Mediaboss Marketing

In just a few weeks, Canadian politicschanged forever. Or so everyone thought.

The Liberals, once the country's "natural governing party,"were reduced to a smoking ruin. The Bloc Qubcois'two decades of dominance in Quebec came to an abrupt halt.

Stephen Harper finally won his majority government a "strong, stable, national, majority Conservative government,"as he liked to say and the New Democrats shed their perennial third-party status. The NDP was now in it to win it.

But 10 years later, the federal election held on May 2, 2011 doesn't seem as earth-shattering as it once appeared.

Today, the Liberals are where they usually havebeen throughout their history in government and the Bloc, while far from dominant, is a force again in Quebec. The Conservatives seem about as far away from winning a majority as they've ever been over the past 15 years, while the NDP is nestled once more in the back corner of the House of Commons.

The reverberations of that 2011 campaign can still be felt today, however both in the lessons that still hold true and the falseconclusionsthat weredrawn in the immediate aftermath ofan exceptionalelection.

Even as the 2011 election campaign was underway, the players couldn't agree on how it started. For theLiberals and New Democrats,the triggering eventwas the Conservatives being found in contempt of Parliament and losing a confidence vote.

The Conservatives, meanwhile, arguedthe election became necessary becausethe opposition partiescouldn't supportthebudgetandwere hoping to revive their doomed 2008attemptto form a governingcoalition.

The first days of the campaign made it clear which narrative won out. Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieffspent a lot of the early campaignanswering questions(ornot answering them)about whether he would try to teamup with the NDP and the Bloc in a coalition.

It all went downhill from there for Ignatieff, whose public image the Conservatives had spent years successfully undermining with highly effective adsthat portrayed him as an opportunistic intellectual who had spent his professional life outside the country he wanted to lead.

As Harper waged a disciplinedcampaign with limited media access (and limited opportunities to be knocked off-message),the NDP's Jack Layton, leader of the party since 2003, finally began to breakthrough. An appearance on Radio-Canada's much-watched talk-showTout le monde en parleand a strong English-language debate performance helped propel the NDP forward in the polls.

The biggest shift took place in Quebec, where the NDP began to pick up a few percentage points on a daily basis primarily at the expense of a tired Bloc campaign under Gilles Duceppe. By the finaldays of the election, Layton's NDP was solidly in second place, the Liberals and Bloc were in freefall and the Conservatives were knocking on the door of a majority government.

When the votes were counted, the Conservatives had secured the majority they had failed to win in 2006 and 2008, with 40 per cent of the vote and 166 seats in a House of Commons which then sat 308. The NDP formed the Official Opposition for the first time in its history, with 31 per cent of the vote and 103 seats an astonishing 59 of which were won in Quebec.

The Liberals were reduced to 34 seats and 19 per cent of the vote, while the Bloc fell to just four seats. It was the worst result in both party's histories and it cost Ignatieff and Duceppeboththeir leaderships and theirown seats.

A new era in Canadian politics had dawned. Or so it seemed at the time.

The 2011 election offereda practicaldemonstration ofthe reasons why parties can't take theirpositions inpolls for granted. The New Democrats in particular have been fond ofpointing at the 2011 result to argue thatbad polls or low fundraising numbers shouldn't be taken terribly seriously.

But italso showed that the electoral landscape in Canada can change very quickly and thatif you assumethings will stay the way they've been for a very long time, you can get blindsided by events.

There have been a few other examples of historic and unforeseeable breakthroughs in Canadian politics since 2011. In the 2015 provincial election, the Alberta New Democrats ended the Progressive Conservatives' 44-year run in office, coming from behind in the polls during the campaign to defeat an entrenched PC government.

In 2019, the Prince Edward Island Greens made history when they formed the Official Opposition in that province.

The 2011 election was also the beginning of a tumultuous time in Quebec politics. After Quebecers handed the Bloc a majority of the province's seats in six consecutive elections going back to 1993, Quebecers went en masse to the New Democrats a party they had never supported in large numbers before.

But then Quebec voters pivoted to the Liberals in 2015. In 2019, many of them swung back to the Bloc. At the provincial level, Quebec went from a minority Parti Qubcois government in 2012 to a majority Liberal government in 2014. In 2018, the Coalition Avenir Qubecbecame the first party other than the Liberals and the PQ to govern the provincesince the 1960s.

Quebec is setting up to be an important battleground again in the next federal campaign.

Quebec isn't the most important battleground, however. As in 2011, that title goes to the ridings in and around Toronto.

Ten years ago, the Conservatives could not have won their majority government without making significant gains in the Greater Toronto Area. About two-thirds of the seats the party picked up between the 2008 and 2011 elections were in Toronto and the surrounding suburbs. Without them, Harper would have fallen short of the 155 seats he needed.

Since 2011, the GTA has continued to be a kingmaker. Liberal gains in the 2015 federal election in the region handed them their majority. Had his party lost those seats in 2019, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau might not havebeen in a position to form aminority government.

CBC News: The House7:03Can the 2011 election teach us anything about the next?

As a fast-growing part of Canada, theGTA is only going to grow inimportance in future federal elections. That trend didn't start in 2011, but that election did prove that the Conservatives could win big in a region that had largely spurned them for 20 years.

The Conservatives were aided, however, by the weakness of their traditional foe. Ignatieff was an unpopular leader heading into the campaign the New Democrats were able to take advantage of that.

The election was a shot across the bow of the Liberals, signalling that if they're weak enough, the NDP can replace them. The 2018 Ontario provincial election ended up making the same point. In Western Canada, the NDP long ago replaced the Liberals as the sparring partner forthe main conservative parties in Saskatchewan and Manitoba, and in Alberta more recently.

But there were many aspects of the 2011 federal election that proved to be one-offs, making it look like an outlier anexception, not a newrule.

It's impossible to know how much of an impact Layton's death a few months after the election had on the future of the NDP, or whether he would have avoided his successor Thomas Mulcair's fate in the 2015 election.

But with Layton gone and the Conservatives in office, discussion in some progressive circles turned to the need to unite the left in order to put up a common front against Harper.

A few months after the election, former Liberal prime minister Jean Chrtien predicted that the Liberals and NDP would eventually merge.Nathan Cullen and Joyce Murray mountedbids for the NDP and Liberal leaderships on platforms embracing intra-party co-operation. (Cullen finished third in the 2012 NDP leadership raceand Joyce Murray was the runner-up in the 2013 vote that tapped Trudeau for the Liberal leadership.)

But the desireto unite the left was based on some faulty premises. One of them had to do withturnout. Low voterturnout in2008 and 2011 benefited the Conservatives and their disproportionately older base, soa divided left seemed at the timeto be a huge obstacle for the Liberals and New Democrats.

But turnout spiked in 2015 and 2019 to 68 and 67 per cent, respectively, after registering around 60 per cent in the two previous elections. Much of that increased participation benefited the Liberals.

History doesn't always repeat itselfbut it has been a pretty reliable guide. The Liberals were able to win in 2015 and 2019 despite a divided left. They also managed winsin 1965, 1968, 1972 and 1980when the NDP was putting up above-average results.

On top of that, the notion of an unbeatable Conservative Party ran contrary to Canada's political history. Not since the death of John A. Macdonald have the Conservatives enjoyed more than 10 consecutive years in government.

Immediately after the2011 election, however, the trend lines appeared to be going in the right direction for the Conservatives and the wrong direction for the Liberals. The Liberals had lost seats and votes in four consecutive elections as the Conservatives gained.

But the sample size offered by a few elections led tosome premature political obituaries, based on the assumption that the Conservatives would remain strong, the NDP had finally arrived and that the Liberals and Bloc would be consigned to the dustbin of history.

There were reasons tobelieve at the timethat 2011marked the moment"when the gods changed" the beginning ofthe end for the Liberal Party.

Ignatieff had become only the third Liberal leader after Edward Blake in the 19th century and Stphane Dion more recently to fail to become prime minister. Western democracies were increasingly being polarized between left and right and in the United Kingdom the "mother of all Parliaments" the Liberals hadbeen replaced by the Labour Party decades earlier.

With support for independence waning, the Bloc also seemed like an anachronism whose time had run out if one ignored the factthat Quebec has a long history of distinct parties at the federal level.

The 2011election hasn't turned out to be the kind of political re-alignment some predicted. The demographic changes that were supposed to make the Conservatives the 21st century's "natural governing party" haven't benefited them because the Liberals adapted to those changes, as all successful parties do.

The potential for Quebec's social democratic traditions to form the foundation of a future NDP government, meanwhile,collided with an inconvenient fact:those Qubecoissocial democrats also tendto be Quebecnationalists, aligning them withan ideology which the 2015 election suggested was incompatible with the NDP's position on issues like identity.

Many of the conclusions drawn from the 2011 election were based on what was a very unusual electoral map one that upended the normal dynamics of Canadian elections.

For example, the Conservatives were able to win a majority government with very little representation from Quebec. The party elected just five Quebec MPsand would have secured enough seats in the rest of the country for a majority government without a single one of them suggesting that the province need not form an important part of the party's electoral strategy going forward.

But the Conservatives havewon majority governments withoutsignificant delegations from Quebec on just two occasions. The election in1917 whenthe country was fiercely divided between English and French Canada over conscription was the first. The 2011 election was the second. Exceptional circumstances are rarely the foundation of a winning strategy.

The split between the Liberals and the NDP was particularly exceptional. In Quebec, the NDP was benefiting largelyfrom lost Bloc votes, but in the rest of the country the swing was mostly between the Liberals and NDP.

But it wasn't a big enough swing. Outside of Quebec, the NDP still finished nearly 20 points behind the Conservatives and won 44 seats, only one more than Ed Broadbent had won in 1988 on a smaller map the party's best performance prior to 2011.

This meant that in much of the country, the Conservatives were not up against the Liberals in their traditional two-way fights. Increases in support for the NDP at the Liberals' expense boosted the NDP in ridings across the country, but that boost tended to start from a very low floor.

Often, theresult was the Liberals falling farenough to lose seats to the Conservatives, but not far enough to put the NDP in a position to win them instead. In the Greater Toronto Area, this shift in votes won the Conservatives many seats. Without it, they would not have gotten their majority government.

While the 2011 election didn't produce a lasting political re-alignment, some echoes of that campaign can still be heard today.

Quebec remains a more multi-coloured battleground than it was prior to 2011 and the NDP has secured a toehold there Alexandre Boulerice's seat of RosemontLa Petite-Patrie that survived the receding of the "orange wave".

The GTA is still where the makeupof the federal government isdecided. Former Conservative leaderAndrew Scheer's inability to break back into the region doomed his leadership. With the Conservatives still trailing the Liberals by double-digits in the polls in Ontario, it could very well doom Erin O'Toole's leadership as well.

But the most important takeaway might be the lesson the Liberals learned from their near-death experience. They're not the first political party to suffera series of crushing defeats before realizing they need a fundamental change in their approach.

And they won't be the last. Since that one majority government victory under Harper in 2011, the Conservatives have failed twice to repeat it. Languishing in the polls at or below their historical floor of around 30 per cent, the party could be on track to fail a third time.

If so, the parallels between the 2011 electionand a potential 2021 campaign might not be about what happened 10 years ago, but what happened next.

Follow this link:
A Harper dynasty and the end of the Liberals? How the 2011 election didn't change everything - CBC.ca

Help Us Help Kamloops. Support Local Media.

In response to the COVID-19 crisis, Kamloops This Week is now soliciting donations from readers. This program is designed to support our local journalism in a time where our advertisers are unable to due to their own economic constraints. Kamloops This Week has always been a free product and will continue to be free. This is a means for those who can afford to support local media to help ensure those who cant afford to can get access to trusted local information. You can make a one-time or a monthly donation of any amount and cancel at any time .

NEW: For every donation of $25 or greater, we will offer a digital advertising package to the local non-profit group of your choice.

Click on https://support.kamloopsthisweek.com for more information or to make your donation.

Thank you in advance for your support.

Go here to see the original:
Opposition blasts Liberals after debate to call PM's top aide on Vance cancelled - Kamloops This Week

The Ontario Liberal party is warming up to the idea of removing private companies from the provinces long-term care and home care sectors.

The shift came as two sweeping reports into COVID-19 and long-term care shook the Progressive Conservative government last week. Liberal Leader Steven Del Duca, speaking to reporters on Friday, left the door open for his party to overhaul for-profit elder care, if elected next year.

Based on everything Ive seen and heard, and all the discussions and the tragic circumstances of the last 12 or 13 months, Im at a point where I do not believe mixing profit with care in this space at all is compatible anymore, Del Duca told iPolitics on Friday.

I cant see any compatibility, he added.

The Liberals are in the midst of developing their 2022 election campaign platform, meaning Del Duca couldnt commit to an official position, but his comments last week were the strongest yet on the issue.

If the Liberals choose to embrace a fully publicly funded elder care system, they will join Ontarios NDP, which unveiled a plan to remove private companies from the long-term care and home care sectors in October.

The NDPs plan would spend $6 billion over eight years in one-time capital investments to expand the sectors capacity, plus $3 billion in annual operating costs. If implemented, Ontario would spend 50 per cent more a year on long-term care than it does now.

On Friday, Ontarios commission reviewing COVID-19 in long-term care released its final report after an almost eight-month investigation. One of the reports recommendations urged the government to reassess the long-term care sectors business model.

READ MORE: Early instructions failed to contain COVID in Ontario nursing homes: AG

It is difficult to see how one can build a culture of excellence in care when care is only a means to profit on the infrastructure and hoteling of seniors, the report read.

COVID-19 has seriously undermined the reputation of for-profit homes. The commission has repeatedly heard about the distrust of the private sector when it comes to providing care. A new model is needed to reset the balance, it continued.

Del Duca acknowledged that Ontario couldnt flick a switch and remove profit incentives from long-term care, but he said the status quo isnt acceptable to the people of Ontario.

He also took aim at long-term care company executives.

Three of the largest for-profit chains paid out tens of millions of dollars in dividends to their shareholders during this crisis when they were receiving at least $90 million in pandemic support from you and I, Del Duca said. That just goes right to the heart of that incompatibility.

NDP Leader Andrea Horwath told iPolitics on Friday the Liberals have no credibility when it comes to long-term care.

The Liberals had 15 years to deal with long-term care and they didnt, Horwath said. We all saw where long-term care was when COVID hit.

Del Duca said he will have more to say about his partys elder care policies in the coming weeks, as the Liberals platform comes together.

READ MORE: Ontario NDP pitches eight-year plan to overhaul long-term care

More from iPolitics

Visit link:
Ontario Liberals signal willingness to overhaul for-profit long-term care - iPolitics.ca

Marco Mendicino, right, poses with Canada's Prime Minister Justin Trudeau after being sworn-in as Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship during the presentation of Trudeau's cabinet in Ottawa, Ontario, on November 20, 2019.

BLAIR GABLE/Reuters

A federal government promise to ensure that foreign journalists and human-rights campaigners are welcomed into Canada as refugees has not been put into action, and observers worry that the looming possibility of an election means the Liberals may not live up to their commitment to have a system in place by the end of the year.

In late 2019, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau appointed MP Marco Mendicino as Immigration Minister and directed him in a mandate letter to introduce a dedicated refugee stream to provide a safe haven for human-rights advocates, journalists and humanitarian workers at risk.

A year and a half later, the initiative to bring 250 such asylum seekers into Canada each year has failed to materialize. The federal government says it is still talking to stakeholder groups to iron out details, in hopes that officials can finalize the program by later this year.

Story continues below advertisement

Consistent with his mandate letter, Minister Mendicino included 250 spaces in his annual immigration levels plan, with the first applications expected this year, said Peter Liang, a spokesman for Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada. He continues to engage with foreign and domestic partners as we move to fully implement this commitment in the coming months.

Yet some of the stakeholder groups with whom the government has been consulting argue time is running out.

Frankly I think they have their work cut out to meet the target for 2021, as there are still a lot of issues to be worked through before they can roll it out, says Janet Dench, executive director of the Canadian Council for Refugees.

Peter Showler, who chairs PEN Canadas writers-in-peril committee, has also been talking to government officials. He worries that a potential fall election could derail the initiative. If there is an election call, and the program hasnt been implemented, well, then, those mandate provisions essentially fall by the wayside.

Canada has long admitted journalists and human-rights workers among the thousands of asylum seekers it accepts into the country each year. But the governments hope behind the program announced in 2019 is to create a special category for claimants who might be falling through the cracks.

Mr. Showler gives as a potential example the prospect of Canada welcoming Turkish journalists who are in limbo after fleeing President Recep Erdogans crackdown on civil society.

There are about 250 journalists who are now in prison in Turkey said Mr. Showler. Well, there are many of those people who tried to get out and werent able to get out. Some are languishing in places ... where theyre living without status and have been for two or three or four years.

Story continues below advertisement

Mr. Showler, who is also a former chair of Canadas Immigration and Refugee Board, said that under the new program, groups like PEN Canada could help vouch for people who were displaced or under threat specifically because their writing or rights work placed them on a collision course with repressive regimes.

Several groups would be poised to help the federal government make such determinations.

Amnesty International Canada welcomes Canadas commitment to a new refugee stream, said Jackie Hansen, a gender-rights campaigner with that group.

Unlike standard immigration processes, the federal refugee determination system does not typically consider professional classes when it assesses who should be admitted to Canada.

For this reason, some stakeholders are wary about the government going down this road. As the government acknowledges, human-rights defenders are already resettled to Canada [they are just not separately categorized so cant be counted], said Ms. Dench at the refugee council.

She said she appreciates additional spaces opening up for refugees but we are concerned that the new category appears to create tiers within the resettlement program, with people processed under this category benefitting from [apparently] faster processing and additional support after arrival in Canada.

Story continues below advertisement

Our Morning Update and Evening Update newsletters are written by Globe editors, giving you a concise summary of the days most important headlines. Sign up today.

Read more here:
Liberal plan to fast-track journalist refugees is running out of time - The Globe and Mail

Breadcrumb Trail Links

'You can't do both. You can't take 70, 80, 90 per cent off the bottom line of businesses and expect them to be really happy about investing in the country'

Author of the article:

Publishing date:

OTTAWA The federal Liberals spent big in last weeks budget in a bid to get more domestic bio-manufacturing for products like vaccines, but industry experts said it will take more than money to reestablish Canada as a major industry player.

Canadas vaccine roll-out has suffered from the countrys inability to produce vaccines domestically, with all of the shots going into arms currently being made somewhere else. This has left the country susceptible to export restrictions in Europe or America-first style policies or even complete bans as is happening in India where the country is dealing with a horrific new COVID wave.

Industry Minister Franois-Philippe Champagne said he is confident industry and government can work together to reestablish Canada as a leader in bio-manufacturing.

We are in a journey with a common purpose to make Canada a more significant player when it comes to the life sciences industry of the world, he said.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

That journey came with a $2.2 billion price tag that among other things includes $500 million over four years to the Canada Foundation for Innovation to help universities with capital projects related to research. It also provides $250 million to the governments research councils for bio-medical projects and $92 million to adMare, an arms length firm that helps small companies scale up.

There is also $1 billion in the governments strategic innovation fund set aside over the next seven years for bio-manufacturing projects. That money could be used for major deals like the governments decision last month to spend $415 million on a new vaccine plant in Toronto with drug giant Sanofi Pasteur.

Champagne said the pandemic has forced every country in the world to consider its limitations when it comes to pharmaceutical manufacturing and Canada needs to be prepared to step up to the plate.

The government has to be part of the equation, because obviously were competing with many jurisdictions in the world, he said.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Pamela Fralick, president of Innovative Medicines Canada, said the funding in the budget is offering a lot for the sector and she is pleased the Trudeau government is finally engaging with the industry.

She cautioned, however, that the governments move to further regulate and lower drug prices runs right up against the goal of setting up a flourishing and vibrant industry.

You cant do both. You cant take 70, 80, 90 per cent off the bottom line of businesses and expect them to be really happy about investing in the country, she said.

She said the government should also look at regulatory issues to clear red tape so companies that have developed new treatments can get them to market quickly.

She said the governments goal of getting vaccines made in Canada is more complex than it might seem. Fralick said she is encouraging the government to think about supporting the whole industry from small start-ups to major players.

The Pfizer vaccine is a good example, she argues, because its supply chain is so complex that no one country could ever hope to produce it completely onshore.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Its 280 components, 86 suppliers in 19 countries. Thats what it takes to get this vaccine from bits and pieces if you will, into the arms of those of us here in Canada and around the world, she said.

Andrew Casey, president and CEO of BIOTECanada, another industry group, said he was also impressed with the budget and said now it is about determining how best to address some of the other challenges.

There is really significant investment into the sector, and now trying to figure out where all these pieces are going.

He echoed Fralick in saying the government has to think not just about lowering prices.

That relationship has to morph a little bit going forward, away from the pure pricing discussion and towards something thats more holistic and benefits Canada in a broader way, he said.

Casey said predicting the next pandemic or what type of vaccine will be needed is impossible to know, but if Canada has a diverse field of bio-medical companies, there is a better chance the technology will be there to fight it.

What you need to do is start to look at a broader landscape, invest in certain areas, and then grow expertise, knowing that parts of that will be really critical to what the next solution is going to be.

Champagne said the government is looking both short and long-term when it comes to growing the industry, with short-term investments now, but with an eye to building a bigger industry over the long term.

He said Canada isnt alone in trying to push pharmaceutical prices down, but he is open to more conversations with industry about some of the broader issues.

There are some long term policy issues that warrant discussions, particularly following the largest, or the most significant, health and economic crisis we had in a century.

Email: rtumilty@postmedia.com | Twitter: ryantumilty

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Sign up to receive the daily top stories from the National Post, a division of Postmedia Network Inc.

A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it please check your junk folder.

The next issue of Posted Newsletter will soon be in your inbox.

We encountered an issue signing you up. Please try again

Postmedia is committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion and encourage all readers to share their views on our articles. Comments may take up to an hour for moderation before appearing on the site. We ask you to keep your comments relevant and respectful. We have enabled email notificationsyou will now receive an email if you receive a reply to your comment, there is an update to a comment thread you follow or if a user you follow comments. Visit our Community Guidelines for more information and details on how to adjust your email settings.

See the original post:
Liberals' goal to boost bio-manufacturing in Canada inhibited by their own policies, industry says - National Post