• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Election 2009?

Another one from the rumor mill (I overheard it on the radio, but didn't get the station call sign); Mr Ignatieff is trying to force an election to give himself an exit strategy and return to Harvard.

I have to admit this makes about as much sense as anything else coming down the pike, and is even consistent with the Ignatieff as a Narcissist narrative (well, he's in good company, the "Big O" also seems a lot more interested in himself than what's going on around him...).

Time will tell.

BTW, judging politicians or public figures by their media persona's is very dangerous. Mr Harper in person is quite a warm figure, the "Young Dauphin" is very dull in person, and I can name other public persons from media, politics and academia who I have personally observed to be quite different from their "public" persona.
 
Here's a youtube video of our "stuffy" Prime Minister singing a duet with Yoyo Ma at a surprise appearance at the National Arts Centre:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOt2Qp0H9G8
 
Kelly McParland: Liberals flee Dhalla and her pension bill
Posted: October 06, 2009

Read more: http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/10/06/kelly-mcparland-liberals-flee-dhalla-pension-bill.aspx#ixzz0TE700S98


Here's why I'll never be a member of Stephen Harper's super-secret cabal of strategic advisers.

Last week I explained why Ruby Dhalla's private members bill, Bill C-428, was nothing to worry about, because a) private members bills rarely pass and b) the cost, at less than $500 a year per elderly immigrant, wasn't a big deal. (A Liberal blogger pointed out the Conservatives proposed something similar in 2004)

Not only did just about every commenter on the blog disagree with me, so did other bloggers. And now even the Liberals are fleeing the scene, leaving Dhalla out there all on her own to defend a bill that is apparently as popular as an outbreak of scurvy.

The party issued a press release yesterday announcing that Judy Sgro, the critic for seniors and pensions, would vote against the bill. And she has the party leadership behind her:

“The issues of pension adequacy, coverage and security are matters that the Liberal Caucus takes very seriously,” said Ms. Sgro.  “The Leader and the Liberal Caucus feel the solutions to the challenges facing our national pension and retirement systems must be addressed holistically and with a comprehensive national vision.”

“To become law, Bill C-428 will require a Royal Recommendation as it would prompt the expenditure of between $300 and $700 million,” Ms. Sgro noted.  “Given the potential costs of Bill C-428, the systemic and financial implications of the measure must be evaluated in a larger context.  Expenditure of public dollars must never be made without careful consideration of the long-term ramifications on the public treasury.”

“Canada currently uses a number of support systems and legal requirements when assisting new Canadians,” concluded Ms. Sgro. “The Liberal Party feels the OAS system is not the most appropriate method of increasing that assistance.”

Gee, that's interesting. What happened to the party devoted to fighting poverty and bettering the lot of hard-pressed immigrants? How about all those speeches Michael Ignatieff has been giving about the good old days of Liberal compassion, and how Canadians must surely miss them? An extra billion dollars for employment insurance wasn't too much for the Liberal leadership to support, but something around half that for the elderly is too much.

Although Ms. Dhalla proposed the measure in June, only recently did it attract notice. Opposition on the web was growing and Tories claimed their phones were ringing off the hook with angry constituents.

"This change allows someone to move to Canada at age 62 and, in three years, be eligible for OAS as well as all the free medical. They will pay no income tax at all in that time as they will be kept very well in the meantime as an immigrant," wrote an angry reader to the Windsor Star. "I might add that when someone does come to Canada, they are treated royally and receive all kinds of financial aid that would never be available to any of us Canadians at any age."

Michael Ignatieff obviously decided he didn't need this. Dhalla didn't win any new friends in the party when she got dragged into a dispute over her immigrant housekeepers earlier this year, and there's clearly no big appetite to march into battle on her behalf once again. The Conservative instincts on this were sharper: Sure it's not that expensive, but Canadians evidently don't see why elderly immigrants would be moving here in the first place, especially if they're destitute, unless the plan is to sign up for services they never contributed to. How did they get here if they don't have family, and if they have family why do they need an extra $500 from the government?

Ms. Dhalla's bill was seconded by Bob Rae. Last week Rae helped embarrass Ignatieff by backing Martin Cauchon in the Denis Coderre dispute. Maybe it didn't bother Mr. Ignatieff that much to return the favour.

 
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/dhalla-pledges-fealty-to-liberals/article1315656/

Even though Jane Taber wrote this, it appears to be factual:

Dhalla pledges fealty to Liberals

Jane Taber
Ottawa — The Globe and Mail
Last updated on Wednesday, Oct. 07, 2009 03:51PM EDT

Beleaguered Liberal MP Ruby Dhalla swore allegiance to her party, denied she was crossing the floor to the Tories and was given a standing ovation by her colleagues.

All this happened behind closed doors at the national caucus meeting Wednesday morning.

See link.

Funny having to stand up in caucus and swear allegiance. I wonder who ordered her to do it. Bad precedence.
 
Ms Dhalla can be more useful to the Torries as a Liberal rather than a Conservative.


Now for the speculating... Who do you think is a potential to cross the floor?
 
ModlrMike said:
Now for the speculating... Who do you think is a potential to cross the floor?

- A bunch of Liberals who don't want to be in the same party as Ms. Dhalla.
 
Two points:

1. Don't count Ignatieff out. He is a very, very bright guy and he is supported by some of the best partisan political strategists and operators in Canada. He can recover and he might recover and if he does he might well become our prime minister; and

2. Ignatieff has loyalty troubles on two fronts -

a. the hard left of the Liberals Party is, still, convinced that he is a Bushite, and

b. the hard right of the Liberal Party is becoming convinced that he will be turned (by his operators) into some sort of Trudeau lite.

If, and it's a very big IF, there are going to be any Liberal defectors to the Tories they (all one of them?) may come from the latter group.

By the way, I agree that the Conservatives want nothing at all to do with Dhalla - she's poison and a loose cannon and she's a one trick pony, serving an ethnic constituency.
 
I agree, unfortunatly " Don't count Ignatieff out ".

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/10/07/ekos-poll-federal-conservative-liberal-ndp-green-bloc.html

Conservatives extend poll lead over Liberals
Last Updated: Thursday, October 8, 2009 | 9:40 AM ET CBC News

The federal Conservatives have widened their lead over the Liberals when it comes to voting intentions, a new poll suggests.

As the Tories' support shows signs of growing, disapproval ratings for Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff are also going up.

The EKOS poll, released Thursday exclusively to the CBC, found that 39.7 per cent of respondents supported the Conservatives, while the Liberals had 25.7 per cent backing. The New Democratic Party had the support of 15.2 per cent of respondents, with the Green Party and the Bloc Québécois both at 9.7 per cent.

Conservative support was up 3.7 percentage points from a poll released last week, while Liberal support was off by four points. The NDP's support was up by 1.3 points, the Green Party was off by 0.8 points and the Bloc slipped by 0.1.

Since early September, when the Conservatives and the Liberals were in a virtual dead heat in the polls, the Tories have pulled ahead.

The latest poll was conducted between Sept. 30 and Oct. 6. The polling period included the Oct. 1 vote on the Liberals' motion of no-confidence in the minority Tory government — a motion the Conservatives defeated as the NDP decided to abstain. The NDP has vowed to keep the government in power to ensure passage of legislation extending employment insurance benefits.

Liberals lose ground with voter base
EKOS president Frank Graves said the Liberals have lost ground with voters in traditional strongholds, including in Toronto and among women, university graduates, visible minorities and recent immigrants.

"Even visible minorities and recent immigrants who were like almost an automatic vote for the Liberals, have shifted," said Graves.

"They're running about equally now with the Conservatives. All these other groups are lining up more on the conservative side of the equation."

As his party has slipped in the polls, Ignatieff's disapproval ratings have grown.

The percentage of respondents who disapproved of the way Ignatieff is handling his job was 51 per cent, up from 38 per cent in August.

Ignatieff's approval rating was 19 per cent, down from 29 per cent two months ago.

Ignatieff addresses poll numbers
Graves said it is difficult to pinpoint why Ignatieff's popularity has plummeted in such a short time.

"Perhaps some of the framing that was put in place by the Conservatives and some of the so-called negative ads have stuck with Mr. Ignatieff," he said. "Because it's hard to line up anything he's said or done specifically."

Ignatieff, speaking Thursday morning in London, Ont., after addressing the local chamber of commerce, said there is "no question" the Conservatives have characterized or "framed" him in a certain way.

"I've got to lift that big frame off and let Canadians see who I really am, and we will be doing that," he said.

"If there are things I need to do better, I am certainly going to be ready to try, because I want to listen to Canadians and improve my performance any way I can," he said.

Harper approval rating rises
As for Prime Minister Stephen Harper, his disapproval rating was 42 per cent, compared with 47 per cent in August. The percentage of respondents who approved of how Harper was doing his job was 39 per cent, for a gain of three percentage points.

NDP Leader Jack Layton had a disapproval rating of 31 per cent, an improvement from 33 per cent in August. Layton's approval numbers held steady at 34 per cent.

The poll randomly sampled 3,333 Canadians aged 18 and over. The margin of error associated with a sample of that size is plus or minus 1.7 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.
 
There's no doubt that Iggy can rehabilitate himself or be rehabilitated by the party. What the Conservatives have been handed is an opportunity to maximize coverage of Liberal dissent, thereby reinforcing the public's impression that Iggy is not a leader.
 
The problem that all the opposition parties have is that the longer Harper continues to operate with the rotating support of the various other parties the harder it will be for them to paint him as anything worse than a pragmatist at the next election.  That may not go down well with the fringes of any party, including the Tories, but will secure the middle ground.  And, as we have discussed before, the real agenda is the one that Iggy is just now starting to identify and fight ..... the intention to decentralize government and reduce its ability to act on the economy.

How better to do that than create a deficit in a time of financial stress and then demand that the government be required to refill the coffers in good times when the citizenry can look after themselves.  The argument then becomes that if it doesn't refill the silos in the good times it wont be in a position to assist when the next recession comes along 11 years from now.
 
According to this report, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s Globe and Mail, even when the Liberals try to do something right – legislation can, almost always, be improved – they end up doing damage to their electoral prospects:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/liberal-senators-break-with-ignatieff-on-law-and-order-bill/article1317860/
Liberal senators break with Ignatieff on law-and-order bill
Upper chamber grits amend legislation that the Liberal Leader had championed

John Ibbitson

Ottawa

Friday, Oct. 09, 2009

Michael Ignatieff's leadership woes worsened Thursday, after some Liberal senators effectively gutted law-and-order legislation that the Liberal Leader had supported and the Senate adjourned for a week before the problem could be fixed.

Mr. Ignatieff is paying the political cost of a disunited caucus and plunging poll numbers. He desperately needs to change a public perception that, fairly or not, portrays him as an ineffective leader who cannot even control his own MPs.

The senators insist they are simply doing their job of suggesting improvements to legislation that was passed by the House with more haste than judgment.

“It doesn't help in the public view, I must admit,” Liberal Senator George Baker said in an interview. “However, if we didn't do this, then it wouldn't help in the justification of the Senate being in existence.”

Such a justification, however, is unlikely to reverse the latest poll numbers. A new Ekos survey done for the CBC has Prime Minister Stephen Harper's Conservatives at 39.7 per cent and Mr. Ignatieff's Liberals at 25.7 per cent. A Strategic Counsel/Globe and Mail/CTV poll released earlier this week had similar results.

The contentious legislation concerned how much time to deduct from prison sentences for time already served in local jails.

Judges may, depending on circumstances, award twice the time served in recognition that jails are less pleasant places than federal prisons and that the time served does not count toward parole.

Claiming that defence lawyers are abusing the practice by drawing out trials, all 10 provincial attorneys-general asked the federal government to restrict it. Legislation brought forward by the Conservatives earlier this year to do just that sailed through the House with unanimous consent.

But the Liberal majority on the Senate legal affairs committee heard from legal scholars and associations representing both Crown and defence lawyers who said the measure was too restrictive. They amended the bill to give judges some added discretion.

“The judge is the person best placed to decide what sentence should be imposed and what credit (if any) should be granted,” Liberal Senator Larry Campbell maintained on his blog .

The Conservatives reacted with outrage (and secret glee).

“They don't have any trouble fighting among themselves; I'm just telling them to fight crime in this country,” Justice Minister Rob Nicholson said in an interview. He urged Mr. Ignatieff to whip his Senate caucus into compliance. “I want him to get involved with this.”

The Liberals are clearly embarrassed by their rebellious senators, although Liberal MP Ujjal Dosanjh rejected the suggestion that the senators were making life difficult for the party. “They know they have to accede to the will of House, ultimately,” he told reporters.

Both sides tried to reach an agreement Thursday to bring the legislation before the full Senate, where other Liberal senators could join with the Conservative minority to pass the bill without amendments. But those negotiations broke down, with each side blaming the other.

Mr. Ignatieff acknowledged Thursday that the Conservatives had succeeded in framing him in an unflattering way that was hurting his popularity.

“I've got to lift that big frame off and let Canadians see who I really am, and we will be doing that,” he told reporters.

“If there are things I need to do better, I am certainly going to be ready to try, because I want to listen to Canadians and improve my performance any way I can.”


This will be just another tempest in a teapot; it is unlikely to have “legs” but it is another nail in the 2009 election coffin.

But it complicates life for Harper, in a way. While it helps the already solid Conservative law and order base to refocus its anger at the Liberals and the Senate for being soft on crime, it highlights Harper’s failure to reform the Senate – another ”wish list” item for other Conservatives. 

 
From what I saw from the interview yesterday on CTV's Power Play ( 2 LPC & 1CPC Senators), one Liberal Senator (can't remember who: George Baker maybe it was Larry Campbell, former Mayor of Vancouver), said he would not be whipped. Apparently while some of the Liberal Senators where out at lunch (vice out to lunch), the Conservatives had a majority in the Senate. Because of this, the story circulating (and probably originated by the Liberals), was that the the Bill was not voted on at that moment as the Conservatives wanted the preception to continue that Ignatieff cannot control/lead the LPC, and that the Liberal Senate is soft on crime. Additionally, the Liberal senators who are spearheading this amendment to the Bill are Rae's supporters which adds to the story.

Global and the CTV both said it was The Senate holding up the Bill, not the Liberal dominated Senate or the Liberal Senators. Sloppy reporting or the Parliamentary Press Gallery continued game of revenge against Mr. Harper??

There is also another crime bill being held up. I think if this gets enough traction, and the lazy Canadian public pays attention, it will not bode well for The Senate. All Mr. Harper has to say WRT his recent Senate appointments, is that he is attempting to get a majority in the Senate in order to be in a position, as the Canadian government, to execute Senate reform.




 
But.....

In the fight to redistribute seats in the Commons Harper is facing stiff opposition from Quebec as it fears losing clout there.  The logical answer is to ensure that it maintains Geographic Clout, as opposed to Demographic Clout, in a counter-balancing institution - A reformed Senate.

Every time that the Senate acts against the will of the Commons and the PM it demonstrates that it does still have effective powers. All that is required is that it be legitimated through some universally agreed form of selection (not necessarily election).  As to the third E - equal - how do you define equal?  Two equal founding nations?  Three equal nations?  Four equal regions? Five equal Regions? 13 equal provinces and territories?  And what does equality imply?  Equal voice in a consensus?  Equal vetoes?  Equal opportunity to voice concerns?

I think it is too early to write off Senate reform as a failure.... I believe that the ball is still in play on that one.
 
How many times lately have you read, heard, saw commentators and other media types say that being the leader of the official opposition is a difficult job or whatever when referring to Ignatieff? If you can remember 4/5 + years back, how many times was the same said about Harper?

The Canadian media are mainly (not all) in the pocket of the LPC. Often they are creators of news.
 
I think Canadians, ever so very slowly, are realizing that Quebec is a noose around Canada's neck. Dammed if you do, dammed if you don't. Quebec is never, never, ever satisfied. I was surprised at some of the posts here at Army.ca that speak to this.Watch/tape Question Period in the HOC. It will make you sick, especially the Bloc's continued sniveling.

Anyway, the fate of Canada and Senate reform are not the subject of this topic.
 
I suggest that almost everything from here on down is off topic: not about Ignatieff, per se, but, rather, about the 2009 election - the one that is increasingly unlikely to happen.
 
E.R. Campbell said:
I suggest that almost everything from here on down is off topic: not about Ignatieff, per se, but, rather, about the 2009 election - the one that is increasingly unlikely to happen.


I agree, so I have moved everything over to the 2009 election thread as suggested.

With the dislike for winter and christmas elections, the minimum 36 day campaign length, and
Layton pushing out TV ads claiming he'll make this parlament work, It is nearly time to retire
this thread.

 
Agreed. That's why I started an Election 2010? thread, but there is still a chance for 2009, either through an opposition miscalculation or a Tory motion that is both a test of confidence and sufficiently toxic as to require the opposition to unite against it. Now that parliament has been in session for more than eight months I doubt the GG would not grant an election after a loss of confidence.
 
Rifleman62 said:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/dhalla-pledges-fealty-to-liberals/article1315656/

Even though Jane Taber wrote this, it appears to be factual:

Dhalla pledges fealty to Liberals

Jane Taber
Ottawa — The Globe and Mail
Last updated on Wednesday, Oct. 07, 2009 03:51PM EDT

Beleaguered Liberal MP Ruby Dhalla swore allegiance to her party, denied she was crossing the floor to the Tories and was given a standing ovation by her colleagues.

All this happened behind closed doors at the national caucus meeting Wednesday morning.

See link.

Funny having to stand up in caucus and swear allegiance. I wonder who ordered her to do it. Bad precedence.


Something is working for the Conservatives according to this article, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s  Globe and Mail:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/toronto/the-battle-for-brampton/article1336750/
The battle for Brampton
Sikhs from Ruby Dhalla's riding are defecting in droves to the Conservatives, marking a huge shift in immigrant politics and giving Stephen Harper his first foothold in the traditionally Liberal GTA

Joe Friesen

Saturday, Oct. 24, 2009

In a Brampton living room last weekend, Sunny Gill helped seal the conversion of a young Sikh truck driver who claims he can move 300 votes from the Liberals to the Conservatives.

The truck driver was just the latest domino to fall favourably for Mr. Gill, the local Conservative South Asian outreach co-ordinator. It was a satisfying moment.

“When you come here, any immigrant thinks the Liberals are demi-gods. But when you establish yourself, you look at their policies,” said Mr. Gill.

“If we're able to split the ethnic vote, we're going to slaughter the Liberals.”

It wasn't long ago that voting Conservative was considered a cardinal sin in some ethnic communities. But polls now show that immigrants, the unshakeable bedrock of Liberal support, are forsaking Pierre Trudeau's party – the party of multiculturalism, of expanded immigration, of the Charter – for Stephen Harper.

A profound political shift is taking hold, one that could give the Conservatives a crucial foothold in the Greater Toronto Area.

Significantly, Brampton offers a window on Canada's future. Sikhs settled here from the late 1960s, finding work in the transport industries. About one in five Brampton residents is Sikh, as are three of the four MPs: Liberals Ruby Dhalla, Nav Bains and Gurbax Malhi.

The city is growing so rapidly, thanks to immigration, that new subdivisions seem to pop up overnight. The landscape is cluttered with snaking crescents of Kwikbilt, pink-roofed houses. Nearly 60 per cent of the 430,000 residents belong to a visible minority, and about half are born outside Canada. The arrivals come mainly from South Asia, and, unlike earlier waves, they're moving directly to the suburbs and exurbs, once considered hotbeds of conservatism.

This is the tempting, frosted edge of the increasingly ethnic, Liberal-voting doughnut-ring of ridings that surround Canada's biggest cities. If the Conservatives can move even 10 per cent of the immigrant vote it could put them in striking distance of a majority.

An Ekos poll last week showed the Conservatives, for the first time, leading among voters born outside Canada.

“It's fair to say they're having unprecedented success,” said Ekos president Frank Graves. “The Liberals historically have owned that demographic.”

Even senior Liberals confirm the game has changed. For a combination of reasons, from demographic shifts to the party's inattention and perceived arrogance, they can no longer count on the blanket support of immigrant communities.

“Our party, quite frankly, has been taking them for granted for quite some time,” said one senior Ontario Liberal. “We're seeing very effective penetration by the Conservatives, especially at the federal level.”

At the Sikh Sangat Gurdwara, one of the half-dozen temples in the area, the Punjabi newspaper boxes are lined up 10 across. Political interest is phenomenally high, and it extends beyond the news pages. Sikhs delivered dozens of delegates to Jean Chrétien in his 1990 leadership bid, and to Stéphane Dion via Gerard Kennedy in the last leadership campaign. Need a room filled with 500 supporters? Sikhs can do it. Need to raise $100,000 in a day? Sikhs have done it.

As one Indo-Canadian Liberal put it, “The Sikh organizations are by far one of the most impressive political muscle tools in Canada. That's their calling card.”

Harvinder Singh Dhaliwal, the temple's secretary, said that, by and large, most of the 10,000 or so local Sikhs served by his Gurdwara consider themselves Liberals. But that's beginning to change. He says many Sikhs feel taken for granted, treated as though they were in the Liberals' pockets. As he speaks, a few of the dozen other men sitting in his office nod agreement.

“The last three or four years there's been a growing willingness to support the Conservatives,” he said. “The Conservatives are bending over backwards to accommodate us.”

Same-sex marriage was the first wedge in the relationship. It was difficult for many Sikhs to accept because their religion forbids it, Mr. Dhaliwal said. He's also strongly opposed to Ruby Dhalla, the MP for Brampton-Springdale.

First, he said, she parachuted into the riding without having to win a nomination in 2004. The riding executive endorsed the NDP in retaliation. Second, she voted in favour of same-sex marriage. Third, she recently attended an event sponsored by a tiny, and, in his view, heretical Sikh sect.

Although he still considers himself a Liberal, Mr. Dhaliwal will campaign for Ms. Dhalla's Tory opponent, even if that risks a Harper majority.

“If I'm a true Liberal, I want to get rid of Ruby Dhalla,” he said.

Ms. Dhalla is a lightning rod for criticism, particularly in the wake of allegations, which she denies, that her family mistreated live-in caregivers.

“The people are sick and tired of the smear campaign that's been going on and the dirty politics that's being played,” Ms. Dhalla said. She points out she's already won two campaigns since voting for same-sex marriage, and says her focus now is on representing her constituents.

Over the last three months, she said, she's attended at least 16 community events every weekend. She has also championed a private members bill to allow foreign-born seniors to collect old-age security, which her party won't support.

Ms. Dhalla's margin of victory plummeted from 8,000 votes in 2006 to 700 votes in 2008. Observers agree her seat is in jeopardy. The same goes for her neighbour in Brampton West, MP Andrew Kania, who won by about 200 votes last time. Mr. Malhi and Mr. Bains won by 4,000 and 8,000 votes and are considered safer.

Adding to Liberal woes is a surprisingly effective campaign, led by Citizenship Minister Jason Kenney, to win over visible-minority communities.

When he embarked on his quest three years ago it seemed an impossible task. Slowly but surely, though, he has made inroads.

“They've been extremely effective, whether at wedge issues or small-‘p' politics – giving a citizenship award, using a combination of largesse and honours to peel off small groups one after another. Kenney is the master at this,” said a senior Liberal.

Just pay attention to Mr. Kenney's calendar, he adds. He seems to be around Vancouver or the GTA every week (Ms. Dhalla jokes he's in Brampton so often, he must be buying a house). Both he and Mr. Harper are mindful of the ethnic media, and they buy plenty of advertising in their pages. The Tories believe that many of the largest immigrant groups, because of their cultural attitudes and religious beliefs, may be more inclined to support their cause. Bhupinder Sidhu, a 39-year-old Tory convert, agrees.

“The only reason we were Liberal in the first place is because of immigration. Socially, we are conservative,” he said.

Jagdeep Kailey, a columnist with the Punjabi Post, said the Conservatives have identified a few key leaders who can carry their message among Indo-Canadians. He said there is also a tiny but vocal minority in the community still upset with Bob Rae for his report on the 1985 Air India bombing.

“With the Liberals as such, there is a feeling that they have not stood by the Sikhs. There is also a feeling among Sikhs that, with other groups coming to Canada from India, they are not as pampered by the party as they were in the past,” Mr. Kailey said.

Brampton residents are bombarded by Conservative MPs using their Parliamentary mail to spread the Conservative message. But in South Asian politics, Mr. Kailey explains, it's usually a word from a trusted friend or relative that proves persuasive.

Ranjit Grewal, a 57-year-old warehouse worker, is one of the new Conservative ambassadors. He recently switched parties because the Conservatives, unlike the Liberals, want to listen to his views, he said.

“They're calling me to give [them] some advice. [Conservative candidate] Kyle Seeback is calling me at home,” he said. “People are like flowers in the garden. If you want them to have a nice smell, you have to listen to them.”

Mr. Grewal works in concert with Mr. Gill in Brampton West. They employ a strategy lifted from Barack Obama's presidential campaign, Mr. Gill said. They identify opinion leaders, then take time to cultivate a relationship. Then they ask for their support.

Mr. Graves said the Conservative approach is also reminiscent of the Karl Rove strategy of the Bush years - identifying key constituencies and targeting them with a tailored message and policies.

Earlier this year, the Prime Minister apologized for the 1914 Komagata Maru incident, when a ship carrying 340 Sikhs was turned away at the Port of Vancouver. Some Sikhs were unhappy the apology took place outside the House of Commons, but it still resonated in the community.

“The Liberals for 40 years have been talking and talking, and guess what? Stephen Harper goes and apologizes for it and wins praise from the community,” said Gary Singh, a long-time Liberal.

“Paul Martin didn't do it, Chrétien didn't do it, and they're supposed to be the best friends of the South Asians.”

Mr. Singh said the Liberal Party must come to terms with a fundamental demographic shift. Once, there were power brokers in immigrant communities who could claim to control thousands of votes, but not any more, he said. Around the dinner table, Canadian-born children are questioning their parents' allegiance to the Liberal Party, he added.

“We're at the crossroads of our politics, believe me,” Mr. Singh said. “As long as they're blind and indifferent to the fact that minorities are the majority, they'll pay a price. The new reality is that there's a demographic paradigm shift. The party that recognizes that and includes them, makes them genuine political partners, will reap the benefits.”


There are dangers in ethnic politics: embrace the Sikhs, too much, and you risk alienating the Hindus; placate the Hindus and you annoy some Chinese and many Muslims, and so on. Jason Kenney has done a brilliant job of focusing on narrow, wedge, social issues and keeping ethnic concerns away from e.g. foreign and trade policy.

But this should put paid to any notions that Ruby Dhalla would be welcomed into the Tory caucus. It would not, on the other hand, be too surprising if she was pressured to leave the Liberal Party of Canada and sit as an independent, despite her protestations of loyalty. Her loyalty isn't the problem: she's a loser and, as with playing bridge, it may be most advantageous to get rid of losers early if you cannot find a way to finesse them.
 
Back
Top