Monday, March 1, 2010

By-election in Ottawa West-Nepean

With all the Olympics buzz for the past while it is almost too easy to forget about other less savoury matters, one of which is the by-election this week in Ottawa West-Nepean. It's been a quiet affair, with only a modest number of signs erected and just one leaflet apiece in my mailbox from three of the candidates. The election will not change the government and it won't impact on any policies, or at least not directly. The Liberal candidate, Bob Chiarelli, is supposedly the front runner despite the possibility of a protest vote against the government. I must admit that until the election got under way, Chiarelli was the only one of the candidates whose name I was familiar with.

One curiosity that popped out when I compared the Chiarelli and Graham (PC party) leaflets was that both candidates are running on the same issue: the performance of the Liberal government. They are also both focused on the government record on health care, which is perhaps sensible since it does consume about half of the provincial budget. That may sound surprising, but it is absolutely true that over the years the provincial government has morphed into a health care provider (a bit like an HMO in the US) with a diversity of other, relatively tiny portfolios. Other provinces are similar in this regard.

The difference in the health care focus of the leaflets is that the PC party pretty much scream: "E-health scandal! Throw the bums out!" It's true that the E-health project was a scandal, and it was not alone among other government agencies, including OLG. The Liberal leaflet, unlike the small-sized card from the PC party, is much larger and lists a bunch of health care investments made within the riding. The object would appear to dazzle us that none of this would have occurred under another party (i.e. PC) in government. The reality is that these investments would almost certainly been made regardless of the party in power, since if not done, the result would have been even more politically dangerous than a mere spending scandal.

I am unimpressed with the Liberal candidate and the present Liberal government, and I am definitely not impressed with the content of their leaflet. Chiarelli may win, however it will be have to be without my help. I am motivated in this by the matter of his record as Mayor of Ottawa. While he does work better with others than the current office-holder, his record is one that is endemic of all Ottawa councils: mismanaged budgets and policies. When I consider that Chiarelli could very well end up in cabinet if elected, well I just won't go there.

Then there's the PC candidate, Beth Graham. I understand she has a service record, but the leaflet talks to none of that. Presumably she or her party handlers think it unworthy of notice or worthy of remaining obscure. There is even some high comedy on her leaflet with its headline: "Time for change." Change? This is not a general election; if she is elected, she will be a member of the opposition, and the government will be precisely the same as before. I would rather hear how she proposes to be a good representative for us while seated in opposition. It's nice that she (or the PC central committee) wants to stop government misspending, but this election won't accomplish that.

Another hilarious item on the Graham leaflet is the reference to "the Toronto Liberals' E-Health scandal..." I'll give them kudos for proper use of the apostrophe, but just what is this Toronto Liberals creature? No matter which party forms the government, including the PC, it is expected that Toronto MPPs will feature prominently since the city contains a large percentage of the Ontario population. I could as easily claim that the previous Harris government was a cabal of Toronto Conservatives. Yet it is a fact that neither McGuinty nor Harris are from Toronto.

Those leaflets are motivating me to vote for neither of these two candidates. If not them, then who? It is highly unlikely that one of the others -- NDP or Green -- would win, although they are worth a look. Since this election will not change the government, it seems I can either tell the government that I do or do not support them. By choosing the latter I must select a candidate to receive my protest vote. This brings us to the third leaflet, which is from MacKenzie the Green Party candidate, whoever he is. Actually the leaflet does say something about who he is, which is very different from the approach taken in the Graham leaflet. There is even some mention of policy, something eschewed by the other two. This is a more positive approach to the electorate.

I have yet to make my choice except that it will be a protest vote. I reject the NDP for other reasons, so I am left with choosing Graham (PC) or MacKenzie (Green). Whatever way I do eventually vote, it will be uncorrelated with my vote in the next general election. That is, mine will be a one-time protest vote that speaks to the dynamics of the by-election and the ability of the candidates to communicate something (or anything) that has meaning to me or the riding. I do hope they all say more, publicly, over the next few days than what they have so far chosen to emphasize in their leaflets.

No comments: