Biggest Election: It's 88

With 56% of the vote, the 1988 Federal Election has been crowned Canada's biggest by Calgary Grit readers, knocking off Tommy Douglas' 1944 Saskatchewan win in the final.

With a federal election about to start up, it was probably appropriate to look back at some of the big elections from the past. And there are certainly lessons all parties can learn from '88, as there are from all past elections.

Without a doubt, 1988 was Canada's most exciting election. There was a real policy debate, an unfolding national unity crisis, great ads, a mid-campaign coup attempt, an exhilarating debate, a real three-party race, and a see-saw campaign that was in doubt until the end. And, for better or worse, Mulroney's second term would shape Canadian politics for the next 20 years thanks to the Meech collapse, the Tory collapse, the rise of Reform and Bloc, free trade, and the GST. So I don't think this election won just because it was more familiar to voters (after all, my Greatest PM contest featured a Laurier-MacDonald final) - I think it truly is a deserving winner.

A big thanks to everyone who voted, and to John Duffy for seeding the elections. And now, the attention of this blog can turn squarely to the present and the next "big" election we're about to embark on. It certainly doesn't appear to have the makings of a historic one but, then again, the element of surprise is why a lot of the elections in this contest can truly be called "historic".


Final Vote
Provincial Final
Federal Final
Provincial Semis
Federal Semis
Provincial Quarters
Federal Quarters

The Federal Final

We now have our final four. On the federal side, a pair of Tory election wins will duke it out - 1988's free trade election is up against the 57/58 fall of the Liberal dynasty. On the provincial side of things, the 1976 Quebec election (a winner with 53% of the vote against 1960 Quebec) will take on the 1944 Saskatchewan election (blowing out 1943 Ontario with 84% of the vote).

Voting is now open on the federal final until 10 pm on Wednesday - next week a provincial champion will be crowned, and then the two will go head-to-head for the title of Canada's Biggest Election.


1957/58 (6) vs. 1988 (1)

Arguments For The Two Elections: Click Here

What If...1988: The problem with writting a good "what if" scenario for the 1988 election is that there are so many plausible outcomes. But let's look at the obvious one: what if the Tories had been reduced to a minority and, having won the referendum on free trade, the Liberals and NDP decided to form a coalition government. The NDP would have had major influence on Canada's economic and foreign policy, NAFTA would never have come into being, and the Meech debate would have taken a bizarre unpredictable twist.

A minority government would likely have set up another election in '90/'91 - on the heels of a Bob Rae win in Ontario could the NDP have formed government federally? Prime Minister Ed Broadbent anyone? Would the Bloc and Reform Party have ever gathered critical mass to become legitimate political players? If not, could the Tories have returned quickly to power and, if so, would it have been under Mulroney's leadership? It seems likely that Chretien would have eventually replaced Turner regardless, but with no second term to give Campbell and Charest cabinet experience, who would have been the heir apparent to Mulroney?

What If...1957: Given that the Liberals were widely expected to win the 1957 election, it's not hard to imagine the King/St.Laurent dynasty being extended. It seems likely that the Grits would not have made good on C.D. Howe's promise to "run St. Laurent stuffed", so that likely would have meant a Lester B. Pearson Prime Ministership three or four years earlier. So the real question is, would Pearson have made the same reforms he did in a minority with a majority or would he have have employed the same cautious, gradual progress the Liberals had become known for over their 22 years in power? I'd suspect the later.

So if '57 hadn't happened in '57, when would it have happened? The Liberal dynasty had to end at some point but one wonders how it would have without a Tory who could campaign like Dief. Another interesting question, related to the provincial side of the bracket, is whether Jean Lesage would have left federal politics in '58 had the Liberals been in power? Would Lesage have stayed in Ottawa to replace Pearson as Prime Minister? Or would it have been Paul Martin senior? And how would all of this affected the goings-on in Quebec? Again, too many questions with very few answers.

Which Election Was Bigger?
(6) 1957/58 (Diefenbaker over St. Laurent, Pearson)
(1) 1988 (Mulroney over Turner, Broadbent)
See Results

Brian Time

I'll be updating this as the ethics committee continues to grill Mulroney - not as frantically as Kady O'Malley, but updates will be forthcoming. From what I've seen so far, Brian is certainly in fine form - despite his age, he's still an all-star at this. Among the highlights so far:


-“My biggest mistake in life, by far, was ever agreeing to be introduced to Karlheinz Schreiber in the first place,” Mr. Mulroney said. The former prime minister said his second biggest mistake was accepting cash payments from Mr. Schreiber. I'm sure Canadians would have a wide range of options for choosing mistake number 3.


-Brian says he only got $225,000, not $300,000. Well, then, that makes the whole thing seem kind of trivial, eh?


-Mulroney admits he got the first cash payment while still a sitting MP, although says no business was discussed at Harrington Lake with Schreiber while still PM.


-The opposition MPs are trying to bring the wireless lobbying issue into this, despite obvious objections by the Tories on the committee. Mulroney says he never met with Bernier while in Industry, although he did meet with him when he was in Foreign Affairs.


-The tax issue seems to be the area where Mulroney is weakest in his response. He claims the money was for "expenses" alone so that technically income. Eek! Over to you Warren:

"What "expenses" would necessitate $300,000 in advance? Was he travelling to the moon and back, on a gold-plated rocket encrusted with jewels? Was he staying in hotels on Venus, for $30,000 a night?"


Updates:
10:29 am: Mulroney is just eating Sukh Dhaliwal alive. "May I just say that I thank the Liberal party for their strong defense of the GST" after asked if he paid GST on the $300,000 $225,000. Brian's also far too smart to bite when asked to show how big the envelope of cash was.

10:46 am: The irshman Brian Murphy seems a little awe struck but maybe he's just trying to disarm Brian with flattery. Mulroney re-emphasizes that he was not broke after he left 24 Sussex.

10:56 am: Closing statement. Cue the violins.

11:01 am: Szabo: "We've had a lot of conflicting testimony between our two witnesses." No kidding. Looks like Brian will be asked to come back in February...assuming no election, of course.

The Plot Thickens

The word of the day is "airbus", as Schreiber deflects attention away from the mounting scantilycladwomangate scandal that has engulfed Ottawa.

While this will probably just turn into a big game of "he said, he said" between various shady individuals, Mulroney's appearance Tuesday is gonna be must see TV.

Devil's Advocate

So Luc Lavoie is out and NDP spinster Robin Sears is in as Mulroney's spokesman. Not a good sign given how long Lavoie has been spinning for his old friend...

You've got to wonder if this has something to do with Lavoie's comments on the fifth estate special from February '06:

"There never was any money. He's too smart to do something like that. It's just too dummy. It's too damn stupid.

He said it himself under oath. So it would be major perjury, right? A former PM of a country like Canada doesn't go under oath to say something like this. You don't lie about this stuff. To think otherwise is pretty insulting."


Yup. Hard to disagree.


In other news, poor Jean Charest has now been pulled into this mess and the "name that scandal" contest has four finalists:

Airbust
Airbucks
Schreibergelder
Schreiberbriber

While I do love the way "Schreiberbriber" rolls off the tongue, I'm partial towards Airbucks myself.


5th estate Hat Tip: tGPOitHotW

On The Take

One imagines this blog will be quite interesting over the next few months...

Mulroney's Waterloo

Coming this spring to CBC, the explosive sequel to "Gomery" takes a no holds barred look at the Brian Mulroney Airbus Affair. The excitement of the Gomery Inquiry will be re-lived and, while the cast is different, like any good reality show we've got the same endearing stereotype cast you've come to know and love - the ex-PM out for revenge, party infighting, envelopes of cash, shady businessmen, splashy headlines, an opposition out for blood. Who knows how it will end? Who will get voted out this time?

Wow. It's been a busy few days. When we last left you, Stephen Harper was set to call a probe to investigate if an inquiry into the Mulroney-Schreiber affair was necessary.

Then, late Monday night, Mulroney himself came forward demanding a full blown inquiry. I know Mulroney wants to clear his name and is probably looking forward to a chance to settle some old political scores but it's hard to see how this ends well for him. There was a great 22 Minutes skit after the Airbus settlement. When asked to explain the 2 million dollars that were "wasted", the "mounties" answered "when I think about the look in the eyes of the average Canadian at the thought that maybe, just maybe, Brian Mulroney would be going to jail - well, you just can't put a price tag on that kind of happiness." We all saw how the Gomery inquiry, which found no wrongdoings by Martin or Chretien, stuck to them; Even if Brian is cleared, between his reputation and the fishy business of cash transfer, it's impossible for his reputation not to take a personal hit.

Following this, on Tuesday, Harper stunned everyone by calling the "extremely dangerous" inquiry he had warned against just a week prior.

As one might imagine, there's a ton of coverage on this in today's papers. Maclean's has a good round-up of the Mulroney/Harper friendship, the QP fireworks, and the media coverage. The Globe has a series of articles where we learn, among other things, that "Because Mr. [Frank] Moores is dead, he can't be a witness at the public inquiry."

The big news today is that University of Waterloo President David Johnson will draft the terms of reference for the inquiry.

So, the big question is, will all this help or hurt Harper? Well, it certainly won't help him, that's for darn sure. Given that the Conservative Party has disintegrated and reformed itself since these events took place, it really shouldn't be impacting Harper, but one imagines he'll take a hit on this, in the short term at least. The Liberals are certainly going to try and use this to burn the bridge on the ethics issue since it's one of the areas where the Tories currently have the upper hand on them. With the "in and out scandal" going nowhere, this might be their chance to neutralize the CPC on ethics. There are enough open questions about letters to Harper that, at the very least, they can try to drag him and his party into it.

Bart's Books - Mulroney's Memoirs

It’s been interesting reading through Brian Mulroney's Memoirs over the past two weeks, especially given the whirlwind of controversy that has enveloped him. Although the book is over a thousand pages long, it’s a great source of information and fascinating enough that I could probably have read another couple hundred pages. And even though Mulroney is arrogant, spiteful, and incredibly self-biased throughout the book, I can’t help but feeling a little bit sorry for him over the Schreiber stuff. And that sympathy alone is proof enough that he has injected some personal humanity into the book. In short, Memoirs is one of the best political books I’ve read in years.

Unlike Bill Clinton’s equally lengthy autobiography, Mulroney doesn’t dwell on his childhood and plunges into content that will appeal to politicos within 30 pages. Mulroney’s recap of young Tory events, political conventions, and his early encounters with politicians of the day like Diefenbaker or Paul Martin Sr. are as interesting as the stories from his time as PM. Mulroney also manages to tie early events to later ones by including journal entries from his time as PM throughout the book.

As for the man himself and his record? Mulroney was one of the most successful Prime Ministers on the international scene in Canadian history. He led the charge against apartheid in South Africa, negotiated Acid Rain and Free Trade treaties with the Americans, and certainly appears to have managed G7 politics with finesse – at least by his accounts. Given the amount of ink he uses to recount his many fights with Margaret Thatcher on apartheid, it’s clear that Mulroney regards it as his finest accomplishment as Prime Minister and he certainly deserves full marks for moving Canada into a leadership role internationally on the file.

That’s the good. As you might expect, Mulroney glosses over the black marks on his government. The parade of ministerial resignations is casually ignored and some clever accounting numbers are used to paint his lackluster economic record in a positive light. However, Mulroney does anything but ignore his largest failing – instead, the national unity struggles of the day are centre stage throughout the book.

Mulroney’s university thesis was on Quebec politics and he won the PC leadership on a promise of a Quebec breakthrough. For Mulroney, this was really his raison d'être in politics and, because of that, he considers the end of Meech “a death in the family” that has left him with “a throbbing sense of loss for one of the greatest might-have-beens in Canada’s 140 year history”. It’s truly remarkable just how many references Mulroney makes to Meech throughout the book and how virulent and vindictive he becomes when discussing the deal which was “suffocated in a cruel act of political infanticide by the premier of Newfoundland.” That’s just one of at least 20 or 30 pejorative references to Clyde Wells throughout the book. And Wells got off easy compared to the man who haunts Mulroney still.

When Memoirs was first launched, there was a big brouhaha over its attacks on Trudeau. Mulroney is a vicious critic of the 1982 constitutional repatriation in the book and takes every opportunity to belittle Trudeau and his accomplishments. The weird thing is, the journal entries pre-1987 where Trudeau is mentioned are mostly positive – it's clear that Mulroney can’t forgive Trudeau for having the audacity to speak out against a constitutional deal that P.E.T. (and many Canadians) clearly could not accept on an intellectual level. Just as it was Trudeau’s right to attack Meech, Mulroney certainly has the right to fight back in his memoirs but he loses all credibility when he resorts to ad hominen attacks, trying to discredit Trudeau because he didn’t serve in the military 40 years before the Meech affair (and, in that sentence, the “he didn’t serve in the military” refers to Trudeau, although it should could just as easily apply to Brian). It appears Mulroney himself would agree with my assessment in a deliciously ironic passage, just 12 pages after his attack on Trudeau’s military record:

I may well be wrong, but I think [Trudeau] mitigated whatever value his arguments might otherwise command by such a violent and vicious diatribe against so many people –living and dead – that he appears unhinged.

But these are just the sort of fun contradictions that make the book an enjoyable read, even for Liberals. How can you do anything but chuckle when Mulroney attacks the Liberals for their free trade flip flop when he railed against Crosbie’s free trade proposal during the ’83 PC leadership convention? Or when he attacks Joe Clark for allowing provinces to opt out of a federal program? That’s all to be expected in a memoir and when I move on to Chretien’s after this, I wouldn’t expect it to be any different. After all, this is Mulroney’s version of events, not a historical dissertation. A historical dissertation might say that criticism of Mulroney over his lack of experience in ’76 was fair game. A historical account might conclude that the Tories ’88 victory was not solely because of Mulroney’s soaring popularity. A historical account might not quote hundreds of positive newspaper stories about the PM and then dismiss all criticism as being part of media bias.

That said, as a historical document this book is incredibly invaluable. Appendices at the end recap behind-the-scenes conversations between the PM and Premiers about Meech and Charlottetown. And, having written a history essay or two on this time period during my years at University, I would have loved to have a resource like this book to get the official Mulroney position on such a wide range of topics. Beyond that, Memoirs works as popular political literature too. Getting a glimpse of private conversations between Mulroney and the likes of Reagan, Thatcher, and Gorbachev makes the book worth its sticker price ($50 in Canada, $40 in the US). And the chapter where Mulroney recounts the betrayal of Lucien Bouchard has everything you could want in a political book. Compared to current hot topic political debates on Senate abolition and 1% GST cuts, the content of this book is quite riveting.

So, despite his flaws – or maybe because of them – Mulroney has written a truly impressive memoir.


Recommendation: Get a hard cover copy. Personally, I'm very glad to have a signed copy.

Other Reviews: Jason Cherniak, Pample the Moose, Kerplonka

A copy of this book was provided by Random House for review.

We Used to be Friends

After seven pages of coverage in today's Globe, I'm sure everyone has already heard about Harper's call for a probe into the Mulroney airbus affair by an independent third party (maybe they'll bring Bernard Roy back due to his experience at the Gomery inquiry...).

I'll give Harper credit for doing the right thing here. Given that Mulroney is a bit of a mentor to him and that many in his party are still loyal to the former PM, this certainly wasn't an easy decision for Harper to make.

That'll Buy A Lot Of Gucci Loafers

Mulroney adviser asked Schreiber to transfer Airbus funds, affidavit alleges

I think it's important to remember that these are just allegations...by a very shady individual. But it's certainly going to have the opposition shouting even louder for some sort of re-opening of the file. Because if it's true...wow...


In far less sexy news but probably a lot more relevant from a public policy perspective is this story:

OTTAWA - More than 12,000 refugee claimants are stuck in a steadily growing backlog as the Harper government continues to dawdle on filling vacancies at the Immigration and Refugee Board.

Despite a flurry of recent appointments, the IRB reports that there are still 43 vacancies in its 127-member refugee-protection division, which adjudicates claims for asylum.

The backlog of claims is swelling by about 1,000 each month and reached 12,414 by the end of September.

Each claim is taking an average of 14.3 months to process.

When Prime Minister Stephen Harper took power 21 months ago, there were only five vacancies on the board and the backlog of claims had effectively been reduced to zero for the first time in a decade.

Yup, the questions in the House will be all about Brian on Monday but I'd sure like to see Diane Finley try to explain why her government has dropped the ball on this.

[Hat Tip: EFL]

Morning Round-Up

1. Yesterday, Dave Bronconnier declared September as "yellow ribbon month" in Calgary. While the timing is a bit suspect, rumour has it that October will be declared "provincial/municipal funding agreement awareness month" or "celebration of overpass construction month".



2. Brian Mulroney is in the news for "lashing out" against Pierre Trudeau. To be clear, this is a former Prime Minister trashing another former Prime Minister who has been dead for seven years, over things the later did a quarter century before becoming PM. Real classy Brian - good to see you aren't bitter or anything.

The Calgary Sun calls it a "clash of the titans", but I'm not sure it can really be considered a clash when one of the "clashers" isn't really able to, you know, respond.



3. Fred Thompson has jumped into the Presidential race and I'd have to peg him as the odds on favourite to take the Republican nomination at this point. The same way a lot of Liberals are longing for another Trudeau, one imagines a lot of Republicans would love to find the next Reagan and Thompson will probably be close enough for many of them.




4. Interesting move for McGuinty to release his full platform over a month before election day.




5. For those who missed it on Saturday, here's the link to Andrew Coyne's "politics here is uniquely stupid" column. Gotta agree, at least partially.