Canada’s Debate

I’ve talked about the infrastructure deficit a couple of times in the past; and have even mentioned it on AD Radio on a couple of ocassions when I’ve called in. Well, the subject is in the news once again, as is Harper (and primarily) Flahertys’ appallingly weak response.

Here are the basic facts: Canada’s municipal and rural infrastructure is in staggeringly poor repair, most of it (in adjusted capital spending) being built between 1900 and 1970. A large amount of that infrastructure is so old/dicrepid that it is impossible to project it’s long-term lifespan, and a large majority of it will pass the point that it is repairable in the next decade. The cost to repair/replace this infrastructure is well over $100 Billion dollars. Almost all of it is municipal.

I highlight that last fact because it is at the root of both the problem, and the above-mentioned weak response. Municipal/regional governments depend largely on property taxes for their revenues, and property taxes usually increase along with the rate of inflation, if that. Most of Canada’s urban infrastructure was built during periods of economic expansion and intense urban growth. Toronto’s infrastructure was built in the early part of the 20th century during the two major influxes of European settlers, and during the 1960’s when monied newcomers from Asia started to arrive. (The story is similar in Vancouver, Calgary, etc.) During the periods of expansion the cost of labour and material was relatively stable, and maintenance was inexpensive as the systems being built were being used at rates well below capacity. End result, cities could afford to build infrastructure as they expanded. Fast forward to the 21st century: labour and material costs have far out-stripped inflation, infrastructure systems are being used at peak capacity (or higher), and perhaps most significantly, municipalities are required to use the money raised from property taxes to pay for obligations that didn’t exist during previous build-cycles. (more…)

So the other week I wrote about the Leafs and their collective woes. Specifically I wrote about their offensive inconsistency, sloppy defense, unreliable goaltending, and staggeringly poor management. Much to my chagrin, the Leafs played a game tuesday night which demonstrated all of the team’s failings, and specifically the problems that I identified last week, in a clear and concise fashion to confirm my misgivings. (more…)

Ignoring for a moment the fact that Peter Van Loane is an idiot, and Dalton McGuinty is fighting a losing battle; Ontario’s place in Canada seems to be a prominent subject of discussion these days. For those not in-the-know I will summarize:

The Tories have decided that some provinces are under-represented in the House of Commons, and are going to increase the number of seats, in total and for these specific provinces. Seems sensible so far, does it not? The catch is that B.C. and Alberta will get an increase that brings their number in line with their respective populations; while Ontario’s increase will only go half-way towards that goal (a deficit of 10 seats.)

Expanding the House of Commons is tricky; provinces can not have the number of seats reduced, and any expansion is bound to create political tension. Space is of course also limited… which provides a convenient explanation for Ontario’s exclusion. It is also pure bullshit; if there was only enough room to expand the House by X number of seats and three provinces were identified as needing expansion then the fair thing to do would be to determine the amount of seats to be added based on space available, and proportionally divide them among the three provinces based on population of the total group (Alberta, B.C., and Ontario.) (more…)

There was an interesting (and much better written) column in the Star yesterday which discusses pretty much everything I discussed in my post of the same day; Dion’s ineffectiveness, Liberal disorganization, Harper’s relatively-free reign of the public debate, etc. Ironically, the author thinks that this is the time for silence. He suggests that Dion can use this time to regroup and let Harper catch some heat in the spotlight. This argument relies on two assumptions: that Harper will look bad in the public eye when this is all said and done, and subsequently lose support; and that time away from the spotlight will help Dion and the Liberals.

I can certainly see how he could draw that conclusion, but I believe that this is a case where the media is perhaps having trouble seperating itself from the public. (more…)

Bold words I know, but it’s a fair question to consider. In the last decade the Maple Leafs have employed a series of truly horrible defensive players. Some of them went on to play well elsewhere, some of them were past their prime, and some of them just sucked out loud. I’m thinking of players like Jyrkke Lumme, Phil Housley (who combined with Lumme to briefly form the worst defensive pairing in the history of hockey), Anders Ericksson, Andy Wozniewsky, Aki Berg, Nathan Dempsey, etc.

The time has finally come to add Bryan McCabe to the list. In the past I’ve been willing to excuse his defensive deficiencies to a degree (has trouble reading the play, handles the puck poorly, takes bad penalties) because he provided all-star offensive production, he genuinely gives his best effort, and he was not overpaid. That being said, now that he is being dramatically overpayed his performance quite simply has to improve, especially given the appalling depth at Defense for the Leafs (a defense which is costing over $20 million/year.)

As evinced by last night’s game, that is not likely to happen. To put it simple terms (in case the man himself is reading this), McCabe plays like a 19 year old rookie. Want proof? Look at his tremendously boneheaded cross-ice pass that cost the team the game last night and his post-game comments. He is on record as saying that he was trying the cross-ice touch-pass to set up a one-timer.

There was plenty of open ice and plenty of time. “I just tried to one-tap it to Nik and make the play,” McCabe said.

There are three major problems with that statement: First, a good defenseman NEVER tries a touch-pass without looking up to see if the passing lane is occupied. Second, a good defenseman NEVER tries a touch-pass across the blue line when the receiving player is stationary and preparing to shoot. Third, a good defenseman NEVER tries a touch-pass on a short-handed, or reduced (even) manpower situation. In any of those three situations the touch pass becomes incredibly dangerous; if it’s intercepted the other team is almost guaranteed a breakaway. Experienced defensemen know this… there are ocassional slipups naturally, and sometimes a good player (or a bad one) will break the rule; but they know it is a mistake. To Bryan McCabe, it was just a play that didn’t work, and for someone that’s been in the league for over a decade, that thinking demonstrates an alarming lack of maturity and hockey intelligence.

It also demonstrates why the Leafs need DESPERATELY to trade him, regardless of the short-term fallout for the team’s defensive efforts.

Oh, another question. How on earth does a butterfly goalie allow a five-hole goal in overtime against a defenseman who has trouble shooting the puck?

If you guessed “The Liberal Party,” you are correct.

Ok, I know that’s an appalingly easy riddle, but it seemed like a good way to convey what I am feeling. Every time I see Harper’s commercials about Dion I am incensed, not because it’s a cheap and offensive way to play the game, and not because it’s dishonest, but because there has been no coherent response from the Liberals whatsoever. The Liberal party is broke; I get it… but I find it hard to believe that they are so starved of resources that they can’t mount any sort of visible offensive, on public policy grounds or otherwise. If they are so starved, then that really says more about Dion’s leadership than any unfortunate statements he makes in the House of Commons.

Lets assume for a moment that they are not then, and consider what that means. Everyone is making hay of the fact that the Liberals are only a few points behind Harper, but “close second” doesn’t matter much when social programs are being eliminated and opportunities for action are being wasted, as has happened for over two years now. As near as I can tell, the Liberal inaction is being driven by two things: organizational confusion stemming from leadership tensions, and a “keep a low profile” attitude. The latter is a reflex response to Martin’s “lets air the Liberals-under-Chretien Garbage” approach, which was an unmitigated disaster; and the former is again most likely a result of a lack of strong leadership.

Not having any ties to the Liberal Party (I tried to join in order to throw my support behind Bob Rae, but the party AND Bob Rae’s campaign never processed my seperate applications) it’s hard for me to comment on what is supposedly going on behind closed doors; but I choose to do so anyways. I am not one to simply demand that Dion drop so the Liberals take another kick at the can. Dion is not a loser, I do believe that he is capable of effectively leading the Liberal Party of Canada, but it is clear that he is failing to do so at this time.

“The best defense is a good offense” is not necessarily true in Politics. Dion doesn’t need to be Harper-lite to win back voters (and the Government.) However, he does need to do more than be the loudest member of the Opposition in the House of Commons, right now that’s all that he is; and that’s not what he was elected as leader for.

I have mixed feelings regarding Remembrance Day, and they are invariably tied to the statement above: Lest We Forget. I try to respect and honour Canada’s veterans, and the contributions they have made over the decades, but I am never quite sure how I feel about it. “Lest we forget” is dramatic and an almost tangible statement, but it (like Remembrance Day) is a Monument without context.

Why should we remember, and what lessons are we supposed to take from it? My reasons are personal, but the general “message” can best be summarized as “sometimes fighting for what’s right is necessary; and sometimes that means dying for what’s right.” A noble sentiment perhaps, if an unfortunate byproduct of humanity’s state of affairs. But how is someone without a personal motivation supposed to embrace this reasoning, and more importantly, what lessons can we all learn from it? Aphorisms are nice, but they are catchy for a reason: they are easily digestible and lacking in substance. (more…)

I’ve been avoiding the whole Mulroney-Schreiber scandal for the last week or two, in part because I didn’t feel I was fully qualified to comment. Other (more “read”) bloggers have offered a variety of insightful (and uninsightful, naturally) posts on the subject.

Harper’s decision to open an investigation however alleviates any concerns I may have had about drifting towards demagoguery… This decision is a mistake in every way possible. Not because he shouldn’t open an investigation, but because the timing and optics of it are terrible. Now, why does that sound familiar?

In reality the political fallout from this kerfuffle will be minor when compared to the Gomery inquiry, regardless of how it develops: The Liberals were the majority, Mulroney had no legislative ties to the PC party, and was not lobbying them… the PC Party no longer exists, and none of the current big-name (and visible) Conservatives had anything to do with Mulroney at the time. More importantly, it has nothing to do with Quebec…

Still, one can’t help but wonder at Harper’s timing on this one. How could a level-headed politician refuse to open an investigation into a former mentor and claim his reasons were not political, and finally give in only when that politician’s name is implicated in court papers… and still claim politics are not the motivation? Of course none of this is surprising. This is a politician who has basically created a “cone of silence” around the legislative building to deflect criticism and otherwise prop up his minority.

Of course, none of this would be a problem if anyone on the other side of the hall had any cajones, or the media properly did it’s job…

Whoops… see, almost slipping into irrational raving there! Media and opposition parties checking the power-hungry minority? Pie-in-the-sky optimism that is!