Biggest fool of them all

I'm not a big fan of polls. But a recent poll conducted for the The Comedy Network reveals that Canadians have chosen the federal Liberal Party as "Fools of the Year."

TOP 5 CANADIAN "FOOLS"

1. The Federal Liberal Party (34%): for its involvement in the sponsorship scandal and ultimate election defeat.
2. Celine Dion (27%): for pleading that officials send kayaks to rescue New Orleanians after Hurricane Katrina.
3. CBC (13%): for locking out its employees and thus giving away viewers to other channels for reasons nobody really cared about.
4. The Canadian Electorate (12%): for electing a Stephen Harper government.
5. Team Canada (11%): for one of its worst performances ever at the 2006 Olympic Winter Games despite a star-studded line-up and a $100-million US NHL payroll.

Good riddance

Pauline Marois is leaving politics. Although she undoubtedly has her admirers among PQ hardliners, I have nothing but contempt for the woman. I am happy to see her go.

Among her accomplishments highlighted yesterday were the creation of the province's low-cost daycare system, the constitutional amendment replacing religious school boards with linguistic ones and the drafting of youth-protection legislation.

I will always remember Marois as the person who kicked the English out of our local elementary school when she handed control of the school over to the new French school board. Until then, the school was one of the pioneers of French immersion education in Canada, operating as a completely bilingual school with a student population that was 60% English and 40% French.

Imagine that! A bilingual school! In Quebec! I’m not making this up. Of course, Marois wasted no time putting that to a quick end once she had a constitutional amendment in hand permitting segregated schools.

As to Marois’ other "accomplishments," she, more accurately, created a high-cost, low-price daycare system. Having lived through the system, I have never understood why advocates for institutional daycare in other parts of the country have lionized the Quebec model. For example, we were forced to enrol our daughter full time to secure a place even though we only needed care for three days a week. Is it any wonder that costs have spiralled out of control?

And finally, her youth protection legislation apparently did not obviate the need for forceful advocates to speak out against continuing injustice. One casualty along the way was youth court Judge Andrée Ruffo, who was removed from the court "for repeatedly speaking out on the inadequacies of the youth protection system."

Darth Harper

I have decided to end my little trial subscription with the Toronto Star after seeing Sunday's editorial cartoon. It is actually quite offensive when you think about it.

I sent them the following note:

I want to cancel my subscription... I know the Star is a Liberal paper, but publishing an editorial cartoon equating our prime minister with Darth Vader is going way too far. I simply cannot stomach it. Good bye.

I certainly won't miss their editorials or the spin they put on the news. However, I will miss some of the ads. So to all those advertisers that might wish to attract me as a customer, you better start advertising in the National Post since it is the only newspaper I will be getting from now on.

The discipline of power

Adam Daifallah has posted his thoughts about what has been said about David Emerson. Let me address his points one by one.

First, every person who enters politics does so for a combination of altruistic and selfish reasons. Emerson does not need to be a minister. He could go back to the private sector and easily earn ten times his minister's salary.

Second, the Liberals badly flubbed the software lumber file, even with Emerson as a Liberal minister. That said, Emerson does bring inside knowledge of the forest industry and a no-nonsense approach in dealing with issues. Is he indispensable? Far from it. But he does have a lot to offer.

Third, loyalty and criticism need not be mutually exclusive. However, I believe the way many have gone about criticizing the party does amount to disloyalty.

Fourth, while similar on the surface, the two defections differ in fundamental ways. Belinda was a driving force behind the merger and a founding member of the CPC. She crossed the floor in a way calculated to cause serious damage to the party. Her reasons for leaving were Liberal talking points and were disconnected from reality, especially her professed fears about Quebec separatism.

In contrast, one could call Emerson a fair-weather Liberal. He was attracted by power and the good he could do with it. Paul Martin personally recruited him. His loyalty was to Martin, not the Liberal Party. Yet Martin stepped down when he lost power. Harper offered Emerson an opportunity to advance his agenda through the CPC in a real position, not something invented to feed his ego.

One similarity in the two defections, however, is that the Conservatives were hurt politically by both. For some reason, the Liberals have escaped relatively unscathed.

Fifth, there was nothing improper in what Stephen Harper did with either cabinet appointment. It was consistent with past practices and served an important strategic purpose in bolstering his government, at least until party members starting shooting each other in the feet. If Harper does nothing to advance his accountability platform, then all the criticism is justified. But give him time. I do not think he will disappoint us.

And finally, Harper is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. An awful lot of ink was spilled in the aftermath of the election regarding the lack of CPC representation in the major metropolitan areas. If Harper did nothing to address this, he would have been subjected to continuing criticism. And yet he is also criticized for deftly ensuring that these cities are represented in his cabinet.

It is tough enough to put together a government when you lead a new party that is largely made up of members with little experience governing. The last thing a leader needs is to be ducking shots from his members. That does not mean we should be silent about actions with which we disagree. But there are more diplomatic ways of communicating these concerns than through the media. If the CPC is to succeed in advancing its agenda, then its members must learn the discipline of power.

No minors allowed

On Warren Kinsella's invitation at the Blogstravaganza, I went to see the Shit From Hell show tonight with my 12-year old daughter. Warren suggested that I bring some earplugs for her because they play loud. Unfortunately, he didn't mention fake ID. No minors allowed.

So we waited in the rain at the corner of College and Bathurst for our streetcar and went home. Too bad. I would have liked to see if he has improved any since I last saw him play with The Trial Continues. That was too long ago.

Puppy distraction

As if I didn't have enough distractions to keep me from blogging, we recently added a puppy to our household. It is almost like having another child. Although as I remember it, changing diapers and toilet training a child is easier than house training a puppy, or at least the mess is better contained.

We got the puppy just before Christmas. My 12-year daughter, who had been asking for a puppy for years, finally got her wish. A few months earlier, she had found a breeder in the neighbourhood and we put our name on the list for one of the puppies in the next litter.

We first saw the puppies when they were three weeks old. The mother is a Jack Russell and the father is a Jack Russell-Shih Tzu mix.

We were hoping the Shih Tzu genes would temper her a bit since Jack Russells are known to be pretty active and lively dogs. Well, it seems that it was the Jack Russell that came out in the mix. At three months, she is already jumping over the gate we were using to keep her in the kitchen.

Moreover, she seems absolutely defiant at times when I insist that she pee on the mat. Kaloo will wander over to a spot in the living room and do her business while looking straight at me. So far, she hits the mat only about 50% of the time.

Raising a puppy is far more work than I expected. Fortunately, my daughter is keeping her end of the bargain and giving me lots of help. It has certainly been a learning experience for both of us. In the meantime, if my blogging is even lighter than usual, you'll know why.

Belinda was wrong about Quebec

It seems Belinda had it all wrong. Instead of being a threat to Canadian unity, support for Quebec independence has actually declined following the election of a Conservative government. Not that she would have listened to me anyway.

People in French-speaking Quebec are rapidly losing interest in the idea of independence, according to a new poll released on Tuesday.

The CROP poll for the La Presse newspaper showed only 34 percent of Quebecers would vote "yes" in a referendum on whether to split from the rest of Canada, down steeply from 43 percent before last week's federal election. The number who would vote "no" rose to 58 percent from 49 percent.

The newspaper linked the drop in support for separatism to the election result. The Conservatives beat the Liberals, who had been badly hurt by a corruption scandal in Quebec which damaged the image of federalism in the province.

From the original article in La Presse:

Pour Claude Gauthier, vice-président de CROP, les Québécois croient, avec le départ des libéraux fédéraux, que les changements souhaités au fédéralisme sont possibles, qu'il pourra y avoir un dialogue fructueux entre le gouvernement Charest et celui de Harper.

" Les gens ne croyaient plus que le changement était possible, les Québécois sont clairement favorables à la main tendue par M. Harper ", résume le sondeur, qui voit même dans ce message un écho de l'arrivée d'un Brian Mulroney, porté au pouvoir en septembre 1984 avec la promesse de faire adhérer " dans l'honneur et l'enthousiasme " le Québec à la Constitution répudiée en 1982.

This is great news for Canada and Quebec. Let’s just make sure we follow through.

Admitting you're a Conservative

Here in Toronto it is not easy being a Conservative, or at least admitting it.

Yesterday while out canvassing for Jurij Klufas, my local CPC candidate, one prospective supporter greeted me enthusiatically at his door. Yet when asked if we could count on his support he whispered he was voting Conservative; his friends inside were all Liberals and he didn't want them to know it.

This widespread reluctance to display one's Conservative stripes reminds me of francophone federalists in Quebec. Federalist Quebecers have traditionally kept their political views to themselves such that pollsters systematically underestimate support for federalist parties if they take their word at face value. Consequently, experienced Quebec pollsters typically give the bulk of the undecided vote to the federalist side.

I suspect something similar may be at work with the Conservatives. Rather than enduring possible discomfort when revealing their political preferences, some may opt for the politically correct answer and choose the Liberals.

That may be changing if this story is any guide.

On Monday, Martin's Liberals could well find that Toronto and Ontario are peppered with federal Conservative voters — Tory-leaning folks who've said little about their political sentiments for a couple of decades.

While their friends and families packed the Commons with Liberals from Ontario these past dozen years, these Conservative sympathizers were content to hang back or even vote with the prevailing trends.

But the past few weeks and months, Ontario's "closet Conservatives" have embarked on coming out, step by slow step.

Of course, if this is true then the polls may be giving a more accurate read on public opinion. In any event, the Conservatives are on the road to victory. It is only a question of by how much.

Kick the Bastards Out

No one expected the Liberals not to play dirty, but the depths to which they have sunk still surprises me. In their final dying days, they are pulling out all the stops to paint their opponents as extreme. Without doubt, the last batch of Liberal ads go well beyond what would once have been considered unacceptable political tactics in this country. But then, the Liberals are proving what we knew them to be all along.

In that spirit, I have resurrected my song Poor Paul (right-click to save), which I wrote last spring. Admittedly, the lyrics (printed below) rather crudely express how many of us feel and are more Carolyn Parrish than high art. Nonetheless, it can be quite cathartic to sing along, especially during the chorus. Give it a try and keep in mind that next Monday Canadians are finally going to kick the bastards out.

Poor Paul

This is a story about Mr. Dithers
Otherwise known as Paul
Prime Minister Paul Martin
The saviour of the Liberal Party

Kick the bastards out
Kick the bastards out
Kick the bastards out
Ooo ooo ooo
Ooo ooo ooo
Ooo ooo ooo

Poor Paul was born to be Prime Minister
And when he got his chance
He blew it
He blew it badly
He doesn’t know what he’s doing
Not at all
Poor Paul
Poor Paul
Poor Paul

Kick the bastards out
Kick the bastards out
Kick the bastards out
Ooo ooo ooo
Ooo ooo ooo
Ooo ooo ooo

We don’t want you
As our Prime Minister
You’re an idiot
Get the hell out of the way

Va chier ailleurs

Oo oo
Oo oo

(cc) Steve Stinson (aka Stint Malicious)

Note: this song is being offered under the terms of a Creative Commons license. This means you are welcome to download it and share it with your friends.

Double or nothing

Source: Reuters

Buzz Hargrove has raised the stakes. With his Liberal senatorship about to slip out of his grasp, Buzz has apparently taken another sip from Paul Martin's kool-aid.

"(Harper's) view of the country is a separatist view that doesn't have a strong federal government. A strong federal government is what makes Canada the country it is," the Hargrove said Wednesday.

[...]

He said a Harper-led government would put in place "a framework that will make it easier for the separatists to win in Quebec -- surely that's pretty close to being a separatist."

[...]

The CAW head also implied that Quebecers should vote for the Bloc Quebecois if it meant keeping out the Conservatives.

This strange bit of logic comes after the Canadian Auto Workers Union leader placed his bet last month to endorse Paul Martin's Liberals, abandoning his long-time allies in the NDP. With even longer odds now, Buzz is doubling his bet. He needs help.

Liberal Sam Bulte doesn't get it

It seems my little question at Wednesday night’s all-candidates meeting for the Parkdale-High Park riding has set the blogosphere on fire. I asked Liberal incumbent Sarmite Bulte to take Michael Geist's copyright pledge, which simply commits candidates to exclude themselves from potential conflicts in deliberations on copyright reform if they accept contributions from entertainment and media industry interests. Bulte responded with outright anger to my question, so much so that she might have throttled me if the microphone had been any closer to the candidates table.

Accordion Guy has a video of her response on his blog.

The sad thing is that Bulte does not get it. She is oblivious to the obvious conflict of her deep involvement in reforming Canadian copyright laws and the direct support she receives from the primary beneficiaries of her proposed leglislation.

Here is my full question with notes. The parts I skipped over, largely due to Liberal-orchestrated jeering, are in faded text.

My name is Steve Stinson.

I moved to this riding five months ago from the Saint-Lambert riding on the Montreal south shore [some polite clapping here].

This question is directed to all the candidates, but first a little background. [Here I was asked to choose a specific candidate to which I replied it was probably most appropriate if Ms. Bulte answered first.]

My old riding gained considerable notoriety as a result of the Liberal candidate Yolande Thibeault receiving more than $19,000 in declared contributions from the principal parties implicated in the Gomery report. [Midway through this part some people, led apparently by Bulte's campaign manager, started shouting “ask the question.” A little rattled, I diligently ploughed on.]

Somehow, I thought things would be different when I moved Toronto. However, I was quite dismayed to read that our current MP Sarmite Bulte has received significant individual and corporate contributions from the very groups that she oversees in her role as Canadian Heritage parliamentary secretary. [At this point, the moderator also piled on demanding I ask the question.] They are also reportedly organizing an upcoming fundraiser.

Consequently, I would ask each of the candidates whether they would take the Copyright Pledge proposed by University of Ottawa law professor and Toronto Star columnist Michael Geist. The pledge is as follows:

No Member of Parliament who has accepted financial contributions or other benefits from

(i) a copyright lobby group,
(ii) its corporate members, or
(iii) senior executives as well as
(iv) a copyright collective

shall serve as Minister of Canadian Heritage or as Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage, nor sit on any legislative committee conducting hearings or deliberations on copyright matters. [Here my microphone was turned off and I abandoned my concluding comment which follows.]

Sounds reasonable to me. The voters of High Park-Parkdale need reassurance that our MP will be working for us, and not corporate media interests.

With the exception of Bulte, all the candidates accepted the pledge including Conservative candidate Jurij Klufas, who outlined how the CPC would ban all corporate donations to political parties and limit individual contributions to $1000 per year. NDP candidate Peggy Nash also responded articulately to the question, highlighting the need to balance the rights of both creators and users in reforming our copyright laws.

Parkdale-High Park residents deserve better. On January 23rd, Bulte is going to get her butt kicked.

Note: After the meeting, Gregory Hamara, chair of the Bloor West Village Residents Association, apologized to me for interrupting and cutting off my question. Overall, he did an excellent job moderating an unruly meeting.

Gomery's unlimited mandate

One thing that really jumped out at me during last night's French debate was Paul Martin's assertion that he gave Justice John Gomery an unlimited mandate with unlimited resources to investigate Liberal government wrong doing.

Je l'ai donné un mandat illimité, des ressources illimités...

Really?

You can watch his statement in French by clicking the first clip in the Gouvernance et éthique section and advancing to about the 1:20 mark.

Only in Canada...

Elton John is getting married tomorrow. At least that is what the papers would lead you to believe. Elton and his Canadian partner David Furnish indeed plan to tie the knot, but they are not getting “married.”

Under Britain’s Civil Partnership Act 2004, same sex couples will be permitted to enter into civil partnerships beginning December 21, 2005. The act, however, says nothing about gay marriage. Nonetheless, the reviews from UK’s gay and lesbian community are generally positive.

Canadian-born film-maker Furnish said the act was "hugely significant" for society.

"It is one of the defining issues of our times," he said.

"And I applaud Britain for embracing the diversity of our society."

Here in Canada, Conservative Party of Canada leader Stephen Harper continues to be vilified for proposing essentially the same thing.

Only in Canada you say? Pity.

Smoking gun

The initial accusation that the Finance Department leaked inside information about imminent changes to the taxation of income trusts and dividends, while compelling, lacked any real evidence. In that context, Finance Minister Goodale's explanation that suspicious market activity was merely speculation was plausible, if not convincing.

All that has changed now that evidence has surfaced about a senior advisor in the Finance Department calling CARP, an advocacy group for Canadians over 50, to notify them of a policy announcement later that day with the unspoken understanding that they would get what they wanted on income trusts.

The chart below shows the S&P Canadian Income Trust Index (^GSPRTCM) rising in the second half of the trading day, particularly just before the close, relative to the overall TSX Index (^GSPTSE). The movement in some individual issues, where trading volumes sky-rocketed, is even more pronounced.


Notwithstanding recent backtracking by CARP, there is now enough smoke for the Ontario Securities Commission to investigate allegations of insider trading. Ralph Goodale has some explaining to do.

Where's the PM?

Last election, the Liberals tried to rebrand themselves as Team Martin or L'équipe Martin in Quebec. Despite their efforts, the strategy only had limited success. For some candidates such as Yolande Thibeault (see photo from the last election below), the stench of AdScam was simply too strong to overcome, as they went down to well-deserved defeat.

This election, the Liberals seem to be doing all they can to distance themselves from Paul Martin, as well as their own party. The vacillating, flip-flopping, Liberal leader is no longer the asset they thought he was. For example, the campaign pamphlet I received from local Liberal candidate Sarmite Bulte does not mention Martin's name at all, while the Liberal logo on the pamphlet is dwarfed by her name.

With unintended irony, the Liberals seem to be playing their own version of Where's Waldo? with a "where's the PM?" button on the front page of their site (h/t, Warren K). Mention of Paul Martin's name is typically several pages deep on the candidates sites I have visited. Some candidates don't even mention his name at all.

Somehow I think the Liberals are going to have a hard time playing the "Stephen Harper is scary" card when they are afraid of their own leader.

And why is that?

Duceppe...said he doesn't necessarily want to see a Conservative government led by Stephen Harper.

Gilles Duceppe and other Quebec sovereignists are salivating at the possibility of another Liberal minority or majority government. Such an outcome would be rightly viewed as a snub to Quebec and put in place a key winning condition for a future, successful referendum on Quebec independence.

Quebecers are deeply embarrassed by the sponsorship scandal. Not only does it reflect badly on the Liberal government, it reflects badly on them. That is why they will massively reject Paul Martin’s Liberals in the upcoming election.

Gilles Duceppe knows that if the rest of Canada re-elects the federal Liberals, his dream of an independent Quebec is at hand. Maybe it’s time for the rest of us to pull our heads out of the sand.

Liberal Influence Peddling

Don't you just love it when Liberals rat on their own? The principals at TDH Strategies are obviously not welcome in the Paul Martin camp. One of their posts today highlights the questionable connections between Martin operative Erik Bornman and Dave Basi.

The search-warrant "information to obtain" or ITO released by police in September, 2004 claim that Bornman offered provincial ministerial aides Dave Basi and Bob Virk a benefit -- help in obtaining $100,000-plus jobs with the federal Liberal government -- in exchange for obtaining confidential information about the BC Rail deals.

Yesterday, the federal Liberal riding association for Saanich-Gulf Islands had their nomination meeting to choose their candidate for the upcoming federal election. The race between Jag Dhanowa and former Liberal MLA Sheila Orr had become bitter, largely because of disputes over what Orr supporters referred to as the "instant Liberals" who have supported Dhanowa in the past.

Orr ended up winning by 71 votes, but the most fascinating thing about the entire affair was the appearance of Dave Basi, the central figure in the police raids and a man now charged with breach of trust, accepting a bribe to influence government business (from none other than Erik Bornman) and fraud over $5,000. Basi brought a significant amount of members out to support Dhanowa.

Plus ça change...

DIY election platforms

In a recent musing, Warren Kinsella characterizes Toronto Star columnist Jim Travers as "one of PMO's last remaining messenger boys." And yet in today's column, Travers lays out the reasons to throw the Martin gang out.

In a subtle dig at Kinsella, Travers calls it the century's "first do-it-yourself election." Kinsella, of course, waxes poetic in his recent book Fury’s Hour about DIY culture in the punk movement.

Travers comes up with these gems:

… democracy only works when votes are used as sticks to beat discipline into politicians who mistake the public purse for their own.

[…]

After years of demonizing Conservatives as secret agents for Ralph Klein and two-tier health care, Liberals are suddenly silent as Jean Charest speeds the country toward different systems for rich and poor. Even a watershed Supreme Court decision undermining Ottawa's health insurance monopoly has left strangely speechless a government more concerned with repairing its ruined Quebec brand than defending public health care.

[…]

Martin believes in asymmetrical federalism but, apparently, not enough to debate or defend it. Canada is under renovation without a blueprint and that justifies showing Liberals the door.

[…]

Decisions are tightly held in Martin's innermost circle, the promise to make MPs strong enough to do their job is broken, and tracking how taxes are spent is as intentionally difficult as ever.

Canadians recognize the problem and are applying a solution. They treat the federal government with the disdain it's earned and, come election day, record numbers will vote with their feet by staying home.

The few who still care have no shortage of other planks to build their DIY-platforms. From protecting privacy to reaching the Canada-created international aid threshold, there is plenty of rough stuff to finish the job.Now seems a good time to start.

Even Kinsella can't argue with that.

Let them go?

It is little wonder the CPC is on life support in Quebec if these views are representative of CPC party and Blogging Tories members.

Loyalist, in his post Boisclair: Maintient-Il Le Droit? argues:

If Quebec thinks that the rest of Canada is stifling its rightful aspirations, it's doing the same to ours as well.

Let's hope that Boisclair leads the PQ to victory, in the next election and referendum. Because if the choice is between Quebec or Alberta leaving, we know whose departure would weaken Canada the most, economically, politically, and culturally.

And in the comments, Warwick weighs in with:

Let Quebec go willingly. If not, invite them to leave. This country has not been viable since the beginning. Quebec has been dragging us down since we started letting them. They cost too much for the little good they do.

Let them drown in their own socialism - without us paying for it.

My sympathy for Quebec has reached into negative numbers. Be gone.

Such talk is not only offensive, it is down right counterproductive. No party can win a majority government without seats in Quebec. Moreover, if you want to bring more Ontarians into the fold, then playing the national disunity card is just plain stupid.

Smarten up guys.

She's Brian's Mom

I thought she looked familiar. She's Brian's mom!



Listen to her here.

Big Brother Paul

Michael Geist highlights the shortcomings of Bill C-74, the Modernization of Investigative Techniques Act, on his blog today. He concludes:

Canadians deserve better. They deserve real judicial oversight before their personal information is disclosed and, given the costs (financial and otherwise) they deserve a full accounting on why this bill is needed.

If this thing passes, you can forget about your privacy. Big Brother Paul will be watching.

Think harder

So:

Prime Minister Paul Martin says he can't think of anyone who wants a Christmas election campaign except for the three opposition leaders.

I can think of at least one.

The Toronto (Star) Consensus

After having lived in Quebec for most of the past fifteen years I naturally become suspicious whenever it is asserted that everyone agrees on an issue. More times than not, I found myself on the other side of the issue that all Quebecers supposedly agreed on. Whether it was on fiscal imbalance, the language laws or the clarity act, somehow the so-called consensus usually excluded me.

For some reason, I thought it would be different when I moved to Ontario. Little did I realize that claiming a consensus is a common rhetorical device used to marginalize one’s political opponents on this side of the Ottawa River as well. Take this recent book review in yesterday’s Toronto Star:

There are occasions you realize everybody in your community agrees on almost everything.

Sometimes this can be terrifying, but most times there's a certain comfort to be taken when most everyone agrees that certain things — say gay marriage, access to abortion and the legalization of marijuana — are all desirables.

Now personally, I cannot really say I am in fundamental disagreement with any of these things. In fact, I have even been an advocate for one of them. But only willful ignorance can lead one to be blind to the fact that many Canadians do disagree with them. Moreover, I fail to understand how pretending that defensible, opposing views do not exist actually advances one’s cause.

Unfortunately, disrespect for opposing viewpoints seems to be increasingly common in Canadian political discourse. Instead of attempting to bridge the gaps and forging a true, workable consensus, we have been prone to divisive and destructive debates.

For example, same-sex marriage may now be the law in this country to the evident pleasure of its supporters. But the attempt to demonize not only those who opposed the bill, but even those who were simply uncomfortable with it did not win over people to the cause. Ultimately, this winner-takes-all approach not only leads to bad policy, it also undermines support for the laws that do get passed.

You too can be a Registered Lobbyist

Taking my cue from Scott Reid’s comments on Friday, I took the initial step to register as a lobbyist.

Scott Reid…said lobbying is legally defined as trying to influence public policy.

It's better to be safe than sorry. I have called my MP’s office in the past to provide my feedback on the public policy issues of the day. Moreover, my political opinions are now out in the open here at Nice Comfy Fur. What else is the purpose of calling one’s MP or writing a political blog if not to influence public policy?

You too can be a Registered Lobbyist by registering online at the Office of the Registrar of Lobbyists. It’s free.

Think of the benefits. You can call your MP or blog about political issues with impunity. As an added bonus, Scott Reid or Scott Brison can never make unfounded accusations about you not registering as a Lobbyist.


Update: To register as a lobbyist at the link above, you must first create an account. Scroll down the page and click Account Creation.