In the Conservative Bubble

A blurry picture from my camera.

I attended a Conservative campaign rally with the McMaster "Vote Mob" on April 7th, where students demonstrated at both Stephen Harper's and Michael Ignatieff's campaign stops in Hamilton (I did not commit enough time to stop by the Liberal rally later that night, as my organic chemistry textbook was calling for me). After giving our names at two separate occasions, providing organizers with our addresses, and going through security, we were let into the sea of blue. [One guy even asked me what I had behind the new words on my sign, since I'd converted an old Halloween prop for the vote mob sign. No, it was nothing anti-Harper, just a barely visible "Only 47 Days until Beethoven's Birthday!"]

Even with a non-partisan agenda, we were kept in the back of the crowd (granted, we were late arrivals), and pretty much out of view of the main cameras, and Stephen Harper. He never even acknowledged our presence, but then again, there's no surprise that he didn't stray from his prepared speech on the teleprompter.  The event started with his triumphant voice on the booming speakers, the soundtrack for his main campaign ad*. Harper was then introduced by one of the local candidates, and gave his standard speech promising to preserve a good economy, make Canada great, and frame the "unnecessary" election as a choice between a "clear, stable, majority government" and an "unstable coalition", to the joy of his crowd of supporters cheering "yes! without raising taxes!" And then he left. No questions taken. I don't even recall any handshakes. And that was it.

This is what many journalists and critics call a "bubble campaign". Canada's own "bubble boy", Harper, and the Conservative campaign, is kept away from as much criticism as possible, living within a happy feedback cycle of support in an opposition-free environment.

The editorial cartoon from Yorkton this Week.

You have a bubble campaign when:

• You don't answer any questions from the public at your rallies (recall Duceppe in debate: "I would like to congratulate Mr. Harper for answering a question from a citizen for the first time in this campaign")
• You allow five questions from the media per day
• You ask supporters to pre-register before attending rallies
• You screen your rally attendees 
• You kick out students from your rally because they have a Facebook profile picture with Ignatieff
• You exclude a veteran from a rally because they hold different views
• You rarely attend public events
• Your supporters chant your name for a full minute for you to ignore a question on terrorism
• Your party's candidates are skipping some of their all-candidate's debates in 50 out of 308 ridings, including Julian Fantino and not Bev Oda (she's still running?!?) 
• Your Youtube videos block comments and disable ratings (none of the other four parties do this)

I find this bubble campaign very troubling. How can you be accountable if you don't account for the opposition? How can you be "Here for Canada" if you don't listen to Canadians? On May 2nd, let's burst Harper's bubble, and vote anything but Conservative. 

*Side note: Harper's campaign ad is much like Tim Pawlenty's book promo, both embedded below. Tim Pawlenty was a former Governor of Minnesota, and a potential candidate for the Republican primaries in preparation for the US 2012 Presidential Elections. A very comedic analysis of Pawlenty's ad by Stephen Colbert can be found here.

A Harry Tsai Update

Last week, I wrote a note with five reasons explaining "Why I Can't Support Scarborough-Agincourt Candidate Harry Tsai" (Part 1 | Part 2), largely focusing on the Conservatives' ethnic targeting and the underwhelming campaign (i.e. campaign advertisement in Mandarin but not in English, no riding-specific policy/issues presented on the website). As the polls have shown, a lot can change in a week, and so here's an update.

I emailed the campaign team showing my concern, with a link to the blog posts. I received an official response on Sunday morning (the 24th), with the following four points:

1. The Conservative party has several promotional videos and one of them was done in Mandarin which Harry was in it. The video is posted on our web page simply because Harry was in it. We had no intention to target any single ethnic group. As you may also notice, we do not have many other languages but English on the webpage simply because Harry always promote multicultural integration, not isolation. If you really care, please speak to those who knows Harry, and you will find out more about what he has done for the community in the last ten years. 

2. As for ethnic targeting, our target is not lmited to Chinese voters. Historically, Chinese voter turn out is low, and of course, we are encouraginging Chinese voters to vote, but at the same time, we are getting support from many other residents in the riding.

3. Harry was nominated on March 28 and the election was called on April 2. We only had one week to prepare for the election and we do apologize not having all the information ready at once, but we keep working on it. We have recently post up more materials on our website, please have a look.

4. We encourage you to work in any campaign office and understand the campaign work.

Thus, my comments on the election campaign video offered only in Mandarin can be shifted away from the specific Tsai campaign and towards the overall Conservative strategy. It's difficult for me to tell since I can't understand the video - this goes back to the overall management of the Conservatives' Youtube channel. Blocking comments and ratings makes the party seem closed off to public opinion, while they should utilize some of Youtube's features, like subtitles. These would allow the videos to be more inviting and effective to the community, and would not give the impression that a campaign is only featuring an ad for a specific ethnicity.

The next two points in (1) aren't as relevant. Supporting 'multicultural integration' does not necessitate having information available mainly in English - I don't mind if it's available in several languages - I just want to make sure that it is available in English, at the very least. In regards to speaking to those who know Harry, I have - and did so before writing the post in the first place. For ethnic targeting, my main complaint goes to the Conservative party, and the superficial approaches to catching the ethnic vote is still present, and continues to bother me.

Back to the Tsai campaign, there have been updated links posted between Sunday and Tuesday that pleased me, providing more insight into what Harry Tsai could bring to Scarborough-Agincourt. His "about" page links to the candidates' interviews and a personal interview. Content is good, and finally I can read up on his personal opinions and ideas for this riding, though I have trouble accepting "lack of time" explanation given that my post was written three weeks after his nomination, ample time to set up a few pages and prepare a few statements on what he feels is best for Scarborough-Agincourt. In a matter of hours, I was able to pour out more content on my blog - so this key information shouldn't be coming out with a week left in the election. Of course, better late than never. Thus, this post addresses my first three concerns. On the fourth, petty issue on typos, I have noticed some minor changes, though the four I highlighted remain untouched. Oh well.

Overall, I am pleased with the changes on the website, and their response is worth updating from the previous posts, though my stance on the campaign stays intact.

Vote Mobs

Rick Mercer has seemingly been elevated to an idol-like status among Canadian youth, and has become a key figure in this federal election, especially among younger voters. If you don't know him, he's a political satirist on CBC and hosts the Rick Mercer Report, one of the channel's most popular shows (link to his site). He has hosted shows like The Greatest Canadian, and frequently tours the country to celebrate Canadian culture, and has stopped by many universities. His show is famous for his rants, where he spends a minute or two in front of a camera in the alleyways of Toronto. Here's one from the end of March encouraging students to vote:

And with the phrase, "do the unexpected", university students have been driven to do just that. University of Guelph students started the trend of flash mobs, where large groups of students suddenly gather together and do something as a group to encourage students to vote, before dissipating back into the general crowd. This has been mixed in with vote mobs, where groups of students run around campus with signs and Canadian flags, raising awareness of the election and defying student apathy. The Globe and Mail features an article discussing Rick Mercer's impact on Canadian youth, and links to several vote mob videos. Below is the first one by the University of Guelph.

A very traditional "vote mob" approach. 

These mobs were non-partisan and aimed to raise awareness, and communicate to politicians that the student vote matters. On April 7, both Harper and Ignatieff came to Hamilton, and McMaster planned a rally of its own. The CBC covered the vote mob here, though a bit more like a rally, and below is a video.

We first rallied outside the Hamilton convention centre, keeping our distance from the anti-Harper demonstrators and waved our signs and flags at the cars on Main street. We shouted phrases like "students vote!, students vote!", sang O Canada, and modified McMaster spirit cheers with a focus on voting. After a while, with the Harper rally getting started, we approached the door of the convention centre, asking if we could join in. Only hours after Harper had apologized for kicking students out of a rally because of their Facebook picture, the pressure was on, and after about a 10-15 minutes delay, the organizers let us in. 

After giving them our names, passing the first security check, leaving bags behind, and giving them our names and our addresses at a second checkpoint, we entered the Conservative rally room, where the Stephen Harper ad was playing. We stayed for the length of the rally, though no questions to the public were taken, and he did not acknowledge our presence. The students then walked 8 blocks to the 7 pm Liberal rally, and as seen in the video above, were able to ask Ignatieff a question, though most of the students were not able to fit in the packed room.

More recently, McMaster produced another Vote Mob video, partially inspired by the viral UBC lip dub. We filmed it on April 15th, and the video was out just a few days later. 

Lastly, a recent interview with Rick Mercer showed his support for the Vote Mobs. It's certainly been an interesting twist to this election, and I hope more students will be involved in these events in this election and in upcoming elections. 

Jim Karygiannis: Another Critical Analysis

In light of my recent posts on Harry Tsai, a critical analysis of Jim Karygiannis is warranted. Jim Karygiannis is the the incumbent Member of Parliament for Scarborough-Agincourt, and has been representing the Liberal Party since the riding's formation in 1980. I have previously described his performance as "lacklustre", and here's why:

1) Jim Karygiannis has one of the worst attendance records of Canadian MPs
Attendance records have recently been brought into the public spotlight when Jack Layton referred to stats showing Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff as the MP that had missed the most votes. howdtheyvote.ca is a very helpful website, not only showing the absences of each MP, but also the numbers of words they have each spoken and how'd they vote on each issue. In the most recent session of Parliament, Jim Karygiannis ranked 5th out of 305 MPs (there are three vacancies), missing or abstaining 93 votes. His poor record is consistent, ranking 8th in the previous, session of parliament, with 52 absences. The first session only had one vote, and he was present for that one, but looking back at the 39th Parliament, he ranked 15th and 30th in the two sessions in the number of absences.

The obvious question here is, where was Jim Karygiannis? He explains in an article by the Globe and Mail that "family obligations are first and foremost and paramount". He also says that his constituents are his "bread and butter", meaning that he likes to spend time in the riding instead of in Ottawa. He also goes abroad a lot, and tops the list of visiting countries on trips sponsored by foreign countries or special interest groups, justifying these trips with the fact that Scarborough-Agincourt is very diverse. This is not necessarily appropriate justification for his very high absence rate - it is still disappointing, and a big enough concern for constituents to feel that they are not represented in Parliament. So let's look at what he actually does...

2) He doesn't say much in Parliament for Scarborough Agincourt
Besides missing several cotes, he also ranks 25th out of 305 MPs in terms of "Words Spoken", with 3475 words, compared to the average of around 26 000. (side note: what does Conservative MP Greg Thomson and NDP MP Jim Maloway do in Parliament? The former hasn't said a word all session, and the latter has spewed out 365 000, three times more than the second most talkative MP, nearly ten times more than Harper, and enough for a thousand words a day in a year... and they don't even work all year!)

For Jim, this subpar number shouldn't be much of a surprise - he does miss a lot of votes after all. Glancing at what those words were, his main focus in Parliament was on foreign crises. Of 15 quotes provided by how'd they vote, several were about emergency and disaster relief, including Japan, Egypt, and Libya (4 of them on Libya alone). Other quotes involved condemning the government of Bahrain for its crackdown in March, 2011, condemning attacks on Ahmadi Muslims in Pakistan, and asking Parliament to acknowledge the attack by Saddam Hussein on the Kurdish people in Iraq. Not that these are bad causes, of course, but these do not help to strengthen his image of representing Scarborough-Agincourt at a federal level.

He introduced one bill in the most recent session of Parliament, slightly below the average of 1.56 bills/MP, though this number is largely because there's only a small handful of MPs that introduce most of the bills. The bill was C-319, on speed-limiters, which is set to come into effect "when it receives Royal Assent", according to the Government of Canada website. I can't vouch whether or not this is a local concern, but its purpose is to reduce the number and scale of highway disasters, and his MP site shows several comments, both for and against speed-limiters.

Lastly, he does have a page on his campaign website titled, "Issues that affect Scarborough-Agincourt". Here, he goes into many concerns he has addressed, linking to specific pages and articles on his MP website (yes, he has two sites). While I am pleased that he does address these issues specifically on his site, these links do not provide any information after 2009, which leads me to two conclusions: 1) no one has bothered or had the time to update his site, which is disappointing and shows a lack of communication with his constituents, or 2) he hasn't done anything for a year and a half. Both options aren't great.

3) Poor website design
This, like the typo/mistake issue with harrytsai.ca, is a relatively minor issue, but I have a pet peeve with poor website content and design, and since I brought it up with Harry Tsai's website, I'll bring it here as well. I won't go into page-by-page details since there are so many more of them, but here are a few things I noticed that I would have expected to see fixed on a campaign site, casting doubt over the time and effort that is placed into communicating with constituents:

• The text on this comment page is disordered and very messy 
• Edit needed: "Under Construction Additional Languages are being added" 
• Fonts throughout the site are inconsistent, giving the impression that its content is cut and pasted from various sources 
• White text on the side bar make certain words very difficult to see. 
• It is too difficult to find "other languages" - people who many not necessarily read English must navigate through the site, click "Different Languages", and then find their language. Usually, these other languages are provided directly on the landing page, in case the reader cannot read English
• The first "health care" link of this page links to a word document for no apparent reason. The document looks a bit like a snapshot of a webpage, but there are no actual links, so it's rather useless. 
• The campaign site is not very user friendly - the huge banner with the blurry picture is more of an annoyance than anything else. 

But petty issues aside, I will say that there is a lot of content on his website, much of it relevant to both local issues and topics addressed on the Federal Liberal agenda. 

4) Sign issue
Something to look into, Karygiannis has been accused of threatening to call the police if a veterinarian were to take down Karygiannis signs on the force bordering the campaign area and the vet's office. Just released a few hours before writing this, on April 20th, on the Toronto Sun.

5) Another strategic voting issue
I'll end this post on the same note as I did with Harry Tsai. If this riding is a strong Liberal stronghold, then your vote comes down to the party you support the most. So take a look at their platforms and decide which party you'd like to donate your $2 dollar vote subsidy to.

UPDATE: Here's a nice interview of three main candidates, and what they each stand for.

If you have any comments, corrections, or suggestions you want to offer, feel free to contact me. There's a comment box below, an anonymous form on the left side bar, and you can always throw me an email at ay.savethetigers@gmail.com.

Why I can't support Scarborough-Agincourt candidate Harry Tsai (Part 2)

Part 1 Part 3 (UPDATE)

UPDATE: Here's a nice interview of three main candidates, and what they each stand for.

This post is the second in a series on why I can't support Taiwanese-Canadian candidate Harry Tsai, representing the Conservative Party of Canada in a Liberal stronghold against incumbent Jim Karygiannis. I am happy to see our community members stepping up to politics, but (1) I am unimpressed with a campaign closed to public opinion and a campaign video only available in Mandarin, and (2) I am disappointed with the "ethnic vote" targeting of the Conservatives. I discuss three more issues below:


3) The campaign website is filled with general messages from Harper and the Conservative Party, with no discussion on local issues.  

If you're going to run on a campaign to better represent our riding, you've got to discuss some local issues. But these local concerns are not discussed anywhere on his website, instead featuring the same statements that the Conservative party have been releasing. Here's a quick breakdown of each subpage:

i) "Home": On the 20th of April, I see a post titled "Passover 2011 Greetings from the Prime Minister", a message from Harper to the Jewish community from April 18th. No mention of Harry Tsai or Scarborough-Agincourt, odd for the home page of an election candidate. There is, however, a media panel featuring five pictures in rotation. A majority of them are generic conservative party ads: a picture of Flaherty discussing the economy, one of Harper on taxcuts, and a third picture of Dion, Layton, and Duceppe, on the issue of an Ignatieff coalition. Two of them are pictures of Harry Tsai, linking to the media articles featuring photos taken at campaign rallies and support galas, but both links say nothing about specific issues (here's ALL the text on both pages):

Brings Senior Cares to Scarborough-Agincourt
At a rally held at the Formosa Evergreen Senior Citizens Center on Friday (April 15, 2011), Tsai received warm support and reception from community leaders and members living across GTA. Supporters cheered “Get elected! Get elected” and “Send Harry to Ottawa” during the event in the hope that Tsai would make history and become the first Taiwanese-Canadian to participate in Canadian politics at the legislative level.

Tsai’s father, Tsai Ching and wife, Theresa also took part in the rally.

It is about time that Taiwanese-Canadians start participating in Canada’s politics, his father said.

Ontario Chinese for Conservative Party Gala

Attended Ontario Chinese for Conservative Party Campaign Gala organized by the Federation of Ontario Traditional Chinese Medicine Association. Great crowd!! Great support!!

Not much is said about policy or local concerns. Even with the title "Brings senior cares to Scarborough-Agincourt", there was no talk on the page about what these senior cares were, and what was being done about them. But this is just the home page, so let's not judge for sparse content and move on.

ii) the "about" page: A brief summary of past achievements, accompanied with a picture of Tsai and Harper. Besides resume-like points, there are a list of three phrases: "enhance youth development", "take care of elders" and "promote multiculturalism". Out of all the pages, this is arguably the closest Harry Tsai gets to addressing local issues. Yet, there are no details or plans given - these points are more like general concerns to the party, if not all of Canada, instead of specific community issues.

iii) "News Updates": Here's a picture. How many of these points deal with local issues? How many of these are the same statements from the Conservative Party of Canada? The first two posts link to what I mentioned above on the Home page. Otherwise, everything else is just another federal campaign ad. I have no idea what Harry Tsai is offering, specific to Scarborough-Agincourt.

iv) "Riding": A map of Scarborough-Agincourt with a link to Elections Canada.

v) "Events": A list of upcoming meet-the-candidates events and the dates of the advance polls and election. 

vi) "Media": The first half are a few photo albums of campaign events. The second half embeds six videos (well, I guess he can embed them), including the previously mentioned (in part 1) videos of Harry Tsai's Mandarin campaign clip and a few minutes at one of his rallies. There are also two Harper ads, and two ads by other Conservative candidates of visible minorities endorsing the Harper Conservatives.

vii) "Contact": A simple form page, along with an address and number. I've also noticed that there's no email address. While the form takes care of getting messages through, removing email as a channel of communication is not something I see very often.

Of these seven pages, I do not know much about Harry Tsai and what he stands for, other than his backing of the values set out by the Conservative Party of Canada. This does not set him apart from Jim Karygiannis, who, at the very least, features some local issues and personally written messages (well, at least by his office, instead of only linking to the main party's website). With no local issues brought up on his campaign site with less than two weeks until the election, I see little backing for his claim of "bringing Scarborough-Agincourt back to Ottawa".

4) The campaign website is riddled with typos and mistakes.

This issue is a bit of a pet peeve for me - a bit hypocritical too as I'm sure you've found some mistakes in my writing by this point. But I expect better from a campaign site - there has to be someone editing the posts that are made on your website. If you can't manage to keep mistakes out of a few short posts, how can I trust you to maintain good habits in writing letters and parliamentary documents? How much time will you dedicate to representing Scarborough-Agincourt? The following are just a few examples I noticed on a quick skim of the website and media links:

"He serves many people including new immigrants, youth, seniors, different ethnic group."

"...Tsai received warm support and reception from community leaders and members living across GTA."

"- Actively involved in raising funds to support disasters."

"2011-03-27 PM Ralley"

Also keep in mind that there aren't that many words on the campaign site to start with. Yes, this is a minor issue, but once again, it's a bothersome one for me, and definitely a turn off when it comes to choosing a candidate to support.

5) Placing your ~$2.00 in better hands

The last issue I want to bring up is a rather important one: strategic voting. I suppose this is a necessary evil of any election with a first-past-the-post system, and I will keep this short because I don't want to discuss all the possible scenarios. I'll say this: there is little doubt that Karygiannis will be re-elected, whether or not you like him. Scarborough-Agincourt is not considered by any party, or news site, to be a battleground riding, and I've gotten this notion from Harry Tsai supporters as well. 

If a winner has essentially been decided already, your vote comes down to a donation to a political party, a value slightly higher than $2.00 (it's $1.75 of 2003 dollars adjusted for inflation). Here, I'd suggest reading up a bit more on each party's platforms before voting, instead of casting your support behind a fellow community member when you're actually supporting the party they're running for. Remember, these per-vote subsidies don't go to your candidate - they go to their party. 

Think before you vote. 

If you have any comments, corrections, or suggestions you want to offer, feel free to contact me. There's a comment box below, an anonymous form on the left side bar, and you can always throw me an email at ay.savethetigers@gmail.com.

An Update/Follow Up from the Harry Tsai Campaign

Why I can't support Scarborough-Agincourt candidate Harry Tsai (Part 1)

A Part 3 Update and Follow-Up

There has been some excitement in the Taiwanese community, as Harry Tsai, the first Taiwanese-Canadian to run for Parliament, has been campaigning in my home riding of Scarborough-Agincourt. Representing the Conservative Party of Canada in a Liberal stronghold against incumbent Jim Karygiannis (who has occupied the seat for this riding since its formation) is a tough challenge, and many local Taiwanese have flocked to support him. I am proud to be Taiwanese-Canadian and am happy to see our community members stepping up to politics, but even given Karygiannis' lacklustre performance in the House of Commons, I do not support Harry Tsai in the upcoming election, and here's five reasons why:

1) The Campaign Video: Not in English, and closed to debate
As you could probably guess by my letters to candidates in my school riding on the issue of "special ballot" voting, accessibility is a big issue for me. I want to be able to get to know my candidates, understand the democratic process, and communicate to the Canadian government. Like any young voter, I headed to his election site, harrytsai.ca, to learn more about him, and was greeted by some news-bites, and two videos on the sidebar. I will discuss the content in reason number three, as what drew my attention first were the videos.

The first was the Harper campaign video with the quote on Canada being the best country in the world. The second was of Harry Tsai, titled "Harry-Mandarin". Not unexpectedly, the 30 second ad was in Mandarin, featuring Tsai saying something about Harper. My description is vague because, granted, my Mandarin isn't great - but there are many other people in this riding - in fact, a majority of voters - that do not understand Mandarin. To my surprise, this video was not provided in any of Canada's official languages, and the website at the time, did not provide any other clips of Harry Tsai speaking in English (or French), or at least provide subtitles to his video in any other language.

[To keep this post up-to-date, a video was posted on Monday, April 18th, that did offer a few minutes of Harry Tsai speaking English, but this clip comes late in the election (with two weeks before ballots are cast) and offers no comparable replacement for an English campaign advertisement.]

Besides the video not being offered in English or French, making it difficult for me to know more about him, the ad blocks any commenting to their videos, along with all other ads from the Conservative Party of Canada. No thumbs up or down, either. By blocking off response from voters, it is difficult for the candidates to gauge the effectiveness of their campaign, and removes a channel for discussion. By purposely disabling comments, I've been given the impression that the issues that they are talking about are not open to debate, and that they are ignoring the voices of Canadians.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ak9t0OMm2Do
Above is a link to his election campaign video, if you haven't watched it yet. I would have loved to embed it, but that's blocked too. Why the campaign would deliberately change the default settings to prevent others from sharing his video on other sites and blogs puzzles me, and this issue does not send me a positive image of his election campaign.


2) Conservative Ethnic Targeting
Harry Tsai running in this Scarborough-"Asiancourt" is just one of the many examples of ethnic targeting in this election. As a riding with nearly 70% of the population identifying themselves as a visible minority and more than half of those Chinese (2001 census), an Asian candidate is part of the strategy of targeting immigrant and minority voters. Similarly, Chungsung Leung and Gin Siow are running in Willowdale and Trinity-Spadina, respectively, both ridings with a significantly high population of Asian voters.

But let's look at specific examples. It is no secret that targeting the ethnic vote is part of the Conservative strategy. In this document and powerpoint presentation, sent to Conservative candidates by Jason Kenney, Minister of Citizenship, Immigration, and Multiculturalism, the Conservatives outline their goal of targeting "very ethnic" ridings, singling out ethnic and "very ethnic" communities.

Click to enlarge

One of their slides even outline a sample campaign advertisement.

Look familiar? Here are some screenshots from the Harry Tsai campaign video mentioned earlier (which, of course, I can't embed).

Harry Tsai's campaign is a clear example of the Conservative's targeting of ethnic voters, and this is further emphasized by point 1, where his campaign video is only offered in Mandarin. I am not saying that focusing on the concerns of visible minorities is a bad thing, but in this campaign, (along with the photo-op in Etobicoke Centre where community leaders were asked to bring representatives dressed in "ethnic costumes"), the Conservative approach to immigrants and visible minorities has been superficial, and driven with the purpose of winning key ridings.

As a Taiwanese-Canadian, I want to vote against this superficial Conservative approach to multiculturalism, and thus, cannot support Harry Tsai in this election. I want to see the integration of visible minorities into Canadian culture, instead of singling them out as a demographic and appealing to them with token gestures.

This issue has taken up more space that I would've hoped, so I'll split it into two parts, with issues 3-5 in a following post. I hope you'll take more time into deciding who to vote for in this upcoming election, instead of jumping to a candidate just because he comes from a similar background.

UPDATE: Here's a nice interview of three main candidates, and what they each stand for.

Part 2 Part 3 (Update)

ADFW Debate

Wrapping up my second year with two essays handed in Monday morning, I decided to watch the all-candidate’s debate in my school riding, ADFW (Ancastar-Dundas-Flamborough-Westdale). Since I spend most of my year in Hamilton, I’ve decided to vote here in the 2011 election, and will be casting my ballot by “special voting”, with instructions and recommendations thankfully given by local candidates.

I arrived at the debate moments before it started, lucky enough to find a seat. By 6:00 pm, many people were standing, with the organizers scrambling to find more chairs in the building. Turnout was definitely larger than expected – but they didn’t seem to be expecting many to start with. Chair count went from about 75 to 150, as chairs of various sorts were brought in from nearby rooms.

Pamphlets from all the representative parties were being handed out (in addition to those already set on the chairs), and soon I had a pile of ads with various colours and agendas. As the moderator began to speak, I looked around to see about two thirds of the people sitting. There were a few representatives from each campaign; MacTV was present; other notable attendees included outgoing McMaster Student Union President (and Artsci) Mary Koziol, President-elect Matthew Dillon-Leitch, Presidential Candidate Alicia Ali, and MSU Exec Joe Finkle.

The candidates were seated and introduced in alphabetical order. We had five parties present: Dave Braden of the Liberals, Jamile Ghaddar from the Marxist-Leninist Party, NDP candidate Nancy McBain, Green Party candidate Peter Ormond, and David Sweet, the incumbent Conservative MP. Each were given four minutes to introduce themselves before 80 minutes of debate, where questions alternating from those submitted anonymously online and those asked by the audience would be asked. Candidates had 2 minutes to answer, and an optional 1 minute rebuttal period. 

I was quite unimpressed with the opening statements. Dave Braden had a strong environmental spin to his message, but was quiet and seemed a bit tired. Two interesting notes, throughout the debate, he seemed to be writing down notes most often (by far), and was sipping out of a Timmies Cup, which I later noticed was being refilled by water periodically. Jamile Ghaddar was the only candidate that stood up when she spoke. She introduced herself as a former Mac Student fighting against the "parties of the rich". Nancy MacBain also mentioned her background as a Mac student, and she is still working at Mac today. Her message resonated with Jack Layton's, lumping the Liberals and Conservatives together and placing the NDP as the alternative. David Ormond teaches at Mohawk College, but I found him to be raising all sorts of issues, and felt that he was all over the place. David Sweet gave the same Conservative spiel I've been hearing throughout the election, i.e. "you're voting for jobs vs. coalition", "we need a strong stable national majority Conservative government", etc.

The first question, one submitted online, was on International Development, asking how the government could modernize the system to make its implementation more efficient. The first speaker shifted to the right, and Ghaddar started out, quickly stating that Canada must embrace an anti-violence stance before even thinking about international development, and turning the discussion into an anti-war, "out of Libya" speech. MacBain and Ormond brought the debate to "more jobs" and "climate change", respectively. Back on track, Sweet, he discussed how the Conservatives had been adjusting their aid contributions to more effective and direct causes. Braden talked about a "balanced approach", to involve short term and long term issues, and restore any foreign aid spending cut by the Conservatives. Only Ormond and Ghaddar took their rebuttals: Ormond quipped up a statement on the Conservative's military spending and how just 1% of that funding could significantly benefit foreign aid, rallying the support of the crowd and placing David Sweet on the defense; Ghaddar took the additional minute to further her anti-violence support.

The next question, also online because no one had stepped up to the microphone yet, was on the Health Accord renewal in 2014. Ormond promised to review costs and reduce overcosts, particularly in pharmaceuticals. He also said that he would revisit the health system with a focus on prevention over treatment, and mentioned his party's proposed tax on junk food. Sweet mentioned the Conservatives' plan to increase healthcare funding by 6% annually, and the need for a 1st ministers meeting. Both Braden and MacBain stated that this 6% was insufficient; Braden announced his party's plan to compliment the 6% increase with other progras, as well as a tax on junk food; MacBain also committed more funding. Ghaddar attacked the junk food tax, saying that most of the people who consume junk food are poor, and moved on to criticizing party promise as lies, and stating that what is really unhealthy for Canada is not junk food, but the police abuses in the G8/G20 summit. Sweet did not take a rebuttal - Ghaddar took advantage of this by stating that he did not reply to her issue of the G8/G20 summit, and Ormond added "Mr. Sweet probably isn't allowed to say anything".

With David Sweet on the defensive with four other left-leaning parties and a rather left-leaning crowd, the next question didn't help. I'm surprised the moderator allowed it, but the audience member questioned an alleged comment that Sweet had made on feminism: "I believe that feminists... are frustrated women, unable to find proper male leadership." Unfortunately, Sweet was last in the rotation, but when he did speak, he quickly denied that the quote was not his (which is true). Braden had said that the question did not deserve a response, quickly summing up the concern as a non-issue and that Canada is going forward on promoting women's rights. Ghaddar attacked Harper's cutting of First Nations Womens programs; MacBain echoed these statements and said that the Harper government had not addressed the issue of pay equity. Ormond brought up Elizabeth May being silenced from the debate, arguing that the presence of a woman would have changed the tone of the debate for the better. Other than correcting the misattributed quote, Sweet stated that the funding of women's programs were never cut - money was moved between organizations to support more effective programs, and that overall spending had not decreased. Braden, seemingly more energetic than his start, had a rebuttal, mentioning the Conservatives' unequal treatment of male and female cabinet ministers (expelling a female minister and retaining a male cabinet minister for similar charges), and accused the government of segmenting Canadians into debates of men vs. women, First Nations vs. other Canadians, etc., despite preaching a message of national unity.

The fourth question, from the internet, was on leadership skills necessary for Prime Minister. MacBain said that the most important quality was honestly, quickly adding that the Liberals or Conservatives were not to be trusted. Ormond said that listening to Canadians, being transparent, and simply trying one's best were key skills for any leader. Sweet discussed honestly, integrity, and vision for Canada. Braden stated that "honestly, integrity, and vision" are repeated endlessly, but that other parties did not live up to the message. He discussed the importance of telling the truth, and criticized Harper's mistruths about fighter jet and G8/G20 spending. Ghaddar emphasized a leader that would not support violence, and promoted an event next week against police brutality. In their rebuttal, Ormond returned to the theme of taking money from defense, and placing those billions in cities, adding in his support for parliamentary reform and proportional representation. Sweet put out a few specific numbers on jets, while Braden casts doubt by questioning the numbers thrown around in the election and that the Conservatives have not taken responsibility for their mistakes. MacBain followed with this idea, and added accountability as an important quality.

The fifth question, from the line of people now standing behind the microphone, was asking each candidate if their party, if elected, would restore funding to KAIROS and Prison funds. David Sweet quickly defended his Party's stance of cutting funding to KAIROS, stating that money was being put into more direct programs. He also said that prison farms were ineffective, and reiterated that money was never cut, just placed in different areas. Braden said that he was not too familiar with the KAIROS issue but would look into it, and placed his support behind prison farms, while changing the topic to further his support for farming and agriculture. Ghaddar said that the KAIROS issue was just another example of Harper's control over anything he disagreed with, explaining that the funding was cut due to Harper's distaste in the program's links to Palestine. She added that reform to the nation's prison system was needed. MacBain repeated the previous to candidates, saying that she would look into KAIROS more and pledged for prison system reform, stating that prison farms are effective. Ormond accused the Conservatives of muting voices of organizations like KAIROS, and furthering this claim by mentioning the Conservative's desire to cut party subsidies (also bringing back that May was muted in the debates) He then praised KAIROS for their involvement in climate change conferences. In their rebuttals, Ghaddar discussed the blocking of voices in the G8/G20 summit, Ormond restated that the Conservations were not hearing voices, and urged everyone to familiarize themselves with the Green Party platform. Sweet said that any resubmission by KAIROS would be judged and compared fairly for effectiveness.

Agriculture was the focus of the sixth question, detailing whether foreign food standards should be raised to equal local food standards, and how candidates would support the local farming industry. Ghaddar said that the government could not be counted on to protect the concerns of the people. MacBain voiced her concern of family farms going away, and said that she would encourage young people to become farmers, and support local food, also raising her concern of the Listeriosis crisis of last year. Ormond equated local food with healthy food, and talked about the struggle between local farmers and mega-corporations, accusing current and former governments of giving large corporations tax breaks. Sweet, looking at the question asker instead of most candidates' glancing at the audience, told her that he had and still supports Hamilton's farming industry, contributing about 1 billion in GDP. Braden outlined the Liberal's National Food Policy, where safety and food inspection were priorities, and the commitment to include 30% more Canadian-grown food in supermarkets. In rebuttal, Ormond discussed the importance of educated buyers, and his concern over the labelling of GM foods. Sweet pledged the need to open more markets and discussed the recent plans to open the beef and pork markets to China. Braden used his rebuttal to provide some background about himself, as he owns a 38 year old organic cow farm, and describes the changing landscape for agriculture.

The last question, from a first year student, was on the candidate's support on increasing the number of positions in medical school, and how the government would keep doctors in Canada. Ormond discussed the issue of getting more foreign students in our medical school system, as many qualified individuals arrive and lose all their previous credentials. Sweet reiterated his support for more discussions with the provincial ministers. Braden also stated that the country needed to be more forthcoming to immigrants and to reduce debts of doctors who work in rural areas. Ghaddar blasted the Conservatives for their supposed support for private healthcare that would reduce the number of jobs available for doctors. MacBain criticized Ghaddar for being negative, and described herself as optimistic, detailing the NDP plan to help doctors immediately and reduce debt of doctors who work in places where they are needed. Ghaddar responded saying that sehe was not bleak, just skeptical. MacBain said that her commitments were fully costed, while Ormond slipped in that he would reduce student debt by 50%, and advertised an event that would discuss the effects of water fluoridation.

The three minute closing statements were typical, reflecting the closing comments in the federal leaders' debate. Braden expressed the need to be positive and provide Canadians with immediate benefits, detailing the Liberal Family Pack. Ghaddar said that it was difficult to talk about real issues during a debate, since all parties were promising lies, and she discussed the need to stop the rich parties from controlling the nation. MacBain criticized both Harper and Ignatieff, and set the vote as a choice between practical results and partisan games. Ormond mentions how he has canvassed for the Liberals, Conservatives, and the NDP, and accuses the party system that produces similar results. He adds a spiel against nuclear power, citing the Fukushima crisis, and tells the audience to vote for change. Sweet ends off just like Harper, providing a long Harper quote on why "Canada is the best in the world" and the need for a stable Conservative majority. 

NDP and Liberal Responses to the "Special Ballot" Voting Issue

Here's the first response I received (to this letter), from Nancy MacBain of the NDP.
Received at 5:00 pm, Saturday, April 16th, 2011. Approximately 16 hours, 40 minutes from when I sent it (of course, I send it late at night, just to put that into perspective). I'm impressed.

Thanks for your thoughtful comments. I absolutely appreciate your frustration. I work at McMaster as a staff rep for CUPE 3906, which represents teaching assistants, research assistants and post-doctoral fellows. I think it's extremely important for university students to have a voice in Ottawa and I'm very upset that special ballots have been disallowed this election. The former President of the Mac NDP, Todd White (who was also active in the ADFW NDP riding association until he graduated and moved out of Hamilton) was actually the one responsible for getting a special ballot at McMaster in the first place. We are thus especially disappointed that the Mac special ballot will not be held this year.

I absolutely agree with your comments about students wanting to vote in ADFW even if they're planning on going elsewhere for the summer. In fact, when I talk to students I encourage them to vote in this riding. It's where you spend most of the year. It's where your university is located. And (to put in a partisan plug), this time a member of your own university community is running for the NDP. I've already been part of our local campaigns to reduce tuition fees and I'm running for a party that's committed to increasing federal funding for post-secondary education (which will help the restore per student funding in Ontario and reduce tuition fees), introducing a system of student grants for undergrads, reducing interest rates on student loans and putting more money into the grants that graduate students depend on.

I'm not sure if you know this, but political parties typically help their supporters get out to vote. It's common practice to drive supporters to the polls on advanced polling dates or on e-day. My campaign will do the same for our supporters at Mac and Mohawk. We'll drive you out to Rockton to vote in person by special ballot. We'll help you vote by mail (ie. if you need help with the postage or with faxing a document). We'll drive to an advanced poll or to your poll on E-Day. The other parties should do the same for their supporters.

If you or your friends want to vote NDP, but are having difficulty getting to a poll for whatever reason, just get in touch with us and we'll help you sort it out. Drop by our office at 4 Newton Avenue in Westdale (near the corner of King and Sterling), give us a call at 905-218-6500 or send us an email at nancymacbain@fed.ndp.ca.

The NDP has already spoken out against the attempt to quash the special ballot at Guelph. I've contacted the party to see if they have any plans to deal with the issue on a national level. I will also put in request to the returning office to see if there's anything that can be done about the special balloting rules.

Sincerely,

Nancy MacBain

Here's the second, a much shorter reply from Dave Braden of the Liberal Party.
Received at 5:07 pm, April 16th, 2011. Approximately 17 hours, 50 minutes from when I sent it (The first one sent out was directed to him).

Hi Austin,
Thanks very much for laying out your concerns about student voting procedures. I am investigating the changes that Elections Canada has made and am checking to see if they are offering alternatives that might help students. I'll get back to you.
I hope you'll introduce yourself to me Monday night.
Thanks
Dave

On the 17th, Dave Braden clarified the issue on his website, in this post.
As of 6:35 pm, no other replies from other candidates have been received.

The other replies will be posted as they come in.

A Letter to AFDW Candidates on "Special Ballot" Voting

Open letters to the candidates of the ADFW riding on the issue of "special ballot" voting. 

I will add their responses as they arrive.
And I've already spotted a typo, sigh.

To: Dave Braden, Liberal Candidate for Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale (info@davebraden.ca)

Dear Dave Braden,

My name is Austin Yan, a student at McMaster University, and a first time voter in the upcoming federal election. I'm sure you're well aware of the "special ballot" voting issue at the University of Guelph (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/elections-canada-puts-end-to-special-ballot-voting/article1987880), as promoted on your facebook page and campaign website. While those ballots have been declared valid, Elections Canada has decided to stop all "special ballot" stations outside of the election offices, including on-campus sites. I agree with the policy in general, since it is understandably challenging to exercise control over a non-official voting station (such as having some partisan material nearby), but this decision makes it very difficult for students to get out an vote.

Many McMaster students live in the AFDW riding for at least 8 months of a given year (more, if they're there for summer school), making this area their primary residence, in principle. But the majority of students who spend their summers outside the riding - abroad, or in their hometown - are no longer in the area on May 2nd, election day, which is well after the final exams of the regular school year. The early write days (22nd, 23nd, 25th) are inconvenient, as many students have either (i) completed their exams before then and have left the area, (ii) are visiting home for the Easter Weekend, or (iii) busy studying for, and writing exams, on the 25th. As a result, "special ballot" voting becomes a very reasonable alternative to conventional voting methods, given the timing of the election.

But in order to vote by "special ballot" in person, students must visit the election office at 812 Old Highway #8, almost a thirty minute drive from campus. Moreover, it is inaccessible by public transit, which makes the trip difficult for the majority of students that rely on the HSR, myself included. The remaining option is to register by mail - which is probably what I will resort to - as many students don't have fax machines, but this process still involves paying for postage, waiting for the voting kit, and resending the ballot. Overall, many students feel excluded from the upcoming election, and are finding the process of voting in their primary riding to be rather difficult and inaccessible.

As one of the candidates for the ADFW riding, I'm asking you how you will help make voting more accessible for students in this election, and for any upcoming elections. I am also wondering if you, or your party, will weigh in on Election Canada's decision to prevent on-campus voting stations from taking place, which easily reduces and simplifies the voting process for students.

I look forward to hearing from you via email and seeing you in the debate on Monday. I hope to hear this subject brought up then.

Thanks,

Austin Yan

Arts & Science II, McMaster University

To: David Sweet, Conservative Candidate for Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale (info@davidsweet.ca)

Dear David Sweet,

My name is Austin Yan, a student at McMaster University, and a first time voter in the upcoming federal election. I have emailed you in the past on two occasions, and was pleased to receive a speedy response on both times, especially with a detailed response on the issue of engaging McMaster students.  

I'm sure you're aware of the "special ballot" voting issue at the University of Guelph (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/elections-canada-puts-end-to-special-ballot-voting/article1987880), where votes at an on-site special ballot station set up by the returning officer were questioned on legitimacy. 

... continued word for word with the previous email to Dave Braden.  

To: Nancy MacBain, NDP Candidate for Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale (rebecca@strung.me)

To: Peter Ormond, Green Party Candidate for Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale (peter.ormond@greenparty.ca)

Dear Nancy MacBain/Peter Ormond,

My name is Austin Yan, a student at McMaster University, and a first time voter in the upcoming federal election. I'm sure you're aware of the "special ballot" voting issue at the University of Guelph (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/elections-canada-puts-end-to-special-ballot-voting/article1987880), where votes at an on-site special ballot station set up by the returning officer were questioned on legitimacy. 

... continued word for word with the previous email to Dave Braden.  

Coalitions, and CBC Comment of the Day

Sarcasm on the comment boards always amuse me. Here's one from a CBC article discussing the Green Party carbon tax by "broughad", in response to a post by "DJ_Winn":

DJ_Winn wrote: "We have too many parties in this Country to ever make real progress anymore."

I agree. I've had enough of democracy. Canada should be a one-party state. We can save a lot of money on all those unnecessary elections, and spend it on portraits of our Dear Leader. At least one required for each Canadian home.

In all seriousness though, the vote splitting in the current 2011 Federal Election is a bit messy. You can see on votecompass (an online tool for comparing your personal views and the platforms of the five* major political parties) that most of our parties aren't really that different: the Liberals, NDP, Bloc, and Greens stand in the same quadrant of political thought.

Polls indicate we are on the way to another Conservative minority. A majority is "elusive", and out of the hands of the Conservatives, while the Liberals are far, far behind. I'm not one to say that we should have less parties - each comes with their values and ideas. But this election is far too focussed on rhetoric - the platforms each party is bringing out are practically scripted off each other, typed out in their favourite colour of ink. The major issues occupying the news seem to be on whether Elizabeth May should be in the debates, and the Facebook-stalking habits of the Conservative Party.

If parties share similar values, why don't we hear anything about coalitions? (well, except from the fear-mongering Harper. oh wait, that's why...). Coalitions are a completely legitimate form of government, and worldwide, they're an effective way of overcoming minority governments (practically guaranteed for the fourth election in a row) and making "real progress", whatever that is. I've forgotten what it feels like. You don't need a two party system to be productive - you just need to get the parties talking. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem like anyone's going to break the ice anytime soon.

*some would argue four. or three. or two. depends who you're talking to.

Happy New Year!

In terms of my blogging, the new year comes around the start of summer. School wraps up, there's some more free time, and I try to get into the habit of writing often to keep the blood running through my fingers all year round. Like new year resolutions (and party platforms), the start of the blogging year comes with many optimistic plans... but how many of those ideas actually materialize? Well, despite that thought, I will try to be a more frequent poster this time around, and will probably keep my posts to a more manageable length: shorter. I may try to revive the themes that never really took off last year, and bring in some newer ideas in hopes to expand this site. I'll also be trying to pick up some html-speak, so hopefully I'll be able to understand  how to build a site from scratch, and incorporate some newfoundideas into this blog.

For now, there still are exams, so I'll be working on those. Still, I am trying to figure out how my resources page will work, since it's more of a stand alone page than a separate series of blog posts. While studying for organic chemistry, I am trying to make a flowchart similar to term one, and will be documenting my ideas via Google Docs Presentation, as seen below! Happy April!

[embedded file removed]