Cdns at odds with govt priorities

[steven lloyd]

Interesting ...

Cdns at odds with govt priorities
by The Canadian Press | Story: 119443 - Jul 20, 2014 / 9:05 am

Public-opinion research for the federal Finance Department suggests key government policies are out of step with Canadians' priorities, including the Northern Gateway project.

Members of focus groups consulted prior to the February budget had "little enthusiasm" for the proposed bitumen pipeline to the British Columbia coast — even those who said they support the controversial project.

And among the 12 groups consulted — from Coquitlam, B.C., to Bridgewater, N.S. — the economy itself was not a top-of-mind concern.

Rather, the groups spontaneously raised education, health care, pensions and veterans as their key issues.

They also called for more processing and refining of Canada's oil resources at home, and to do so in a more environmentally safe manner.

The findings of the January focus groups, commissioned from NRG Research Group, suggest the Harper government's central policy themes — trade and the economy, with an emphasis on energy exports — are resonating less with ordinary Canadians.

"There is little enthusiasm for the (Northern Gateway) project, even among supporters," says a Jan. 25 report on the findings.
"Detractors worry about the environmental consequences in the event of a spill, particularly as a result of a tanker accident off the B.C. coast."

"There is an appreciation that increased market access for oil will be economically beneficial but there is still a desire to do so in a more environmentally safe manner."

The Harper government has made Northern Gateway a central plank of its energy strategy, and has pilloried environmental groups who oppose it, labelling them "radical."

The focus groups, along with a public-opinion survey of 3,000 people, were carried out in advance of the Feb. 11 budget under a $135,000 contract.

The analysis of the 3,000-person survey's raw numbers was conducted internally by the Privy Council Office rather than by the polling firm, under a policy dating from April 2010, and like all other such internal analysis is not routinely made public.
Treasury Board policy requires web posting only of public-opinion analysis commissioned from outside firms.

Enbridge's proposed Northern Gateway pipeline, intended to carry bitumen from Alberta's oilsands to the port of Kitimat, B.C., got the federal cabinet's blessing on June 17 on condition that 209 issues be resolved, including consultations with First Nations.

The project faces stiff opposition from numerous groups, including B.C. First Nations, and must overcome several court challenges.

New Democrat environment critic Megan Leslie said the focus-group report "shows what the NDP has been saying all along, that B.C. MPs, Conservative MPs, are going to have to answer to this."

"There is not support for this project in British Columbia and across Canada," she said in an interview from Halifax.
"It's also really heartening to see that people spontaneously talked about resource development through a sustainable lens. They talked about refining and processing here in Canada. People get it."

Asked for comment on the report, a spokesman for the Finance Department said only that the research helps measure the "evolution" of Canadian attitudes.

"The use of quantitative (telephone survey data) and qualitative (focus group) research allow the Finance Department to get a clearer sense of the evolution of the public mood towards the state of the economy, Canadians' sense of personal economic well-being and government actions in the economic arena," David Barnabe said in an email.

Among the other issues participants raised:
— Canada Pension Plan reform: "This came up more often in Ontario, and the sentiment typically focused on the need to ensure this program is adequately funded."
The government has resisted calls to improve CPP though has endorsed other pension-related reforms. The Ontario government has since promised its own public pension plan.
— Veterans: "Concerns expressed whether enough was being done to help individuals with health/mental issues arising from their military service."
The government faced a barrage of veterans' criticisms over the last year, especially related to military suicides, but says it has improved benefits and care.
— Health care and education "continue to come up regularly in the discussions."
The government has said these are areas of exclusive provincial jurisdiction, but has promised stable, predictable block funding.

The report also found that lower-income households were less sanguine about the state of the economy than wealthier households, citing few well-paid jobs being generated and saying "the gap between rich and poor is growing."

"Unbalanced or unequal are words that come up frequently to describe the economy for these individuals," says the document. "Participants often stated that economic decisions tended to support the corporate sector more than average families."

Said Leslie: "Canadians have a broader perspective on what the economy is than the Conservatives, (who) talk about their laser-like focus.

"I would actually say that it's an incredibly narrow focus, on their own navel."

The focus groups, two in each community, were conducted in Coquitlam, B.C.; Calgary; Kitchener-Waterloo, Ont.; Toronto; Quebec City; and Bridgewater, N.S.

http://www.castanet.net/news/Canada/119 ... priorities

[hobbyguy]

I am heartened by the common sense prevalent in the priorities of Canadians. Now if we could just get a common sense government.

[steven lloyd]

I am heartened by the common sense prevalent in the priorities of Canadians.

I am thinking this is a more of a shift in Canadian attitude. It could really be that awareness is growing in the electorate that our current governments are really only interested in serving the interests of a select few as opposed to the populace at large. Bear in mind though that is only one study, and it will remain to be seen how this translates at our next federal election.

[GrooveTunes]

I am heartened by the common sense prevalent in the priorities of Canadians. Now if we could just get a common sense government.

It has been proven that common sense goes out the window at election time. Eg, the last 2 federal elections.

[Rosieodonell]

I am not sure if common sense goes out the window but more like the people that vote are sticking to their guns and not changing. I say this because the newer generations sprout all this love the planet etc.. but are too lazy to get involved and vote.

[steven lloyd]

That’s true. I don’t have any link right now but I recently read a report essentially stating the same thing; that young people, for all their idealism, are as a group the least likely to get out and vote. In addition, the marginalized, disenfranchised and lower income groups with the most to lose by not participating are also, as a group, the least likely to get out and vote. Little wonder the status quo is so entrenched.However, seniors are an ever growing segment of our population and at least some of them have to start awakening to the fact that voting out of long held habits is not serving their best interest either. It will be an interesting election and election campaign. I just wish Trudeau was a stronger candidate.

ETA: as an aside, another report suggested that in BC at least, the strength of the First Nation vote with an emphasis on the importance of environment and sustainability ensures the NDP will continue to be elected in those more remote ridings.

[hobbyguy]

It will be an interesting election indeed. JT is not the strongest candidate, but then neither was Jean Chretien considered especially strong in 1993 (my personal favorite as the Mulroney gang got hammered down to 2 seats for selling us down the river with NAFTA).

The wildcard is indeed younger voters. IF, big if, JT can bring out the younger voters, a surprise could be in order. When Chretien first got elected, the turnout was 69.6%. 2011, giving Harper a majority, was a low turnout election at 61.1%. 2008 was even worse at 58.8%. In both of the last elections the Liberals had candidates that generated no interest, and 2011 had Jack Layton generating some enthusiasm.

Contrast that with JT's papa, over 75% turnout. and Joe Clark over 75% turnout. Seems as turnout goes up, the experience and "strength" of the candidate is less important than the ability to generate interest that brings out younger voters. Joe Clark was almost "hip" in the late seventies - heck he had fairly long hair and Pierre had lost most of his.

So given that the study shows that Harper is out of step, all that is required is to be more in step and the "normal" turnout gets you close. Add in the youth of JT (Harper IS looking old, tubby, and tired these days) and his young family and you can easily see where younger voters could decide to get off their duffs because they have someone that looks like he could understand their issues. 2 or 3 points can swing a lot of ridings. Increase the turnout of younger voters (only 38% showed last time) that should heavily favor JT, and suddenly a lot ridings start to swing.

The local Liberal meeting that I attended made me feel like a really old fella. And that's was 2 yrs out from the election. The young folks were talking about "the Obama strategy" somewhat like "this is how we kick the fat old white guys out". Harper is really looking exactly like that stereotype these days.

Harper has his own "Duff" to worry about with the Mike Duffy trial, and I sense in Duffy wanting the trial to get going soon that he would love the opportunity to exercise "if I go down, you go down". Nothing like a scandal to help out.

[Oxl3y]

I am not sure if common sense goes out the window but more like the people that vote are sticking to their guns and not changing. I say this because the newer generations sprout all this love the planet etc.. but are too lazy to get involved and vote.

You say that like voting even matters. No matter who gets in office nothing will ever change because ultimately politics is a great big *bleep* war and the peoples best interests are the furthest priority. Your candidate can be the most idealistic person in the world but all of his good ideas wont bear fruit because the opposing party will do whatever they can to quash them just because they weren't the ones to suggest it. Sometimes I almost envy a dictatorship system where if the leader wants to do something it damn well will happen.

[maryjane48]

Sometimes I almost envy a dictatorship system where if the leader wants to do something it damn well will happen.

we hAve that now, its called the banking system

[hobbyguy]

Voting does matter.

The chief enablers of corrupt governments are those who do NOT vote.

The second in command enablers of corrupt governments are those who vote along party lines - no matter how stinky their current crop of representatives is.

Politicians only pay attention to those who bother to vote. If, for example, the lower socioeconomic group turned out in bigger numbers to vote, then the minimum wage laws etc. would begin to tilt in their favor. Watch the politicians and you will see them pander to different voting groups, and advance the interests of those who fund their campaigns. So if you aren't a voter (even if eligible), then they won't pay any attention to what matters to you. Even less if you don't contribute to party funds.

This is an interesting aside that really shows how the government has gotten so far out of sync with Canadians: http://www.hilltimes.com/news/news/2014/07/21/rathgeber-book-to-outline-mps-failure-to-challenge-government/39139

And the sad part is:

"Re-election, he admits, becomes much more difficult without a party banner to run in front of"

[Oxl3y]

Voting does matter.

The chief enablers of corrupt governments are those who do NOT vote.

The second in command enablers of corrupt governments are those who vote along party lines - no matter how stinky their current crop of representatives is.

Politicians only pay attention to those who bother to vote. If, for example, the lower socioeconomic group turned out in bigger numbers to vote, then the minimum wage laws etc. would begin to tilt in their favor. Watch the politicians and you will see them pander to different voting groups, and advance the interests of those who fund their campaigns. So if you aren't a voter (even if eligible), then they won't pay any attention to what matters to you. Even less if you don't contribute to party funds.

This is an interesting aside that really shows how the government has gotten so far out of sync with Canadians: http://www.hilltimes.com/news/news/2014/07/21/rathgeber-book-to-outline-mps-failure-to-challenge-government/39139

And the sad part is:

"Re-election, he admits, becomes much more difficult without a party banner to run in front of"

Pandering...that's all it is. How many times has someone with a great platform been voted in just to see them fail to deliver on every single promise. A politician, if voted into power, should have to follow through on every single campaign promise for better or for worse. Until that happens it doesn't matter who sits in the chair...nothing positive will ever get done.

[steven lloyd]

The chief enablers of corrupt governments are those who do NOT vote.

That’s a fact. And as little power as a single voter might have, the person too lazy to bother to vote has even less.

Mind you, we still tend to fall short in holding our elected governments to account – either succumbing to apathy or making some excuse that “well, at least they’re not as bad as the other guy”. We have the governments and governance we deserve.

[mexi cali]

It could really be that awareness is growing in the electorate that our current governments are really only interested in serving the interests of a select few

Oh please let that be true.

It's interesting to feel the defeat and resignation in the content of at least some of the posts here. I would guess that is a common malady suffered by the majority of us who are old enough to vote.

It may sound simplistic and defeatist when eligible voters use the platform that their vote doesn't matter because nothing will change but really, that is the perception and an individuals perception is indeed their reality. And that is sad.

It is energy draining to watch how the Government of most days views the public and their wants. Their disdain and apathy toward the electorate is palpable.

The issues of the day are only issues if they deem them to be and if there is a payoff for the party and its members. My belief has long been that virtually all political parties of any substance exist only to serve themselves.

The article you posted indicates that maybe, just maybe this might be changing if ever so slightly.

If that is the case then the flames need to be fanned and the hope that there could be a change on the horizon needs to be encouraged.