Climate change is not the most pressing issue facing Canada. Hell, Canada is one of the few countries that may actually benefit from climate change. (The tree line is moving north etc). Immigration, for example, is a more pressing concern for Canada than is climate change. Canada is one of the oldest countries (39.7). However bad things are now things promise to get a lot worse. The percentage of Canadians over 65 is set to go from 14.7 now to 27.6 in 2050. The ability of Canada to sustain its social programs will be greatly comprised.

Part of the problem is that average immigrant to Canada (37.1) is not much younger than the average Canadian (39.7). The situation is akin to baling out a boat by moving water from one part of the boat to another.

Major changes to the immigration system are needed. Two come immediately to mind. Canada needs to limit family unification to spouses and dependents under 18 and it needs to rework of the points system so that more emphasis is placed on youth. The average immigrant to Canada has to get younger. Canada also needs to do a better job of ensuring that immigrants are able to succeed. The earning power of immigrants continues to fall and this will eventually affect our ability to attract immigrants to Canada as well as the affect the general population’s willingness to accept them. To that end, Canada needs to do a better job ensuring that foreign credentials are recognized, but it also needs to place a greater emphasis on the ability to speak English or French and it needs to limit is exposure to immigrants who are the least likely to speak English or French and many of are the most likely to drift into illegal status (viz., refugees).

In addition to changing the type of immigrant Canada goes after, Canada also needs admit a lot more immigrants -- upwards of 500,000 a year. This will mean, among other things, greatly increasing the number of visa officers in second world countries with large pools of young educated English speakers. India is an example that comes readily to mind, but others abound. Currently interviews in Brazil are only held in Brasilia and Sao Paulo, but not in Rio. As a source of immigrants, South America remains largely untapped and this especially so with regard to Brazil.

An obvious place to start the search is at home. Foreigners who complete graduate degrees in Canada should be granted citizenship and those who complete an undergraduate degree should be given more credit than they currently receive. Currently they can receive no more than 5 points for studying in Canada. As for ESL students, Immigration officials should be going from one ESL school to another and making clear to students that if they pass the Cambridge exam, say, have a degree and are in their twenties, we want them.

It is imperative that Canada undertake such a project now. After all, Canada is not alone in having to deal with aging population. Some Europe have an even worse problem. Indeed, professor Charles Kupchan notes, "today there are 35 pensioners for every 100 workers within the European Union. By 2050, current demographic trends would leave Europe with 75 pensioners for every 100 workers and in countries like Italy and Spain the ratio would be 1 to 1."

"World Bank projections show that the working-age population of the present EU will drop from 230m now to 167m by 2050, a fall of 63m. Most of this is concentrated in the 12 current euroland countries, where working-age population is projected to drop from 186m to 131m. The worst-hit individual countries are Italy , with a 15m, or 42% fall, from 36m to 21m, followed by Spain and Germany . Britain is not immune but fares relatively well. The World Bank projects a 5m fall in working-age population, from 35.2m to 29.9m In general, though, Europe 's position is dire. As Lombard Street Research writes: "The last demographic shock on a similar scale was the Black Death of the late 14th century. Even two world wars did not stop Europe 's population rising by nearly a fifth in the first half of the 20th century."

If Europe continues on as it is, the median age in Europe will go from 37.7 today to 52.3 by 2050!

Thomas Frank has it ass backwards. What the Republican Party got right was not in convincing working class Americans to vote against their economic self interest. Rather it was in convincing the Democratic Party that it needed to “triangulate” itself into ideological no man’s land in order to win. As Princeton’s Larry Bartels has demonstrated, http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache" title="http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache" target="_blank"http://72.14.253.104/search?q...:yivC-gX3DSMJ:www.princeton.edu/~bartels/kansas.pdf+Larry+Bartels&hl= en&ct=clnk&cd=2&a mp;gl=ca the white working class has not abandoned the Democratic Party. Indeed, they voted for Kerry in stronger numbers than they did JFK or Hubert Humphrey. Nor do the worker class voters place more attention to social issues than economic issues; the opposite it overwhelming true. Working class voters place far more of emphasis on economic issues than do any other segment of voters. Indeed, the higher up the economic ladder one goes the more emphasis voters place on social issues and the less on economic ones. In 2004 well to do placed 10 times as much importance on social issues than did the working class.

Little wonder then why white rural worker class voters overwhelmingly favor Clinton over Obama. She gives them a lot more meat and potatoes then he does. Conversely the much more socially liberal Obama plays much better with urban well off then she does. If the Democrats are going to win the next election, they need to combine the strength of both. They need to become more socially liberal and more fiscally liberal.

What holds true for the Democrats holds doubly true for the Liberals in Canada. There is not a large segment of affluent evangelicals standing in the Liberals way the way there is for the Democrats in the States. The Liberals need to return to 1968. They need to offer universal social programs (e.g., universal dental care and Pharmacare) and social liberalism (e.g., legalized marijuana, euthanasia and perhaps even prostitution) on steroids. This is what won them every province, save Alberta, in 1968. They need to be reminded how wrong a cynical Liberal's forecast was when he said the Liberal slogan for the 1968 election should be the following. "For abortion, homosexuality and easy divorce - vote Liberal!"

Look Stephen even in the US no one speaks about gun control as a civil rights issue.  Whether it be the Civil Rights Act or what have you.  Furthermore, “civil rights” are spoken of as having transcended national boundaries.   They are part of the common heritage of the West.   The Second amendment, however, is unique to the US.  We in Canada do not have anything like it.

Last election the NDP took 7.5% of the popular vote in Quebec. Now polls consistently show the NDP at around 12% in Quebec. In other words, the NDP is up 4 to 5% in province with about a quarter of Canada’s voters. However, recent polls put the NDP below what they were in 2006 nationally and hardly any poll since 2006 has showed the NDP rising above what the obtained in 2006. Ergo the NDP is bleeding voters elsewhere. This is certainly the case in greater Toronto. The NDP is loosing support both to the Liberals and the Greens there.

Toronto Center and Willowdale were not flukes; they are the future. The NDP is going to take it on the chin in the 905 and 416. If there was an election this spring chances are Layton might keep his seat, albeit barely, but Chow, Marston, Charlton and Nash will loose their seats.

The party needs to change focus.

1) The NDP party brass is delusional if they think they can A) utter the following and not be damaged by it and B) think it is actually a sound “gameplan”. “Damaging Harper and the Conservatives on ethical issues like the Cadman mess mainly helps the Grits, and that’s not in our gameplan.” It may be too late to do anything now, but if possible revive the Cadman thing in committee.

2) Stop talking about the economy. Does Layton honestly believe that Globe and Mail, and Can west global are going to give them a fair airing? I hope to god not.

3) Go back to its rural Western roots and focus on taking back voters that had abandoned them for the Reform Party in 1993 and then have gone on to vote Conservative. It still polls far better in BC and Sask than it ever has in Ontario, especially Toronto. They should also look to be fighting it out with the Conservatives to pick up the Liberal votes that have slowly been bleeding away over the years to both themselves and the Conservatives in Northern Ontario.

4) Look to Europe. The NDP used to try to import socially democratic ideas from Europe. What the hell happened? What little is left of that tradition is hardly stressed. Layton spends just as much time talking about the “weaponization of space”, as if foreign policy was somehow their bread and butter, as the party’s pharmacare plan.

Clarity of message and easy to understand policy is all important. 5 examples come readily to mind. Some are already part of the NDP platform.

A) National minimum wage

B) A national pharmacare program based upon the one currently available in the UK

C) 4 weeks paid vacation for all Canadians

D) dental care as part of health care

E) Universal Day Care for kids aged 1-5

5) Dump Layton; replace him with Muclair or even better Joe Comartin

In order to confront critics, who accused the Conservatives, aka the Blue Meanie s, of aimming soley to scare people or make them angry, Peter Van Loan came up with his own version of Descartes' famous Cogito. "I am angry, therefore I am" said Van Loan.

Layton can strut around and proclaim himself the second coming Christ all he wants. So long as Liberals refuse to bring down the government, the NDP’s vote is entirely academic and everyone knows that Jack’s act is nothing but fake bravado. Indeed, forget what Layton says his party’s record of voting against the government. Look at what the NDP are doing in committee and it clear that they focusing on the Liberals and not the Conservatives — just ask to the party strategists. “Damaging Harper and the Conservatives on ethical issues like the Cadman mess mainly helps the Grits, and that’s not in our gameplan.”

So how is the attack the Liberals first strategy working for the NDP? Not well. The NDP have lost their way. The NDP dreams of replacing the Liberals as the official opposition. Never mind the fact this goal is pie in the sky nonsense, the NDP have decided that best way achieving this goal is emulate, to a degree that would make Tommy Douglas role over in his grave, a sad sack Liberal party. The cause of social democracy de damned. In other words, a historical reversal has happened. Whereas the NDP used to be content to let the Liberals steal their policies, if it meant advancing the cause of social democracy, the NDP now seeks to copy the current Liberal party’s ideological incoherence.

Not surprisingly, NDP voters within the 416 and 905, the only region of the country in which NDP and Liberals actually compete, are moving back to the party that actually stands a chance of “getting results” for people during the next election. To make matters worse for the NDP, the emergence of the Green party has seen the urban environmental vote move from the NDP to the Green party. If there was an election this spring chances are Layton will keep his seat, albeit barely, but Chow, Marston, Charlton and Nash will loose their seats.

Of course, the NDP’s troubles are not limited to Toronto region. In BC Dawn Black, Penny and Bell would be in a world of hurt if there was an election called this spring.

It should be dawning on the NDP party brass that the party the best chance to grow the party is not in the 416 and 905. The NDP has to go back to its Western roots and focus on taking back voters that had abandoned them for the Reform Party in 1993 and then gone on to vote Conservative. It still polls far better in BC and Sask than it ever has in Ontario, especially Toronto. They should also look to be fighting it out with the Conservatives to pick up the Liberal votes that have slowly been bleeding away over the years to both themselves and the Conservatives in Northern Ontario. Lastly, they should be looking to pick up Bloc voters in Quebec. Yes Outremont was a Liberal seat, but it was Bloc vote that gave the NDP the victory and not erstwhile Liberal voters.

http://www.stephentaylor.ca/archives/000980.html" title="http://www.stephentaylor.ca/archives/000980.html" target="_blank"http://www.stephentaylor.ca/a...

Talk about a false sense of equivalency. Charlton, “from my cold dead hands”, Heston was no Martin Luther King. Plowing ahead with a NRA meeting in Denver shortly after the Columbine was affront to decency; it was no one’s dream. Describing such an action as "controversial" is being polite. It is about on par with saying thanks Charly I will take that now.

Listening to the Conservatives you would think that past governments – Liberal ones anyway -- have horribly bungled the immigration issue. This is simply not true. Canada is rare among Western countries in that there is no large segment of society is calling on the government to close the doors to immigration. As a result, there is no Canadian Le Pen, Joerg Haider or SVP. Indeed, the main Conservative criticism thus far is that Canada is not processing the large number of people wanting to immigrate to Canada fast enough. Faced with a looming demographic crunch, European politicians must be asking themselves why they are not as lucky.

Still there are problems. Canada lets in far more refugees and humanitarian cases than it needs to and should, rules governing family unification are ridiculously stupid, the points system favors older immigrants over younger ones, the government needs to do a better job ensuring that foreign credentials are recognized and yes skilled worker applications need to be processed faster.

Conservative reforms might help, but no one really knows and that is the problem. Rather than tackling the more nettlesome issues head on the Conservatives have thrown out the rules and have instead said they make them up as the go along. It is hard to imagine a worse way of approaching the issue. The cure promises to be far worse than what currently ails the patient.

Incidentally, the only thing that will speed up the rate at which current applications, some 926,000, are processed is to increase the number immigration officials and Conservatives have been cutting the number of officials and not adding more. Cherry picking a small segment of those already in line is hardly what your average Canadian imagines when they hear the Conservatives claim that they are going to reduce the current backlog, but that is all that Conservatives are doing.

Even more troublesome than the Conservative’s just trust us approach to immigration is their willingness to let in more guest workers. There is ample evidence that armies of disenfranchised workers, whether they be illegal or guest, are a recipe of disaster. It is great way to, create an underclass, suppress wages, encourage black marketing, increase xenophobia and racism.

Liberals trotted out the 1988 Reform Platform on immigration in attempt to tar the Conservatives.
http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/4 09009" title="http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/4 09009" target="_blank"http://www.thestar.com/News/C...

So just what did the document say?

"Immigrants should possess the human capital necessary to adjust quickly and independently to the needs of Canadian society and the job market,"

The cruel irony of Canada’s immigration system is that while many immigrants have good enough educational and professional credentials get them admitted into the country in the first place, many professional bodies are much more discriminating. Canada’s immigrant communities are right to be mad about this. It is not unreasonable to believe that if someone is accepted into Canada because they are a doctor, say, that the path to them practicing medicine not be overly stringent and years in making. The government must do a better job of coordinating with various professional bodies.

"radically or suddenly alter the ethnic makeup of Canada, as it increasingly seems to be."

Oh yes the loathsome coded messages that Reform party used to send out.

"immigration should be essentially economic in nature."

Of course it should be. However, such is the fear of offending someone that no one, not even the Conservatives, dared point out the ridiculousness of Dalton McGuinty’s comments on immigration. No skills, no English or French, no money, no entry. It should be that simple and it is that simple for people applying as a skilled worker.

Alas far too much credence is given to “family unification” in Canada. Robert Dziekanski is a great case in point. Given that no body wants to speak ill of Dziekanski least it be misconstrued that they are saying that his death was anything other than tragic, the press has been loath to point out just how patently absurd it is that Robert Dziekanski was ever allowed to immigrant to Canada in the first place. Dziekanski had a violent criminal record, had spent time in jail, did not speak French or English, had a spotty job history, and had no accredited skills to speak of. It bad enough that in Canada one can sponsor one’s grandparents it mind blowing that one can sponsor a violent criminal.

Family unification process in Canada is a political boondoggle and is something the Liberals should be embarrassed about.

All that being said, I do not think it fair to tar the Conservatives with the Reform brush. It is no longer 1988. However, the Conservatives have left themselves wide open to this line of attack and really deserve to take it on the chin. Allowing the Minister of Immigration to override the rules of game opens the system up to all kinds of abuse. Worse, it undermines what has made the whole points system such a success. Namely, the system allows would be immigrant to get a clear idea as to whether they qualify as a skilled immigrant and gives them confidence that should they score more than 67 points and pay their $550, a large amount a many countries, that they are in. Leaving open the possibility that they could meet all the necessary requirements, but still be denied is not going to help Canada attract the best of the best. These people have other options and are going to go where they are assured of getting in.

I should say this is in closing. Of course, it is all fine and dandy to say the Conservatives are anxious to let in people capable of filling various kinds of jobs. However, the fact that the Conservatives continue to cut the service and staff at Canadian embassies and consulates speaks louder. There needs to be a bigger presence in places such as Rio, Buenos Aires, Sao Paulo, Mexico City, Cairo, Nairobi, Kiev, Mumbai etc. Furthermore, if Canada wants more nurses or oil workers or engineers, or what have you, it is going to have to go to the universities and training centers and go get them.

Listening to some conservatives you would think the case against Gun Registry was open and shut: it does no good at all full stop.

However is the evidence consistent with such a stance? Hardly. Judge for yourself.

The suicide rate in Canada peaked at 15.2 in 1978, dipped below 12 for the first time in 32 years in 2000 and reached a post 1970 low of 11.3 in 2004.

http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/mh-sm/pdf/suicid_e.pdf" title="http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/mh-sm/pdf/suicid_e.pdf" target="_blank"http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/mh...

http://www.justice.gc.ca/en/ps/rs/rep/2006/rr06 -2/rr06-2.pdf" title="http://www.justice.gc.ca/en/ps/rs/rep/2006/rr06 -2/rr06-2.pdf" target="_blank"http://www.justice.gc.ca/en/p...

http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/perhlth66a.htm?sdi=suicide" title="http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/perhlth66a.htm?sdi=suicide" target="_blank"http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/c...

The average suicide rate per year between 1970 and 1976 was 13.35, between 1977 and 1983 it was 14.5, between 1984 and 1990 it was 13.1, between 1991 and 1997 it was 13 and between 1998 to 2004 it was 12.

The number of suicides by firearm in Canada dropped from a high of 1287 in 1978 to a low of 568 in 2004. http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/84F020 9XIE/2004000/t001_en.htm" title="http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/84F020 9XIE/2004000/t001_en.htm" target="_blank"http://www.statcan.ca/english... There was an average of 1033 fire arm suicides per year between 1970 and 1976, 1197 between 1977 and 1983, 1084 between 1984 and 1990, 970 between 1991 and 1997 and 682 between 1998 and 2004.

The number of accidental shooting deaths in Canada stood at 143 in 1971 and has generally declined since then; a low of 20 was reached in 2000. There was an average of 117 accidental shooting deaths per year between 1970 and 1976, 70 between 1977 and 1983, 62.3 between 1984 and 1990, 50.1 between 1991 and 1997 and 28.1 between 1998 and 2004. http://www.justice.gc.ca/en/ps/rs/rep/2006/rr06 -2/rr06-2.pdf" title="http://www.justice.gc.ca/en/ps/rs/rep/2006/rr06 -2/rr06-2.pdf" target="_blank"http://www.justice.gc.ca/en/p...

The rate of homicide in Canada peaked in 1975 at 3.03 per 100,000 and has dropped since then, reaching lower peaks in 1985 (2.72 per 100,000) and 1991 (2.69 per 100,000) while declining to 1.73 per 100,000 in 2003. The average murder rate between 1970 and 1976 was 2.52, between 1977 and 1983 it was 2.67, between 1984 and 1990 it was 2.41, between 1991 and 1997 it was 2.23 and between 1998 and 2004 it was 1.82. http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/85-002 -XIE/85-002-XIE2006006.pdf" title="http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/85-002 -XIE/85-002-XIE2006006.pdf" target="_blank"http://www.statcan.ca/english... The number of homicides as a percentage of the number attempted homicides has increased. http://www.hamiltonpolice.on.ca/NR/rdonlyres/4B12A796- B0C9-436C-9F64-840D3EBEE0 9F/0/CrimeStatisticsinCan ada2004.pdf" title="http://www.hamiltonpolice.on.ca/NR/rdonlyres/4B12A796- B0C9-436C-9F64-840D3EBEE0 9F/0/CrimeStatisticsinCan ada2004.pdf" target="_blank"http://www.hamiltonpolice.on.... In other words, the attempted homicide rate has fallen even further than the homicide rate.

It speaks volumes about the blogging torries that this tool is one of their most read bloggers. Kate McMillan: "The Nazis Didn't Carry Out The Holocaust. The German state did that."

http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/008328.html" title="http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/008328.html" target="_blank"http://www.smalldeadanimals.c...

Most people would say that if someone of sound mind deliberately runs over innocent person and kills them that they are guilty of vehicular homicide, but not Kate. According to Kate, the fault lies with the car and the car alone.

Yes sir conservatives are all about taking personal responsibility.

Perhaps we can make partial sense of what Kate said. Maybe she was saying that there were insufficient constitutional safeguards in Germany at the time and no tradition of respect for the rule of law.

Conservatives are all about constitutional safeguards and needless to say have a long history of supporting an independent judiciary. “It’s the stupid charter” “"Well, the heck with the courts." “Activist judges” "If the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is going to be used as the crutch to carry forward all of the issues that social libertarians want, then there's got to be for us conservatives out there a way to put checks and balances in there."

Leaving Quarda aside, the Liberals are in real trouble in BC. North Vancouver, Richmond, Newton North Delta are all on the razor's edge, Keith Martin will be in for a fight in Esquimalt Juan de Fuca and West Vancouver is as good as gone. If the election was held today I say the Liberals would loose 4 of the aforementioned 5. I think Martin would hold onto his seat. One problem is Dion's English. His accent is strong and his ability to express himself in English is not nearly what it is in French and well that does seem to be a problem in Toronto it certainly is here. Another problem is that Vancouver is a fiscally conservative city, with a very fiscally conservative media. This is not a town of Red Tories. This is not Toronto. There is no Toronto Star. There is the Vancouver Sun and the Fraser Institute. Luckily for the Liberals it is also socially liberal city. By and large SSM played very well here and there is strong support for drug reform of all kinds. If the Liberals are serious about holding onto what they have in BC and perhaps even picking up a seat or two, they need to develop some policies that will appeal to libertarians. Right now the cupboard is bare.

The environment, i.e., the issue of global warming, will not determine the next election. The Conservatives have muddied the waters, the Liberal track record is poor, and quite frankly this is not the burning issue that many make it out to be. The changes are gradual enough and the effects not injurious in the way an economic downturn or health care cuts would be. The very notion of Dion building a platform around the issue of global warming, especially when he will not consider anything as meaty and concert as a carbon tax, is patently absurd.

The Liberals need to create a so called “wedge issue”, a la SSM by proposing legislation that will divide the public. (To describe SSM as a wedge issue prior to 2003 is to abuse the term. Sure there was mixed feelings about SSM prior to the 2003 Ontario Court decision, but it was hardly on the political radar the way it was after Chrétien’s decision not to challenge the ruling.) In the past I have mentioned two such possible wedge issues, viz., marijuana legalization and legalized euthanasia and have said the former has far more potential, but is also much more dangerous. A carbon tax would also fit the bill.

The other thing the Liberals need to do is they need to get back to their socially democratic roots based on a strong commitment to universality. The type of small potatoes grab bag hopelessly diffuse pc special interest liberalism now on offer is uninspiring to say the least. The Liberals need to commit to two or three policies that would further the cause of social democracy in Canada and be an expression of the party’s renewed commitment to universality. In the past I suggested that Liberals commit to giving all Canadians, as is the norm throughout the rest of the Western world, a minimum of 4 weeks of vacation a year. I also recommended that they propose including dental care as part of heath care and introducing a pharmacare program, a la what is available in Britain. To make the latter two seem more economically palatable the Liberals could propose raising the GST back up to 7%. Finally, the Liberals could again revisit the issue of Child Care. The problem is they fumbled the ball the last time around and they seem unwilling to commit to a truly universal system. Peace meal childcare does not address the problem and so does not stand any hope of being a political winner.

Dion has been an unmediated disaster. The party has not moved in the polls since he began as leader and the fundraising numbers are dire. Worse, there is no reason to believe that things will get any better. His English still causes him trouble, he is not getting any more charismatic and the only issue he had a chance to fight the next election on and win, viz., Afghanistan, he chose to punt on. He leads a party that is scared of its own shadow and which had long ago “triangulated&rdquo ; its way in ideological no man’s land. Just what does the Liberal party stand for? The Liberals do not even talk a good game anymore.

What little direction Dion has given the party has not been good. There are plenty of remnants of the Martin era. However, nothing remains of Trudeau’s commitment to universality and federalism and Dion seems more willing to embrace “social taboos” than to challenge them. In its place Dion has decided to pursue ill advised alliances with the Green Party and aboriginal nationalists, and has given plenty of lip service to Martin’s hair brained Atlantic Accord. Once a party that championed a united pluralistic Canada, the Liberal party has become the dupe of provincial and special interest groups who have no regard whatsoever with the national interest. Dion does have his principles though. He may not have any qualms about ruining forever what is left of the Liberal brand, but he is willing to implement one of the most loathed tools in the traditional liberal arsenal, viz. affirmative action, to achieve a higher number of female candidates at the expense the party’s already fractured unity.

Only a miracle and a renewed commitment to social democracy, universality and full blooded social liberalism can save the Liberals now.