Having observed the Canadian Federal election of May 2, 2011, I drew certain conclusions. The debates, as the traditional "kick-off" for the campaign indicated that there was no apparent unifying vision of Canada. 

"Vision" can be defined in four parts. Firstly one must recognize the sources of potential change, or if you like, the catalysts of change. Secondly there must be a recognition of trends and what is inspiring those trends. This is followed by the ability to project change based on the trends, and lastly, to understand what policy is necessary, and where it is to be imposed. This policy of course can be deemed revolutionary, compromising, modifying or status quo. 

Regardless of party affiliation, most Canadians fit into the category between social democrat and conservative. For many years, certainly in my lifetime, the electorate has made choices between parties that are "centrist". Now, we have a bit of a widening in the spectrum, as the federal Conservatives are clearly more to the right, as ever before,. The NDP with their new preponderance of seats are in the process of defining whether or not they are proclaimed socialists. This could potentially could widen the spectrum further, as well as take advantage of their large number of seats in Quebec, which at this time is only a political opportunity, not a political victory. They could be coerced into taking a soft stance on sovereignty, taking advantage of the new movement, "The Coalition for the Future of Quebec". 

Governments regardless of their stance attempt to put into motion, policies that to some degree satisfy current trends, which are not necessarily a by-product of previous governmental policy. If the ruling party formulates policy that in turn compliments and helps drive the trends so that they match their projections, the government comes out looking competent. If the trends are truly indicative of public favour, then the party organization will likely be successful in maintaining a respectable electoral position. 

As we are now in the process of a Provincial election, we should take time to assess the vision, or lack of it, of the current contenders. It can be said that federal politics is more prone to visionary statements such as those referring to language, human rights, federalism, globalism, peace initiatives, environmental accords etc. Or has political dogmatism simply created an incremental style in provincial politics? A study of the political history of Quebec might imply that there is room for innovation and vision in Ontario. The process of relaying messages to Canadians during elections seems to be executed in a technocratic style, which is perceived as parallel to competence. 

A brief look at the political history of our nation, helps give us an idea of how provincial leaders established their reputations. Gordon Campbell, of British Columbia emphasized economic stimulus, expressed largely through natural resource management. By controlling the flow of natural resources, Campbell wanted British Columbia to be properly balanced as a somewhat autonomic province as well as being a major player in the free trade partnership. Back in the 1920's,  British Columbia's John Oliver tried to pressure the Federal Government into lowering freight rates in order to expand it's market. This is an early example of the continuing fight between the federalists and western regions. Ralph Klein tried to negotiate an energy interdependence with the United States. This was a north-south view of North American trade rather than an east-west view, which was promoted since the reign of John A. Macdonald, largely out out of a sense of patriotism and obligation, rather than business sense. Klein also planned for an aggressive system of debt repayment and opened up a so called "can of worms" by taking a stand on same-sex marriage. He wanted veto power on that issue, which appealed to the social conservative element in Alberta. 

William Lyon McKenzie King was concerned with the repression of the lower classes and stated that he wanted to form a "partnership of classes" seeing the potential for growth and change amid strife. I see this as a clear vision of a egalitarian nation. 

Peter Lougheed's Heritage Fund was a significant response to a provinces claim on it's autonomous economy. He was also a leader in the constitutional discussions, agreeing that provinces should have no veto, but should be able to opt out of amendments that reduced provincial powers. He wanted to avoid exploitation through strong government policy and economic diversification.  Many more examples exist of Premiers finding a method of protecting  economic resources. Danny Williams of Newfoundland adamantly opposed the federal expenditure cap on off-shore oil resources. Clyde Wells established his reputation when he spoke out during the Accord negotiations pointing out that individuals in "have-not" provinces would suffer from the Federal Governments difficulty in establishing and operating new shared-cost programmes. 

British Columbia's Richard McBride, back in 1914, opposed the federal policy stating that no province could establish it's own military. 

Our evolving relationship with the United States sheds light on one of the issues that is likely the most changed since the days of Macdonald.

For many years, the fear of invasion from the United States, dictated the direction of federal and provincial policy. Macdonald was very leery of possible invasion and felt that regionalism would weaken Canada's military security. Protectionist policy was originally based upon the fear of invasion. Later, protectionism became more of a tool for the maintenance of a balance of trade, with the emerging world markets.

As can be surmised by many of my comments, alienation is a common thread throughout the public spirit of the provinces, especially for the western provinces and Quebec. We must not forgot the issues that once faced Newfoundland, including the opportunity to join the Dominion of Canada in 1949. Joey Smallwood was the leader of the pro-Dominion group, campaigning on an assurance of prosperity. He expressed to his constituents that they had as much a right to the Dominion's resources as any of its other regions. He established the Economic development Plan of 1951, and lured foreign industrialists to Quebec because the local elite was not willing to invest in industrial development. The opposing Economic Unionists were campaigning for "responsible government" , and close ties with the United States. They warned against cheap Canadian imports and high income tax rates. 

Looking closer at Quebec, Jean LeSage, many years before the constitutional talks at Meach Lake and Charlottetown, declared that Quebeckers should be "masters of our own home". He also wanted to officially denounce the domination of Quebec's businesses by Anglophone interests, as well as the domination over the lives of Quebeckers by the Roman Catholic Church. "C'est le temps, que ca change." he spoke (It's time things changed). He also instigated the nationalism of the hydro commission and created the first Ministry of Education. This was the Quiet Revolution. 

These were the same issues that were being dealt with sixty years earlier  by the then Prime Minister, Wilfrid Laurier. 

The LeSage movement was a response to the suffocating leadership of Maurice Duplessis. Duplessis reinforced the Roman Catholic tradition in Quebec as well as ruralization and the suppression of the labour movement. 

Robert Bourassa following the tradition of Quebec "Liberal-nationalism"

was uncompromising in support of Bill 22. A "distinct society" proved to be a notion, that to some, was not succinct enough in expressing the unique qualities of Quebec, to be effective legislation. To others it was a political minefield, because of its many implications, and legal elasticity. 

Francois Legault, the leader of the previously mentioned political movement, the "Coalition for the Future of Quebec" could be leading Quebec into a new chapter, taking a strong nationalist stance without campaigning for sovereignty, at least initially. The emphasis is on health-care, education, the economy, and enforcing Quebec's Francophone culture, especially language. Autonomy over language is the destination of this new association which could be described as a PQ/Liberal coalition, getting large support from business leaders who were formerly Liberal supporters. 

Conscription was an issue that created conflict within the Church during the period of the first World War, and split the ruling Liberal party. Wilfred Laurier was pro-conscription, seeing it as a policy partner to the issue of reciprocity. This also led to a temporary alienation between Quebec and the Liberal party. This contrasts the anti-free-trade stance taken by the Turner Liberals in the 1980's. This split in the Liberal Party led to the rise of Robert Borden's Conservatives. Quebec, even in those early years of the century, had a nationalist perspective and Laurier suffered some of the same pitfalls as Pierre Trudeau did seventy years later. 

In the 1930's William Lyon Mackenzie King began his elongated reign as Prime Minister. To his credit he was well aware of regional disparities as well as their unique loyalties. he saw deeply into the political mosaic by being fearful of division along class lines. He was pragmatic in addressing the social balance, and the financial freedom of the individual. This is a key element of true Liberalism. He had a working hypothesis that was adequate in preserving stability, but also accepting instability and inconsistencies as catalysts for compromise, consensus and adjustment. 

Looking at the current Prime Minister, Mr. Harper, it has been pointed out by a political observer that he does indeed have a vision for Canada, but chooses to be cautious in the message. He sees Canada as a nation of conservative values, as he expressed during the recent visit of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. Religious fundamentalism flavours his outlook, which gives his ruling party features resembling the "tea party" which is creating a conservative revival in the United States. Tight national security, and an extension of the "melting pot society" philosophy as opposed to the cultural mosaic, is creating a more emotional opposition to the Conservatives that is yet to be enunciated effectively by the opposition. 

If I were so inclined I might hope that this series of essays enlightens you politically, but to be more humble, I do propose that they will encourage you to ask the pertinent questions related to your voting experiences, and the perspective you have a part of the political pie that makes up our democracy. The Canadian political scheme, a Parliamentary democracy and federation of provinces, might be simplistically described as that of a teenager negotiating with his parents for an increase in his/her allowance. The dependent can look for legal ways to earn extra money, and within his jurisdiction, look for ways to alter the guidelines that dictate his/her accessibility to funds. He/she can express his position in a way that inflates his value in the eyes of the parents. This can be in the form of creative accounting, or in the form of promises, that of course may, or may not be kept. Threats of complete or partial separation may motivate or de-motivate the parents, who may have a modus operandi that is not clearly understood by the dependent. 

BREAK A

Politically, the provinces are the main component of the federation. This is parallel, but not precisely to the phenomenon of regionalism. In other words, an effective Prime Minister must be aware of the different regions in his nation, which have differing needs, and how those interests can be satisfied within the federation. The provinces are not perfect representations of the regions, but for political purposes are forced to represent the causes that are of most interest. The regions of Canada could be described as the Atlantic region, (Newfoundland is an interesting sub-region that includes the northern features of Labrador), Quebec (very much a cultural region), Ontario, northern Ontario, Manitoba and Saskatchewan), Alberta, British Columbia and the North. The North is going through varying stages of development, with Nunavut being a formal federal territory which increases the regions political viability. 

In what is described as a global economy, world commodity prices have a huge effect on the economics outside of the central manufacturing  corridors of Canada. In the north, the absence of industry leaves no potential for labour absorption. Schemes to manage fluctuating world prices invite conflict with Washington, over their alleged market-distorting affects. The National Policy under Macdonald, back in the 1880's, in order to pay the bills for rail construction established high-tariff import substitution, and preferential rail fees that encouraged the funnelling of natural resources to eastern industrial centres rather than south or south-east to American markets. Economic nationalism, which was a policy of significant popularity in the early 1970's  is a logical response to the side-effects of globalization. Economic nationalism was a course recommended by members of the NDP's defunct Waffle group, but is now seen as a dated perspective. It is seen as dated because of what is perceived as the inevitability of the evolving global economy. It is interesting at this point to ask the question, "Is the fundamental basis of economic nationalism practical in today's economy?" This discussion would demand a whole new essay, but it is suffice to say that if one of the political entities in Canada decides to encourage this approach, it might find surprising appeal. More regulation and control over imported commodities. Less reliance on world fossil fuel prices. Protective tariffs on our own resources. More investment on industrial development. Higher profits for Canadian manufactures. This of course creates inflation, but wages would also increase.

Let's now look at the current election campaign in Ontario.The NDP and the Conservatives are enunciating policy that is not always in stark contrast. If they continue to campaign policy by policy, this pattern may continue, As the election gets closer to voting day, the parties may feel more inclined to differentiate one selves, thus encouraging more visionary declarations. Both want more long-term care beds, the numbers vary slightly, but not significantly. Both want to scrap the local health integration networks, as their accountability is under question. They both propose small business tax cuts, and more transparency regarding infrastructure projects, and are encouraging the gas tax revenues to be allocated fairly to the respective communities. Both parties are practising deductive micro-politics, which is seeing the political process as starting from the communities and growing outward, rather than the government imposing policy upon the community. The Tories have generally been the precursor of the concept of a streamlined government, but it has become a necessity for all parties to practise financial restraint. Environmental policy is in an evolutionary stage, the Conservatives being the most cautious, making at this point a supportive position for nuclear power, and fighting the deal that the Liberals made with Samsung to manufacture and install 2,500 megawatts of clean wind and solar energy. This project is targeted to create 16,000 jobs. Opposition parties claim the the operation could have been handled by Ontario Power Generation. The Green party is also looking at localization, focussing on community based energy sources and an interconnection in establishing energy contracts, and they are opposed to any new nuclear plant development. The Green Party extends environmental policy in their desire to establish the Ontario Food and Farmers Policy Council, the encouragement of illness prevention measures instead of spending money on the end of the treatment cycle, and specific plans to harness wasted energy. The NDP has not shown the environment as a high priority, but have referred to the merging of Hydro One, Ontario Power Generation, the Ontario Power Authority, and independent system electricity operators. All the parties are looking for creative ways to cut energy costs for consumers, the NDP suggesting taking the HST off utilities. The do express a somewhat protectionist outlook with a recommendation, thought not specific, to reducing the export of raw materials. Our process of "greening" the economy is certainly made more complex because we have a developed economy, and a multi-faceted infrastructure. Third world countries, such as Algeria, who have simplified infrastructures, have the potential to build a sustainable economy from the ground up. It should be up to our governments, who sponsor projects in these countries, to ensure funds are going to such activities. Algeria is planning to tap it's solar power reserves for export. 

Public and private partnerships can mobilize investors. The European Union and the United Nations Procurement Division are doing innovative work. The World Bank is offering 250 million Africans energy-free light. 

What relationship is there between federal, provincial and municipal governments? There is no question that the federalists are in a position to speak with vision. Mr. Ford, Toronto's recently elected mayor, campaigned as a cost-cutter. This is evidence of a right swing in Ontario, that was clearly demonstrated in May. The "small c" conservative movement is a phenomenon. The unclear positions of the Liberals and NDP are an indication that they are pausing, partly because of the fact that they are hesitant in isolating the middle-of-the-road voter who has traditionally voted for different parties at different times. In other words, the electorate is volatile. The Green Party are expanding it's policy structure and still have some work to do in being recognized as more than a single issue party. Their platform does encompass all sectors of the issue spectrum, as building a sustainable economy involves integrating policy from health-care, human rights, structuring import/export tariffs, re-prioritizing education objectives, and redefining the role of the public and private sectors. Despite the evidence of conservatism the majority of Ontarians still support public financing of rapid transit, libraries, utilities and health care. So all parties have to be able to operate a balanced system, with a limited cost escalation in public services. 

The late Eric Kierans a former member of Trudeau's cabinet did not see eye to eye with Trudeau's centrist approach. He was more comfortable with the approach that Lester Pearson took in the 1960's.

He recognized the concept of the "nation-state" and saw it as a tool to protect Canada from it's unwieldy economic system. It implies a politics first, economics second approach, which is based on the belief that a strong infrastructure sets the foundation for a solid economy. 

As we begin to listen to the candidates to decide who will take on the job as our next Premier, it occurs to me that a lot of issues are totally overlooked. If they are being overlooked, it is not necessarily a reflection of priorities. It could be based upon the fact that many problems are seen as a result of previous or ongoing policy. The policies are likely under current jurisdictions such as health, environment, infrastructure, industry, trade, commerce etc. How many times have you heard a candidate talk about today`s youth. In England progress is being made by putting young people into mental health organizations and treatment centres rather than into jails. As young people are acquiring mental health issues at a larger rate we must look at the fact that they are dealing with a much more aggressive society, which is also being influenced by the electronic social media, which is also alarmingly intrusive. 

The G20 meeting was arranged for the sole purpose of allowing the members to create empathy for each others causes. Because of the large number of participants at the table much else was unattainable. Free trade negotiations with the European Economic Union is progressing but it brings into question the provinces desire for a certain level of autonomy, such as Ontario`s buy local green plan. Canada``s current high economic standing has elevated their status in negotiations and propelled the provinces into a co-operative stance with little chance of opting out of certain economic plans. The federal government is certain expressing a stand pat position, because of our economic standing, but our commendation of China must be challenged by opposition parties because of human rights violations. 

The Green Party campaign must accomplish one thing. There is a perception that they are a one issue party. To change this perception, they must explain that environmental policy and the development of sustainable industry with alter the infrastructure of our economy, lower the demand for certain health care services, create employment , lower government spending due to the decrease in waste, and lower energy costs. If this can be illustrate effectively, it is hard to argue that there political base would grow, They are promoting a tuition freeze, electric vehicle incentives, improved school food programmes, better rewards for food stewardship, green building programmes, a reduction traffic gridlock, training programmes for sustainable economics, revenue neutral taxes on waste and emissions, innovation in capturing waste heat, community gardens,  more community based energy sources, the localization of food systems, more recreation friendly communities, electronic health records, more case managers at health clinics,  strengthen the Environmental Bill of Rights and lastly, eliminate corporate and union donations to political parties. 

The federal Green Party has launched the "We're sorry" campaign to apologize to the rest of the world for the Harper governments action on asbestos. On June 24th, Canada became the only country in the world

to oppose the listing of chrysotile asbestos as a hazardous substance under the Rotterdam convention. 

The Conservatives are looking at a buy Ontario food policy and agree on the fair sharing of gas taxes. They do support the closing of all coal plants by 2014. In education they are looking for more teacher autonomy, which should get major support from the teachers union. Like all parties, they are looking at wait time guarantees in hospitals. The Aboriginals are being considered as the mining tax is being looked at as a better source of community funding for the Aboriginals.in the north. 

On speaking about socialism, Horvath replied, I don`t think it is an insult at all. I think it speaks to a value system that says that wealth that`s created  in a society should be shared, and people shouldn`t be  living in dire or desperate poverty.society. She promotes tax reform that is in keeping with the priorities of a democratic and socialist Canada. She proposes to introduce initiatives requiring the public sector unions to compete for government contracts, where appropriate, in order to cut costs.