initiative. His and Prime Minister Fillion's policies don't show this sort of respect. It'd grind my gears, to be sure.

    ReplyDelete
  77. Anyways, gentlemen, it's been lovely and informative, as always, but I'm off and won't be back for a bit - vacation time!

    See you guys around.

    ReplyDelete
  78. Good luck Volkov and I take your point about Canadians generally being an accomdating people, though to a lesser degree and of a different kind then official multiculturalism would suggest.

    Look we already ban many social practices. The "not harming anybody" standard is subjective and not evenly applied. Also remember that self-harm isn't acceptable in Canada either.

    Do Nijabs do harm ?

    Define harm. They damage social interaction, cause isolation, possibly contribute to depression.

    Canadians have high rates of season affective disorder and vitamin D defficiency because of our lack of sunlight.

    Best way to fight it is to go for a walk and get a good 20 minutes of sun, especially on your arms and your face.

    If your face is covered how do you get sunlight ?

    How do you manufacture vitamin D ? How do you combat SAD ? How do the mirror neurons in your brain give you cues about people's emotions if you can't see their facial expressions ?

    Nijabs clearly do harm. But I don't want them banned for the protection of women.

    As I said I want them banned because for 400 years people on this continent have showed their faces. That's our tradition, that's our culture. People coming here should respect that.

    ReplyDelete
  79. "As I said I want them banned because for 400 years people on this continent have showed their faces. That's our tradition, that's our culture. People coming here should respect that."

    Thank you Shadow, I couldn't have put it that well.

    Sarkozy/France has a different problem from us right now but if we don't watch out we will be as bad as his problem.

    ReplyDelete
  80. Eric:
    New Ekos Poll

    http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/03/10/ekos-poll.html

    ReplyDelete
  81. On the number of seats issue, if we did a strict Rep. by pop. Quebec would actually be entitled to between 1 and 3 new seats. The over representation is basically limited to the Maritimes and SK and MB. This is from memory. I don't have the article so I might be wrong about SK or MB.

    ReplyDelete
  82. Earl,

    Quebec is not growing in population in % as Ontario, Alberta and BC in the last 15 years.

    In the next 15 the timebomb and choice for immigration into provinces that have better economic opportunities, fairer language laws will become self-evident.

    If we look at a few of the European countries that have a similar demographic, economic timebomb on the horizon.

    Will Germany be capable of bailing out 3-4 countries after Greece?

    Are the Germans interested in funding the EU if the other countries refuse to make serious cuts to meet their debt obligations?

    ReplyDelete
  83. Earl,

    That does sound about right.

    A little friendly advice for you sir.

    Don't try and reason with a crackpot.

    ReplyDelete
  84. Canadian Sense you are right about the demographic time bomb. It isn't just Quebec but all of Canad'a founding people's save for aboriginals. Immigration is the only way to replenish our population.

    ReplyDelete
  85. 49 we are friends are we not. No need to address me as sir.

    ReplyDelete
  86. Earl,

    Thank you, we don't have the demographic problem as bad as many other countries.

    People want to move here and the US.

    Look at those smaller European countries and China where language, employment, economy are going to have major problems in 20 years.

    Lastly, QC will have to negotiate a win win for the Federal Gov't to give extra seats. I can't imagine the current gov't ever resolving that seat issue until many other federal provincial priorities are resolved.

    I believe Quebec will continue to see it's power and hold in Ottawa decline with the Bloc's participation.

    I believe in 2010/2011 the Quebecers will follow the West and want back in to help shape the best country in the world. (Olympic Spirit, Bouchard)

    ReplyDelete
  87. My opinion...

    Banning articles of clothing is unCanadian.

    There are other, better ways to promote gender equallity, and preserve our culture.

    Banning religious clothing or icons, is too close to a thought crime and discrimination based on religion, for this civil libertarian.

    ReplyDelete

COMMENT MODERATION POLICY - Please be respectful when commenting. If choosing to remain anonymous, please sign your comment with some sort of pseudonym to avoid confusion. Please do not use any derogatory terms for fellow commenters, parties, or politicians. Inflammatory and overly partisan comments will not be posted. PLEASE KEEP DISCUSSION ON TOPIC.