Dreams of Wardrobe

Stephane Dion's 'plan b' is still 'plan a'

With the Liberal campaign continuing to sag (yet somehow the Toronto Star figures it's "firing on all cylinders" -- Quelle surprise!), the common wisdom seems to be that Stephane Dion needs to stop talking about the Green Shift plan.

Because most Canadians are clearly more concerned about the economy, they argue, Dion should instead be talking about that.

Unfortunately for Dion, Dion's plan for the environment -- the Green Shift -- is also his plan for the economy.

And it only gets worse from there. As Conservative strategist Tim Powers points out in today's Globe and Mail, Bob Rae carries all kind of economic baggage with him from his days as the Premier of Ontario. Rae also managed to almost entirely alienate his former NDP followers -- the same followers the Liberal party will need to woo in order to stave off a third-place finish in this election, let alone win.

But Stephane Dion's environmental problem has become his campaign problem. And with little else of substance to campaign on, Dion may have no way out of this one -- and little hope of even holding on to the keys of Stornoway, let alone upgrading to 24 Sussex Drive.

In only their second English-language ad released during this election campaign, the Liberal party has finally deployed its first English-language counter-branding spot against Stephen Harper.

For some political parties, a week would be a long time to wait. For the cash-strapped Liberal party, maybe not so much.

That being said, the ad begins by pushing Harper's image closer to that of an unpopular American president. In a marginally creative shift, however, that president isn't George W Bush, although it is a Republican.

Instead, it's Ronald Regan, as the spot substitutes Harper's name into the "Reganomics" label so often used to describe Regan's trickle-down economic policies.

The ad first questions Harper's commitment to environmental policy. Obviously, the ad doesn't mention that Liberal MP Ralph Goodale recently admitted that, by the criteria that most environmental groups allegedly judge environmental policy, the Tory Green Plan is superior to the Liberal Green Shift.

The spot accuses the Conservatives of writing a "blank cheque" to oil companies to pollute and gouge Canadians at the gas pumps. Conservative Environment Minister John Baird has already struck back for the Tories on this issue, pointing out that the Green Shift plan would allow oilsand developers to continue polluting so long as they're willing to pay carbon taxes.

The spot also points out some of Conservative Finance Minister Jim Flaherty's comments about Ontario last year, wherein he questioned whether or not the province needed to cut corporate taxes in order to make investment in the province more viable.

The ad also notes the number of programs -- 66 in total according to the ad -- and accuses Harper of "divide and conquer politics".

This overlooks the fact that it's traditionally been the Liberals who have indulged themselves in "divide and conquer politics", pandering to Quebec and Ontario while largely ignoring the rest of the country. Only after the rise of the Bloc Quebecois have the Liberals been required to win seats across the country in order to form governments.

It's intriguing to see the Liberals, in the course of their counter-branding effort, trying to brand the Conservatives with a fault that has traditionally been their own.

Whether or not it works will be another story entirely.

The ad concludes by welcoming Canadians to "turn the page" with the Liberal Green Shift plan. The drab black-and-white images played during the "Harpernomics" portion of the ad is then substituted for colour images of promised environmentally-friendly prosperity under the Green Shift.

However, with the release of this ad -- their second ad promoting their vaunted Green Shift plan -- the Liberals are at risk of becoming a single-issue party.

Meanwhile, the Conservatives have released ads concerning immigration, foreign policy, trade policy, and child care. While none of these ads tell the viewer very much about the related Conservative policies, they make the Conservative platform seem a good deal more comprehensive than the Liberal alternative.

Meanwhile, the ad also has a pivotal weakness: it's certain to remind voters who don't like Harper why they dislike him, but they're unlikely to convince many undecided voters against him, nor do they make any real specific appeal for NDP or Green party voters to switch to the Liberals.

At least one thing can be said for certain: with their first anti-Harper ad on the air in English Canada, the Liberal campaign's gloves have effectively come off.

The second round of this election has officially begun.

Green Shift plan not playing well in Saskatchewan

As observers look ahead to the results of the 14 October federal election, two questions loom large.

First: will the Conservatives sweep Alberta again?

Second: can the Conservatives sweep Saskatchewan?

In Alberta, the prospects of another smothering Conservative victory remain strong. Although Rahim Jaffer could be upset in Edmonton-Strathcona and Laurie Hawn will have to work hard to hold Edmonton Centre, the Tories still have a solid provincial victory earlier in the year giving them the momentum they need to maintain their lock on Alberta.

In Saskatchewan, meanwhile, Wascana MP Ralph Goodale remains the only Liberal awash in a sea of blue.

He was one of two non-Conservative MPs in the province until Desnethe-Missinippi-Churchill River MP Gary Merasty resigned his seat. In a by-election he was replaced by Conservative Rob Clarke, who defeated Liberal Joan Beatty. Beatty had been hand-chosen by Stephane Dion over current candidate David Orchard, who had been chosen by the party's riding association.

Orchard has already called for Dion to soften the Green Shift's inevitable impact on farmers.

Orchard has, against Dion's inclinations, been cast into a star candidate role in Saskatchewan. But that isn't where Liberal troubles end in the province. Not by a longshot.

Just as in Alberta, conservatives in Saskatchewan have an election victory -- this one by Brad Wall's Saskatchewan party -- to provide them with momentum.

Wall has come out and criticized Liberal leader Stephane Dion's Green Shift plan. Wall noted that the Green Shift plan would result in a loss of $500 million per annum for Saskatchewan and a 41% increase in electricity costs by 2012.

For his own part, Goodale denounced Wall's claims as "crock of unmitigated horsefeathers."

Unfortunately for Goodale, horses don't have feathers, and Scott Brison, one of the masterminds of the Green Shift plan, has already admitted that the plan will result in higher electicity costs.

"Their arithmetic is just completely wrong, mistaken and false," Goodale insisted, noting that corporate tax cuts accompanying carbon taxation should make up for the extra costs. In theory.

"This is the old Conservative tactic of throw enough mud against the fan and hope everyone gets splattered," Goodale added.

According to political scientist Ken Rasmussen, Wall's comments likely won't have much effect on the election in Saskatchewan. "This is a province that the Tories have, I wouldn't say sewn up, but they're probably going to be quite effective in retaining their seats," he noted.

University of Saskatchewan political scientist David McGrane thinks otherwise. "The fact that Premier Wall has been so outspoken in saying that the Green Shift is harmful for Saskatchewan, that's definitely going to play in favour of the Conservatives," he predicted.

Meanwhile, David Orchard may be stepping on the wrong toes in Desnethe-Missinippi-Churchill River by opposing uranium mining. This in a rural riding where the Green Shift will almost certainly prove to be anathema. “The proposed carbon tax will spell economic doom for the north, in forestry, exploration, farming. Orchard is against uranium mining and oil development,” Rob Clarke noted. “The carbon tax is going to increase fuels costs and raise costs on all household items. Being in government, I will prevent that from happening."

Stephen Harper has offered solid support of his candidate in Wascana, Michelle Hunter.

Clearly, Harper understands the value of unseating Goodale, a former Finance Minister.

For his own part, Goodale insists that the Liberal Green Shift plan would be less costly than the Conservative plan. "They are going to impose costs by imposing their regulations and the target they're aiming at is 35 per cent more severe than Mr Dion's plan. But the crucial difference is that the Dion plan has across-the-board income tax cuts for every family, every individual, every business in the country that will add up to the biggest reduction in income tax in Canadian history," Goodale insisted.

So, while Goodale admits that, by the measuring stick that most environmentalists are measuring climate change policy, Harper's plan is better, Goodale wants to insist that, well, the Liberal plan will at least be cheaper.

Goodale and the Liberals can't even seem to play straight with the environmental lobby.

All the while many Canadians remain concerned about Dion's plans for potential carbon tariffs and seeming lack of a post-Green Shift vision, particularly vis a vis the recovery of lost revenue once carbon tax revenues decline with greenhouse gas emissions.

The Liberals have their work cut out for them in Saskatchewan. Come October 14, Saskatchewan could be joing Alberta adorned in Tory blue.

Saskatchewan star Liberal candidate proposes mid-campaign policy changes

As the 2008 federal election progresses, one can't really help but wonder if Stephane Dion is regretting not intervening (again) in the nomination process in Desnethe-Missinippi-Churchill River.

Even after lightening his vaunted Green Shift plan, Stephane Dion is being called upon by David Orchard (his candidate in Desenethe-Missinippi-Churchill River) to lighten it some more.

"I don't want to see farmers or fisherman or northerners penalized for using fuels for which there is no option, they have no alternative," Orchard pronounced.

Orchard insists that he has no shortage of confidence in Dion's leadership, despite his previous interference in Orchard's electoral ambitions. "I would have no trouble working for Stéphane Dion and I'm working hard to help him win power," he insists.

Calling upon Dion to once again change his policy -- this time in the middle of an election campaign -- probably isn't as helpful as Orchard would like to believe.

To help like this, Stephane Dion may need to say "thanks, but no thanks."

In a new ad released yesterday, the Conservative party took advantage of a trade-related issue brought up by Stephane Dion.

Dion has suggested that the allgedly weak environmental policies of the Conservative government would imperil Canadian trade, as other countries impose punitive tariffs on countries judged to have taken insufficient action fighitng climate change.

"Other countries are considering slapping carbon tariffs on those who don't take action on climate change. As hard as it is to believe, for now, Canada is one of those countries," Dion recently said.

Dion's Green Shift plan promises to impose such "carbon tariffs" on other countries judged to be dragging their feet on climate change.

The ad itself seems to have been put together rather hastily. It features a different narrator than previous Conservative ads, and relies almost overwhelmingly on the analysis of a single expert -- Carlton University's Michael Hart. It features images of numerous Canadian trading partners being stamped with the word "tariff" as it progresses toward its logical conclusion: a map of the United States -- Canada's largest trading partner -- being stamped.

Perhaps it's inevitable that trade-related issues (in particular, Free Trade-related issues) were going to come up in the election campaign. In August, David Orchard, Canada's leading anti-free trader finally secured his opportunity to run for the Liberal party.

Perhaps it was only a matter of time before the Liberal party offered up some kind of Free Trade-related policy -- one that would inevitably require the abrogation of NAFTA -- in order to keep their newest star candidate in the fold.

Not so surprisingly, Dion's trade-related musings closely resemble musings by Barack Obama that he would try to renegotiate NAFTA in order to add environmental agreements. Considering Dion's poor performance on fighting climate change during his last go around, questions over whether or not Dion is, like Obama, merely bluffing remain lefitimate.

As such, the Conservative counter-branding effort in this case ironically tries to drive Dion closer to potentially unpopular policies of the man he would likely most like to emulate, even if Jack Layton is outdoing him on that particular front right now.

This subtext of the ad -- and reminders that many key details about Dion's Green Shift plan have been postponed in Campbellian fashion until after the election -- seem to be meant to work together to encourage voters to question Dion's genuinity and ponder the economic consequences of such a move.

The ad also represents a notable shift in the overall Conservative campaign -- moving away from tactics of ridicule and toward serious debate.

This particular ad is a bold move for the Conservative party. It will be interesting to see what kind of effect it has on the campaign.

Ignatieff denounces diesel tax cut despite Liberal Green Shift offering similar deal

Today, Prime Minister Stephen Harper promised to cut the excise tax on diesel fuel.

Michael Ignatieff took the opportunity to claim the plan "drives a truck through their environmental credibility."

"This is just a gimmick that will make no real difference for Canadians, while actually undermining the country's ability to switch to cleaner renewable sources of energy," Ignatieff insisted. "When it comes to facing the challenge of the climate change crisis, Mr. Harper is going in the opposite direction from the international community and every responsible leader."

Excluding, ironically, Ignatieff's own.

When Dion's Green Shift plan was criticized as being perilous for farmers and truckers -- people who depend upon low diesel fuel prices in order to help ensure their livelihood -- Dion abruptly introduced additional tax cuts for farmers and truckers to offset the additional cost of diesel that would be imposed by a carbon tax, thus eliminating his own proposed incentive for farmers and truckers to reduce their diesel fuel usage.

It's rather ironic for the Liberals to be raging about the environmental impact of Harper's diesel tax cut considering that the election hadn't even begun before the Liberals started running away from their own policies.

"His approach will do nothing to help Canadians who want to end their reliance on fossil fuels and it will do nothing to help the Canadian economy which is the worst performing economy in the G7," Ignatieff insisted.

Of course, what Ignatieff is leaving out is that the Liberal Green Shift Lite -- complete with exemptions for farmers and truckers -- won't do anything to help Canadians end reliance on fossil fuels, and won't do anything to help the Canadian economy. In fact, the Liberal Green Shift Lite plan will most likely do the exact opposite.

Meanwhile, Stephane Dion insisted that Harper's diesel tax cut as evidence that he doesn't govern for the future -- merely for the next election.

Of course, considering that Dion won't answer questions about his post-Green Shift plans, Dion may want to serve the "shortsighted" accusations.

For someone who has challenged Prime Minister Harper to an "honest debate" concerning his Green Shift plan, Dion and company are having a lot of difficulty keeping their story straight.

Branding is crucial for the Liberal party

For "Jack Layton and the NDP" (as he and his colleagues are often so eager to put it), "change" is the Obama-esque theme of their election campaign.

But that's territory they're going to have to fight for, as the Liberal party is promising sweeping changes to the country's tax structure that could very well change the country at a fundamental level.

The first Liberal campaign spot, released yesterday, doesn't quite go so far in promising their Green Shift plan as that kind of fundamental change, but certainly implies as much in the subtext.

The ad is, like the opening batch of Conservative spots, an enthusiasm-themed ad. Promising to "make the environment and economy work together" and "make polluters pay", the spot in question plays to a growing impression of Stephane Dion as a man of vision.

How far that vision extends, and whether or not Canadians favour it are different matters entirely.

Regardless, the ad seems to explain why the producers of the infamous Liberal attack ads of 2005/06 was available to go to work on the NDP's advertising -- instead of the stark, somewhat frightening tone of past Liberal ads (particularly those under Paul Martin's leadership reign), this ad speaks to a positive, optimistic space in Canadian politics.

The imagery in the ad is almost exclusively light and cheerful (with the obvious exception of smog-clouded smokestacks when the ad promises to "make polluters pay").

This may also mark the first time in a number of federal campaigns in which the Liberals have declined to go negative first -- this time, allowing the NDP to get their hands dirty first (unless one counts the "not a leader" and "oil splotch" ads released by the Conservatives).

One thing this ad certainly represents is the Liberals getting back to traditional business. Branding has always been an important element of any Liberal campaign, and with the NDP set to largely ignore the Liberals in favour of attacking the Conservatives, the Liberals may not need to stage a counter-branding campaign against the Conservatives at all.

By not moving to counter-brand against the Conservatives first, however, the Liberals have clearly put the ball in the Tories' court. What happens next in terms of campaign advertising will remain very much up to Stephen Harper.


(Unfortuantely, the embeddable player programmed by the Liberal party webmasters and obtained from their website is a little screwed up. Then again, this is the party that waited until 10 minutes before Stephane Dion's University of Alberta speech was scheduled to start to set up their Audio/Visual equipment.

Thanks again, organizational prowess of the Liberal party! -Ed)

Foresight missing in Dion's Green Shift plan

Yesterday, Liberal leader Stephane Dion kicked off his party's national campaign at the University of Alberta.

His speech (which will be covered in detail here at The Nexus) was followed by a Q-and-A townhall-style meeting, in which he answered a variety of questions. Some questions -- obvious softballs -- were handled fairly effectively and predictably.

Some weren't -- including a question asked about hypothetical post-Green Shift Canada, which envoked a rather perplexing non-answer:

First, the question:

"If your Green Shift plan is implimented, and is successful, inevitably what we're going to see is a decrease in the taxable greenhouse gas emissions. What I'm wondering is what would a Liberal government do to make up that lost revenue?"

And the distinct non-answer:

"If we decrease the level of emissions, then the revenue of the tax will go down.

I pray it will happen!

And at that time, you know what? We'll have our revenues coming from the green economy we'll have created. Good taxpayers and good companies that will not exist in a small number. They'll be everywhere in the country.

I will give you an example: Denmark.

Denmark at first it suffered a shock. They were closing the country on weekends. I mean that you had to drive elsewhere on Saturday and Sunday. They decided to come to tax on fuel. And increase the tax on fuel. It was controversial. At that time they were 99% dependent on oil. Today, they have 0% dependence on oil. They have full employment, and this small country is exporting to the world a third of its windmills. If it's possible there, why not here?

I hope that the carbon tax one day will not exist because we'll have so few greenhouse gas emissions. It's not for tomorrow. Today, we are the worst among the world for greenhouse comissions.

We have a lot to do and it's not possible to do effectively if you don't put a price on greenhouse gas emissions. We come with good programs, good incentives, with education.

For a significant rsult, you put the price greehouse gas emissions and reduce the tax on your income, your investments, your savings and, if you're in business, your profit."

So essentially, one of two things can be taken away from Stephane Dion in this distinct non-answer:

Either Stephane Dion has no plan for the future -- no post-Green Shift plan to restore the inevitable lost revenue due to decreased taxable greenhouse gas emissions -- or he imagines that all this lost revenue will essentially be made up by exporting windmills. Somehow.

If Stephane Dion indeed has no post-Green Shift plan, one could at least applaud his honesty if he were to clearly and openly admit so.

But the alternative explanation, sadly, does not hold water. After all, even if Canada does experience the Green industry boom that Stephane Dion imagines, one has to remember that, under his Green shift tax plan, the profits of such companies -- and the incomes of their employees -- will be taxed at a lower level. The likelihood of such revenues making up for the lost revenue from decreased greenhouse gas emissions isn't terribly likely. It simply isn't mathematically feasible.

Considering that Dion's post-Green Shift numbers just don't seem to add up (at least not in any realistic fashion) the only real alternative seems to be a post-Green Shift tax grab -- increasing tax rates (even if only to 2006 rates) in order to recover the lost revenue.

After all, Stephane Dion is the individual who has spent the last 18 months decrying the lost revenue from the Conservative government's tax cuts.

Someone in the Liberal party needs to remind Stephane Dion that it will take more than prayer to make his Green Shift plan successful. It will take an eye to the future.

If Stephane Dion really has no post-Green Shift plan, big questions remain about whether or not Canadians can trust him to impliment it.