The Reminder is making its archives back to 2003 available on our website. Please note that, due to technical limitations, archive articles are presented without the usual formatting.
Conspiracies, Minorities and Votes What conspiracies? There is a lot of talk in the West about a number of collusions that surprisingly re-elected a Liberal minority government on June 28th. One making the rounds is that the pollsters were really in league with the Martin gang, even though through most of the 35 day campaign they were calling for a Conservative minority. The suspected scheme was to focus on the Conservatives, their platform and leader, not on the corrupt and disgraceful Liberal government. The pollsters, who were wrong in their predictions as usual, even had an "egghead" out of an Eastern university take the polls and predict the number of seats each party would win in each province. It actually looked believable until he predicted four liberals in each of Saskatchewan and Alberta. The suspicion is that the continuous predictions of Liberal losses gave legitimacy to the "attack and scare campaign" that Martin and his allies conducted, a campaign that was disgraceful, unfair and untrue, focusing not on the issues of healthcare, taxation and the like, but on gay rights, bilingualism, abortion, and so-called "hidden agendas" that were not really there. A local friend living in B.C. said he was appalled by the attacks, but they had worked in frightening a lot of people. He likes Harper (he used to support the NDP) but said Harper must use the same tactics next time to hammer the Liberals. It is obvious that people are led to believe that polls are accurate, most particularly by the media, who in general pay for them. Cross Canada polling in this manner is subject to skepticism because of the regional differences, local issues, and candidates. It is all in the questions asked, how they are asked, and who they are talking to. As previously written about, a lot of people only have cell phones, are suspicious of phoners thanks to telemarketers, and lie or tell the phoners what they want to hear. Apparently polling companies are looking at the more expensive personal interview system in conjunction with the phoning, to regain some credibility. By the way, perhaps most do not know that Angus Reed, head of Ipso Reed, one of the largest polling firms is a former Liberal pollster. Also Scott Mackay, head of Probe Polling used by the Winnipeg Free Press for most of its surveys, is Paul Edwards' brother-in-law. Readers may recall Edwards was leader of the Manitoba Liberal party. Conspiracy? What about the roll of the media in the campaign? The CBC did no polling but spent most of the 35 days focusing in on abstract issues, abstract minority groups, giving the Marxist-Leninists and Communists TV time, plus other even more obscure groups, reporting on the Conservative's "hidden agenda, and repeating every attack word Paul Martin said. Martin and Layton had a free reign, while Harper was reported occasionally. Could the "fat cats" in the heavily taxpayer-subsidized CBC have been worried that Conservative-promised tax cuts would mean less money for them, or horror-of-horrors a possibility of privatizing a corporation that is well beyond its time, and a heavy drain on tax dollars? CTV was much more responsible, but also fell for the pollsters' line and expanded it. Minority governments in Canada have not been a rarity since third parties gained support at the end of the First World War. The first, a Conservative one with three less seats than the opposition in 1921, lasted the longest ? over three and a half years, while the shortest was John Dief's 1957 team. Dief of course brought in a lot of popular measures, then called an election he couldn't lose, winning the greatest majority tohat point in Canadian history. Joe Clark's 1979 win with 136 seats lasted six months and was the most incompetent. Clark would never get another chance. Paul Martin's gang with 135 members is Canada's 9th minority government since 1921, and most predictions are it will last at least two years, maybe longer depending on the issues. Lester Pearson won two back-to-back minorities in 1963 and 1965. He could never break Dief's stranglehold on the West. His governments were usually in chaos with poor management in the House. In February, 1968 with 48 of 130 Liberals absent, the government was defeated on a money bill, which means defeat and a new election under the British system. The Liberals were in the early stages of their leadership campaign (which brought in Trudeau) and wanted anything but an election under Pearson. They crafted a motion which said the defeat was not really a defeat of the government and it was amazingly accepted by the new PC leader Robert Stanfield (Stanfield had been elected the previous September in Toronto defeating Duff Roblin). This acceptance enraged wily Tory strategist Gordon Churchill, who withdrew from the caucus. As I was his riding president, Gordon phoned me prior to his actions, explaining the reasons, and asking if we would support him. Assured of our support (we had all voted for Dief/Roblin), he told me that Stanfield had lost his chance to be Prime Minister. He was right, Bob almost made it in 1972, and is known as the best Prime Minister that Canada never had! Trudeau was elected leader and Trudeaumania swept the land in the 1968 election. The rest is history. What about Canada's vote in 2004? The report on the turnout was true ? a 60% turn-out, the lowest since 1898! Why would this happen? After all, Elections Canada spent millions trying to get young people and Natives, traditionally the lowest voters, to go to the polls. Apparently they didn't, as a scary 40% of eligible Canadians did not bother to cast their ballots. A young Flin Flonner told the Corner that no young person he knows bothered to vote. Turn out was low on the Reserves, a fact which a bitter Churchill Liberal candidate blamed for his defeat. BC had some of the lowest vote counts in the country with just over 50% in some ridings. What this all means is that with 35% of the 60% who showed up, Martin's team was the choice of only 21% of vote-eligible Canadians. Is this a problem? What about changing the voting system? More to come on this topic.
