Leader-Star
News Service
May 1997
Archive

Set election dates would end games


Article By Murray Mandryk

One dandy argument for four-year, set election dates is already emerging from the federal campaign.

Such set dates might very well alleviate some of the cynical games federal and provincial politicians play with campaign promises.

An excellent case in point is the federal Liberal party's announcement that it is restoring some of the transfer payments to the provinces that it has taken away in its 31Ž2 years of governing.

It was a cynical move by Prime Minister Jean Chretien to buy votes from hard-hit provinces.

Not to be outdone, Saskatchewan Premier Roy Romanow provided an equally cynical response.

At issue here is not the fact that election campaigns bring new promises from our politicians.

A party must have the right to withhold its plans until the campaign, otherwise, rivals would steal their ideas.

Many of the Liberals' $1.8-billion worth of promises in their already-read book -- the one Reform Leader Preston Manning so gleefully released to the media Tuesday before red-faced Liberals were able to do so in Saskatoon Wednesday -- could be accurately defined as new commitments.

What wasn't new -- what the Liberal government should have told us at the time of its Feb. 20 federal budget -- is the Redbook's news that there will be $6.5 billion available from faster-than-expected federal deficit cuts.

Every economist said at the time of the February budget the federal deficit was being cut faster than the Liberals were saying.

Still, federal Finance Minister Paul Martin would not acknowledge that this was the case.

By withholding such information and possibly even manipulating the finances to gain a political leg up in an election that's been called 11Ž2 years before his mandate is up, Chretien is only feeding the cynicism.

Worse yet, such cynical, political acts tend to feed upon one another and multiply.

Chretien also announced Monday he was ditching the final two years of planned Canada Health and Social Transfer (CHST) cuts because the federal government is so far ahead of its deficit reduction plan. (It will mean the provinces will receive $1.5 billion more than they expected in a couple years. That will translate into $65 million more for Saskatchewan.)

There is no single federal program more important to the provinces than the CHST.

No single federal issue has crippled the provinces more in these past 31Ž2 years than CHST cuts.

If there was even an inkling the transfer payment restoration was coming, this too, should have been announced in the February budget.

Instead, the Liberals were more preoccupied with their own politics than good governance. Money that's forthcoming to the province, anyway, is now being used as a cynical Liberal election goody.

But if Chretien is playing cynical election games, Romanow has been pretty much doing the same thing.

The provincial NDP government has spent most of the last 31Ž2 years blaming all its fiscal problems on these federal cuts. Heck, they devoted the entire 1996 ''pre-budget consultation process" to bashing Ottawa.

So what's Romanow's reaction to an end to these cuts -- seemingly the root of all Saskatchewan's problems?

Well, it's "better than another whack on the head," the Saskatchewan premier said. But by a long ways was "a day late and a dollar short.

"It's a very, very small fraction of the total amount that we already have lost in Saskatchewan," Romanow added.

Heaven forbid Romanow or the Saskatchewan NDP would find anything positive about a federal Liberal government while a campaign is on. It might defeat the purpose of donating his personal staff and caucus to the federal NDP campaign.

Fortunately for the Saskatchewan premier, the people of his province seem far more magnanimous.

When Romanow announced in the March 20 provincial budget his government was forgoing about $180 million in sales tax revenue to give back to the people, he heard remarkably few people whining it was "a day late and a dollar short."

Most Saskatchewan people grudgingly accepted that tax increases were needed to fight the deficits -- the same thinking behind the feds' cuts to transfer payments.

Remarkably few were whining that $180 million does little to offset the extra $1 billion a year in taxes the Saskatchewan NDP has imposed since coming to power.

The ironic thing about something like a set election date is it would mostly save our politicians from themselves.

The more rigid the timetable, the less chance for politicians to play cynical games.

The fewer cynical games played, the less chance of cynical responses.

From The Leader-Post, May 1, 1997

Renaud's behavior was inexcusable


Article By Murray Mandryk

The problem in the case of former Saskatchewan highways minister Andy Renaud is, we've been asking the wrong question.

The question isn't: "Did Renaud really resign from his cabinet post because he made inappropriate remarks to a female patron at a Regina restaurant?"

There is no doubt the incident was a factor.

And if Renaud didn't resign over this incident, he should have.

But the real question that should be asked is: "Should we tolerate such behavior from any MLA, elected official or public figure?"

There can be only one answer. A resounding "No."

No one can deny that Renaud's stated reasons last week for stepping down were legitimate.

Suffering from chest pains and fatigue for several months prior, Renaud was diagnosed on Feb. 26 of having a blocked artery, necessitating an angioplasty and insertion of a metal stint. He has been on heart medication since.

But with this physical condition, why did Renaud not resign his cabinet post long before April 28?

On the evening of March 19, Andy Renaud was at a south Regina restaurant drinking when with a couple friends when he engaged in a conversation with a 25-year-old woman.

As the conversation progressed, both the woman and the restaurant's management became increasingly offended by Renaud's behavior that, by all accounts, was sexist and demeaning.

By Renaud's own admission in a statement he released Tuesday evening: "My behavior was loud and I made inappropriate comments ... my behavior was inexcusable."

Offended by the remarks, the woman shared the incident with her father. The father then raised the issue with Premier Roy Romanow's office the next week.

Much to his credit, Renaud did apologize to both the woman and to her father last week. Romanow said Wednesday Renaud apologized on his own and was not instructed to do so. The premier also insisted that Renaud's decision to resign was also his own and had nothing to do with the incident.

To accept Romanow's explanations, however, only raises more questions about how the premier and the government has handled this issue.

Romanow -- an individual who always has conducted himself as a gentleman -- agreed Wednesday Renaud's behavior was inappropriate.

Presuming Romanow's staff did tell the premier about the March 19 incident as soon as the father brought it to their attention, "why wouldn't Romanow have instructed Renaud to apologize? In fact, would it not have crossed Romanow's mind to ask Renaud to take even more drastic measures like step down from cabinet?"

Like in real life, the sad reality of public life is you are often judged by your worst moments -- not your best. Whatever thoughts you have about Renaud in light of this incident, should be weighed against the benefit of the doubt that this was an isolated incident and the courage and decency he showed by privately apologizing to both the woman and her father before the issue became a public one.

If his resignation did have anything to do with the incident, it actually says a lot about the remorse Renaud and the NDP government do truly feel.

But as stated earlier, his resignation isn't the issue.

The issue is, such self-admitted inexcusable behavior from any MLA can't be tolerated. Yes, this is a matter for public concern.

Andy Renaud represents a government which monthly issues press releases from the human rights commissions outlining cases involving female waitresses or secretaries or even bar patrons who've been harassed by male bosses or customers.

Renaud belongs to a government that is willing to take the province's ban on bar strippers -- both male and female -- to the Supreme Court of Canada for the stated reason that such activities demean women.

It is government and politicians who've laid claim to this moral high ground.

To tolerate or ignore a male MLA demeaning a woman in a public place would be the height of hypocrisy.

In fact, perhaps the most unseemly thing about the Renaud incident is the deafening silence from not only government MLAs, but opposition politicians and even women's groups.

Would the NDP have been so quiet if this was PC cabinet minister and they were in opposition?

Some politicians will tell you it's wrong to cross the line between their public and private lives. About 99.9 per cent they'd be right.

But not in this case.

There is only one issue here.

Renaud did something we, as a society, do not tolerate.

From The Leader-Post, May 3, 1997

Prime Minister might as well have stayed home


Article By Murray Mandryk

Evidently, Premier Roy Romanow's infamous bubble isn't sitting in storage for four years after all.

Prime Minister Jean Chretien appears to have rented it out, souped it up, added wings, made it even more impenetrable and is now flying it around the country this federal election campaign.

You remember Roy's bubble, don't you? The Saskatchewan premier's favorite mode of transportation from the 1995 campaign from which Romanow could speak out, but no inquiries from either reporters or real people could permeate in?

Well, Roy's old bubble is now Jean's campaign machine.

Why not? The great thing about leadership bubbles is no leader ever puts many miles on them.

The notorious leader's bubble touched down in Regina Monday night, hardly making a sound.

Even before touchdown, Chretien's itinerary unequivocally stated on no less than three occasions there would be "no scrums" to answer reporters' questions.

He made good on his itinerary commitment by brushing past reporters Monday night on his way to a speech to a by-invitation-only Liberal crowd. It was the same routine at the Chamber of Commerce breakfast the next morning.

He not only avoided reporters' questions; he did not entertain questions from the business crowd.

But the situation hit the height of absurdity late Tuesday morning at what was supposed to be a "photo op" at the Saskatchewan Indian Federated College on the University of Regina campus.

Despite the best attempts by Liberal campaign strategists to keep all information about Chretien's agenda quiet, the U of R students' union did find out about it and began organizing a protest over cuts to education as a result of the federal cuts to the social transfer payments.

The RCMP got wind of the protest and -- primarily, for what was explained to the students as "security reasons" -- began negotiating with the students to have instead a closed-door meeting with Chretien to discuss the issue.

The students, however, were clearly under the impression that at least the media would be allowed into the meeting. In fact, student leader Marjorie Brown told Broadcast News Tuesday it was their desire to have the media present because public access to the leaders is supposed to be what campaigns are all about.

Liberal organizers obviously believe otherwise.

Not only was this meeting with the students excluded from the Liberals' "no scrums" agenda; the national media were quickly ushered onto the campaign bus before they got wind of the encounter.

When local Saskatchewan reporters saw Chretien ducking into the U of R gymnasium and tried to follow, they were barred from entering. Barred from entering not by RCMP who believed that there was a security but by officious and self-important Liberal campaign organizers who told the reporters that a university gymnasium with 200 members of the public in the middle of an election campaign suddenly became something other than a public place.

To add insult to injury, Agriculture Minister Ralph Goodale then explained that neither he nor virtually anyone else had any prior knowledge this meeting was happening. (Then Goodale presumably went on to explain how he had some lovely riverfront property in Winnipeg he was willing to sell us.)

In nearly a full day in Saskatchewan, Chretien not only managed to escape without answering a single reporter's question, he even managed to either bar or steer away reporters from the one public meeting that he had been forced to hold. (Ask your questions at the next scrum in Calgary, one self-important Liberal toady told Regina-based reporters.)

No matter what complete and utter control freaks the NDP seemed to be during the 1995 provincial campaign, Romanow was virtually Will Rogers compared with Chretien Tuesday.

And what really made the whole affair intolerably galling was Chretien's pious pronouncement in his speech to by-invitation-only Liberals Monday that federal PC Leader Jean Charest was being disrespectful and promoting cynicism in democracy by throwing the Liberal red book on a barbecue.

So what then, Mr. Prime Minister, is breezing into a province for a few nice photo ops and not only refusing to talk to reporters but also refusing to talk publicly with any members of the public that might have concerns?

Why bother coming to Saskatchewan at all?

Next time, save the jet fuel the Liberal campaign plane would spend landing and taking off on the bald prairie and just send your speech video to your 200 favorite Liberal supporters.

After all, we wouldn't want to wear out the bubble.

Other politicians need it, you know.

From The Leader-Post, May 7, 1997

Goohsen case could be devastating for Tories


Article By Murray Mandryk

The recent charge of buying sex from a minor brought against PC Cypress Hills MLA Jack Goohsen may very well sound the final death knell for the Saskatchewan Tories.

PC Leader Bill Boyd says that won't necessarily be the case.

Jack Goohsen is pleading not guilty and fair-minded Saskatchewan people will neither judge the 54-year-old father of six nor the PC party until his court process is over, the Saskatchewan Tory leader told us Monday.

But Boyd's fidgety body language Monday seemed to suggest otherwise.

The charge against Goohsen -- the most damaging allegation to face a party that's already been riddled with charges and convictions of expense fraud -- seemed to drain the life out of the PC leader and his small caucus this week.

As has happened so often since Boyd first became PC leader in November 1994, just when you think he has miraculously put the PCs back on the road to recovery, something else happens.

No one can deny that Boyd is right on the issue of Goohsen's guilt or innocence.

In no way should Jack Goohsen be judged until he has had his day in court. A police charge laid against anyone is nothing more than an accusation and should be viewed as such.

And in a perfect world, people would not judge Goohsen until after his court proceedings.

But politics is far from a perfect world.

When Boyd went before the cameras Monday, there was little conviction in his assertion that the public would give Goohsen the benefit of doubt before his day in court.

Boyd likely understands far more than he is willing to publicly admit that the court of public opinion may have already passed a verdict.

Whether Goohsen is found guilty or not guilty, there will be ramifications for the PCs when provincial voters next go to the polls in 1999.

The nature of this charge against Goohsen -- one involving a minor -- could not be more severe. There are few crimes society frowns upon more than the abuse of children.

And from a political perspective, nothing could discredit the small, five-man PC caucus more than allegations of this nature that may never be forgotten by the public even if Goohsen is found not guilty.

The success of both the Liberal and PC oppositions this session has often come as a result of them riding the moral high horse.

From the Liberal perspective, arguably their must effective member and issue this session has been Humboldt MLA Arlene June with her demands that the government get tough on child prostitution.

The PCs have been no less morally pious.

They've demanded graphic pamphlets on AIDS prevention be removed, encouraged the NDP government to evoke the Charter of Rights notwithstanding clause to ban strippers from this province and called for the removal of an Estevan police officer convicted of hitting his daughter.

The PCs were particularly sanctimonious on the latter issue, charging that Estevan NDP MLA and city councillor Larry Ward had acted inappropriately. (Ward said people should not judge the officer without hearing the whole story.)

"The member from Estevan seems to be saying: 'It's Ok to hit a woman, so long as you've only done it once,'" said Boyd on April 17, ironically, the very same day that Goohsen was charged in the alleged incident.

"Mr. Minister, it's time for this legislature to send a message loud and clear. It's never OK to hit a woman. Not once. Not now. Not ever."

Suffice to say, such bravado was drained from Boyd and the PCs this week after the charges against Goohsen went public.

The Conservatives know the consequences for them politically are as grave as the consequences for Goohsen personally.

Of course, it's not the first time that we've written the political obituary for the Saskatchewan Tories.

Just three weeks before the 1995 election was called, Boyd found out 11 members of the PCs' 1986-91 caucus were charged with fraud. Three of them were also members of Boyd's caucus.

And Boyd had already had to remove Gerry Muirhead from his caucus for his fraud conviction.

But somehow Boyd managed to pull off five seats in the 1995 campaign, keeping his party alive.

The Goohsen situation, however, is different.

This isn't a remnant of PC corruption from the Grant Devine's days. It's close to Boyd.

The political ramifications for the Saskatchewan Tories may already be devastating.

From The Leader-Post, May 8, 1997

Money likely behind shorter House session


Article By Murray Mandryk

In a week when just about every federal politician who passed through town evoked the name of CCF icon Tommy Douglas, allow me to do the same.

Douglas once said: "If someone tells you it's not about the money, it's usually about the money."

What he was referring to specifically, I'm not sure.

But Douglas could have been talking about Saskatchewan's current crop of MLAs who are about to record the shortest legislative sitting in recent memory -- coincidentally, the first one after they no longer receive $155 a day per diems (or $94 a day for Regina MLAs) for showing up.

The signs all point to the legislative session winding down as early as next week.

Occupational Health and Safety Week at the legislature that was supposed to be held between June 2 and June 7 has been moved up to next week.

Of the 69 bills the government has introduced this session so far, 54 of them, as of Friday morning, had gone through second-reading debate.

The MLAs had completed the scrutiny of the 1997-98 budget spending estimates for 11 of 25 government departments. Of the 14 departmental budgets yet to be adopted, all but executive council have been debated twice.

In short, Friday was day 44 of this session. The MLAs should be out of work by next Friday.

If so, it will be the only session in the last 24 years that's lasted less than 50 days. (On average, sessions have lasted 72.5 days each year, the clerk's records show.)

So what's been different?

Until this year, MLAs were being paid $155 a day tax-free for expense allowance for a maximum 70 days.

Naturally, MLAs will deny this correlation.

There has just been far less legislation -- particularly, controversial legislation -- passed this year, our politicians argue.

Well, not really.

In the province's 91 previous sessions going back to 1917, there have been 7,289 bills passed -- an average of 80 per session. (Given that we also had this session a record 32 private member's bills, it's hard to see where the load's been all that much lighter.)

How can 14 per cent less legislation than average equate to 32 per cent less time in the House than average?

Well, there may be a few other reasons why our politicians are beating a hasty retreat:

* A federal election;

* An Official Opposition and a third party (particularly, since the charges against PC MLA Jack Goohsen) that have lost their will to be here, and, most significantly;

* The end of the financial incentives to drag out Saskatchewan's legislative sittings.

The NDP would far sooner be out on the stump aiding their federal brethren than stuck in the legislature in time-consuming debate. This is less of an issue for the Liberals, but one has to start to wonder whether the Liberals want to get out of here before June 2 simply because their candidates nationally -- and in Saskatchewan, in particular -- may not do as well as expected.

Governments open sessions and oppositions close them.

Oppositions do this by dragging out debate on bills or in spending estimates to ensure there is ample scrutiny.

Six bills whipped through second-reading debate during Thursday afternoon alone, suggesting the Liberals aren't all that worried about closely scrutinizing anything.

Where is that dogged commitment to issues we saw from the Liberals last session -- the leadup to their November leadership?

At the end of last year, Liberals were bellowing from the rafters about secret PC and NDP party funds. It's now a year later and it appears the Liberals are willing to let the New Democrats slip out of the legislature -- the place where they are most accountable -- before chief electoral officer Myron Kuziak releases his long-overdue report on party spending.

Could this sudden rush to close things down have something to do with the fact it's simply less profitable for an MLA to be here?

Last year, all MLAs' base salary increased about 19 per cent to $55,000 annually. In exchange, MLAs had to give up their excessive tax-free per diems -- as much as an extra $10,850 a year (Tax-free. Did I mention that?) by claiming all 70 days.

Suddenly, there isn't the incentive to sit 70 days. In fact, MLAs can be fined $200 a day if they don't attend session.

Of course, our MLAs will tell you the money doesn't have anything to do with it.

Tommy may have thought otherwise.

From The Leader-Post, May 10, 1997

Que. a problem for Reform


Article By Murray Mandryk

Two out of three "Quebec politicians" may have helped Reform party Leader Preston Manning's cause in Monday night's national leaders' debate.

Manning's big problem is the one that didn't.

Federal PC Leader Jean Charest's impressive performance in Monday's debate sent out the following strong messages:

* The Progressive Conservatives are still around as a right-wing alternative to Reform;

* You can be a right-wing alternative to Reform and still believe in a central government, and;

* You can be a right-wing alternative to Reform and still believe in national unity.

If the 54-year-old Manning -- he, the Fresh Start Reformer in contrast with the "tired, old" 63-year-old Liberal Leader Jean Chretien or the "same old" Tories led by 37-year-old Charest -- wanted to separate himself from the old-line parties, the national unity segment of Monday's debate afforded Manning a couple perfect opportunities to do so.

One was his "You-almost-blew-it,-sir" attack on Chretien's handling of the 1995 Quebec referendum -- the less-than-subtle inference that it was Chretien's soft stance on separation in 1995 that nearly cost us the country.

The other huge bonus for Manning was the arrogant and strident nature of the one-time Marxist and current Bloc Quebecois Leader Gilles Duceppe.

As Duceppe corrected CBC National TV correspondent Jason Moscovitz that Quebec was not a region but a country, you could almost feel the heat rise from reddening necks across the country.

Manning's frequent references to Chretien, Duceppe and Charest as "more squabbling Quebec politicians" only enhanced that feeling.

But that's about where Manning and his handlers should have asked themselves the following questions:

"Where do we go from here?" What message was Manning sending out in the debate to areas where Reform must grow? How will this appeal to voters in Ontario, the Atlantic provinces, and, for that matter, a large portion of Western Canada that won't be voting Reform simply because of the gun-control issue?

Without any other right-wing alternative, Manning's message would have been more sellable to all Canadian voters.

After all, why would English Canada -- dissatisfied with the huge Liberal majority and not inclined to buy into the spend-at-will platform of Alexa McDonough's NDP -- buy into Charest's program when Manning and Reform were offering similar deficit reduction and similar tax cuts? (Brian Mulroney hasn't been gone that long.)

But what Manning may have really accomplished in his attempt to separate himself from the old-line political parties on the unity issue is allow Charest to separate himself from Manning.

"All I hear in regards to Canada coming from you is always negative," Charest told Manning in response to Reform's refusal to recognize Quebec as distinct. "I never get a sense that there's something positive that we have to build together."

Charest may have also successfully damned Manning as really being no different than Duceppe. Both the Bloc and Reform have a vision of Canada that stops at the Ottawa River, Charest charged.

Not enough to rebuild the fortunes of a discredited PC party, you say? Perhaps.

But to then suggest this is a squabble among Quebec politicians or that voters don't want to see some strong national leadership on the unity issue is another thing.

Consider, though, the only ovation any politician received from the debate's studio audience -- random, non-partisan Canadians from across the country -- was in response to Charest's passionate remarks that he wanted to pass on the same united Canada to his children he received from his parents.

Charest's comments may have given an identity to the PCs as a national party. If so, it's an identity that not only separates the Reform from the PCs but may even allow the PCs to attract voters in Ontario, the Maritimes and much of the urban West.

Of course, we'll have to wait until June 2 to see how many really did care about Charest's unity message.

But even if the momentum from Charest's debate performance doesn't translate into seats, it still may be enough to split the votes for Manning.

And not just in Ontario or the Maritimes.

Take a look at Reform candidates Elwin Hermanson and Allan Kerpan respectively running against incumbents New Democrat Chris Axworthy (Saskatoon-Rosetown-Biggar) and Liberal Morris Bodnar (Saskatoon-Blackstrap). What happens to those two Reform incumbents -- both already behind the respective New Democrat and Liberal based on 1993 results transposed on the new ridings -- if Charest's performance attracts any support back to the PCs?

Indeed, at least one of those squabbling Quebec politicians has become very problematic for Manning.

From The Leader-Post, May 14, 1997

Big area makes campaigning tough


Article By Murray Mandryk

PONTEIX -- A veteran of more campaigns that he cares to remember, long-time Liberal Dick Lemieux knew time was of the essence for his party's Cypress Hills-Grasslands candidate Ron Gleim.

No time for extended chit-chat. Get the candidate face to face with as many voters as you can. Then get him off to the next Liberal organizer in the next town.

"You've got anything to ask him, ask him now," Lemieux encouraged a local grocery clerk -- one of 68 hands Gleim shook in a two-hour stop in this community 311 kilometres southwest of Regina.

"He's busy. He's got to cover New Brunswick."

Or at least, an area as big.

Cypress Hills-Grasslands is 72,876 square kilometres. One federal riding. 70,259 people. Less than one person per square kilometre.

New Brunswick, by the way, is 73,436 square kilometres and has 10 federal seats.

In fact, Cypress Hills-Grasslands is bigger than the provinces of Nova Scotia (55,491 square kilometres) and Prince Edward Island (5,660 square kilometres) combined that have 11 and four federal seats, respectively.

It may also be the toughest riding in Canada to campaign in this election because of its size and makeup.

There are physically bigger seats in the north, but such seats receive special spending considerations so candidates can afford to fly to the isolated pockets of population.

For example, in Churchill River -- four times as large as Cypress Hills - Grasslands covering all of northern Saskatchewan -- most of the population isn't scattered on ranches and farms. There are 16 communities with more than 600 people. Since candidates can spend $1.01 for each of 56,620 residents, flying becomes both feasible and practical.

But in Cypress Hills-Grasslands -- where candidates can spend only the 96 cents per resident -- there are only 11 communities with more that 600 people counting Swift Current (pop. 14,890) and Assiniboia (pop. 2,774). Another 38 communities have between 100 and 599 people and another dozen or so have less than 100.

So Gleim has little choice other that to hit Saskatchewan's brutal highways.

He and his brother Dave, his sometimes driver, logged 800 kilometres on the road one day last week -- eight hours in the vehicle instead of on the doorsteps.

This day's a short one -- a mere 345 kilometres -- covered a small postage stamp in the middle of the riding. Gleim left the Chaplin coffee shop at about 9 a.m. and proceeded to Gravelbourg, Lafleche, Ponteix and Cadillac then back up to campaign headquarters in Swift Current before he arrived back at his Chaplain farm at 8:50 p.m.

"Hell, I drive 50 to 100 miles for parts," shrugs the Chaplin area farmer-rancher and former Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities (SARM) director. "It's not a big deal."

But what is making this campaign tough for Cypress Hills-Grasslands candidates is the timing -- smack dab in the middle of spring seeding when farmers only head into town for repairs.

There's no time to talk politics.

It made for mixed results on the stump. In Gravelbourg, Gleim shook 25 hands in total, but only 11 on Main Street where half the businesses are closed on a Monday, anyway.

However, a visit to Trailtech manufacturers -- a company that's grown from an on-farm business in 1986 to 60 workers with plans for expansion -- did serve to underline Gleim's campaign theme of how much this riding needs local manufacturing and value-added processing to bring young people back to these small towns.

"I'll tell you, if we could just get about of 50 these in this riding," he said.

Today, though, young working people remain a rarity. Of the 28 people he meets in Lafleche, half were playing cards at the local senior's centre. Cadillac was the low point. Gleim can only find nine hands to shake. The local organizer profusely apologized for the lack of bodies.

But it was Lemieux -- a local hardware store owner who knows everyone here and, more importantly, knows how to get a candidate around to meet as many of them as possible -- that turned out to be the day's saving grace.

He buzzed Gleim through town. The 68 eligible voters the candidate met in the town of 631would be more than Gleim would meet at the rest of the day's stops combined.

An otherwise slow day turned into not a bad one -- 130 voters in only 345 kilometres. Better than one for every three kilometres traveled.

Not a bad day when you're campaigning in a riding as big as New Brunswick.

From The Leader-Post, May 15, 1997

Assessing the battles in Saskatchewan's 14 ridings


Article By Murray Mandryk

The arithmetic adds up to some very disappointed Saskatchewan politicians on June 2.

Fourteen federal ridings in this province.

The Liberals, NDP and Reform party each say they will win at least eight seats here. (Heck, Reformers and New Democrats have publicly predicted as many as 10 Saskatchewan seats each. )

You don't gotta be Einstein to see we've got a bit of a math problem.

So let's examine today where the optimism is and where it may be a bit excessive.

Battlefords-Lloydminster: Transposing the 1993 voting results on this riding, Reform would win by 3,000 votes ahead of the Liberals. And that's without the gun control issue. The NDP would be 4,000 votes back and even with incumbent MP Len Taylor running, the seat doesn't make the NDP's top five "expect to win election night" seats. In fact, it doesn't make the NDP's next list of three seats the NDP think they can win with a somewhat favorable vote split. Reformers are very optimistic, but, interestingly, they only rank it their third or fourth best chance. With North Battleford Mayor Glen Hornick and some luck, the Liberals insist they have a chance here.

Blackstrap: Someone is going to be disappointed here. The Liberals consider it among their top three or four seats with incumbent Morris Bodnar. Even though they are 2,000 votes behind on the transposed 1993, Reform believes they have as good a shot with their incumbent Allan Kerpan ( although they still only rank it about their fifth or sixth best seat.) For New Democrats, it's one of those three they think they can win with the right vote split.

Churchill River: Some Liberals have rated this as high as their second best seat with First Nations Bank founder Roy Bird as their candidate. However, the NDP are only 107 votes behind on the transposed 1993 results. The problem with northern politics is, no one can ever tell.

Cypress Hills-Grasslands: With incumbent Lee Morrison and gun control, Saskatchewan Reformers consider this their best seat. The Liberals have popular Chaplain-area reeve Ron Gleim and some pre-election polling that shows them only about six points behind Reform. The NDP feels it has about as much of a chance here as Reform does in Churchill River.

Palliser: One of their top five seats, the NDP believe it's a near lock with Dick Proctor and because the Liberals have Tony Merchant. However, Liberal insiders say the NDP are vastly underestimating Merchant and his campaigning skills. Reformers think they have a chance on a split. Again, there will be disappointment.

Prince Albert: With his daylight saving time gaff and because he's spent much of the last three years in Ottawa, Liberal incumbent MP Gordon Kirkby may be in trouble in what is solid NDP country. Interestingly though, New Democrats are very worried about splitting votes with Reformers and rank this seat among the three where the NDP needs a favorable split.

Qu'Appelle: The NDP's best seat with Lorne Nystrom. However, both the Liberals (with Don Ross) and Reform (with Les Winter) claim they have a shot because of Nystrom's baggage.

Regina-Lumsden-Lake Centre: With incumbent John Solomon the NDP believe this to be the party's second best seat. They are reminding voters the Liberal candidate here (Kevin Clarke) is Tony Merchant's law partner. Reform also feels it has a shot.

Saskatoon-Humboldt: Yet another seat where they'll be tears shed June 2. All three parties have Liberal incumbent Georgette Sheridan's seat among their top five or six best chances.

Saskatoon-Rosetown-Biggar: With incumbent Chris Axworthy and sections of Roy Romanow's and Bob Mitchell's provincial seats in this riding, this is another top-five seat for the NDP. Reform has incumbent Elwin Hermanson and rate his chances the same as Kerpan's -- among their fifth or sixth best seat.

Souris-Moose Mountain: Both Reformers and Liberals consider this about their third or fourth best seat. Old Tory vote here seems to be heading towards a one-time Tory, Reform candidate Roy Bailey -- bad news for Liberal incumbent Bernie Collins who won in 1993 on a very favorable split. New Democrats think they have about as much chance here as they have in Cypress Hills-Grasslands -- more bad news for Collins.

Wanuskewin: Perhaps the ultimate three-way fight and all three parties say the same thing -- "we've got a good chance here." A good place to run a Kleenex concession stand on June 2.

Wascana: At the start of the campaign everyone conceded the province's best Liberal seat to Agriculture Minister Ralph Goodale, but New Democrats now insist they are picking up some weird vibes. Well, if the Liberals and Reformers can claim hope in Qu'Appelle and Regina-Lumsden-Lake Centre, allow the NDP its dreams, too.

Yorkton-Melville: The Reform call it their second-best seat with incumbent Garry Breitkreuz. Like Battlefords-Lloydminster, the NDP say they need a lot of help in what once was NDP territory. Even the Liberals think they have a shot on a split.

From The Leader-Post, May 17, 1997

No more Nazi references, please


Article By Murray Mandryk

On behalf of the country's voting populace sick and tired of all the NDP/Reform Party sanctimony, can we please place a moratorium on references to Hitler and Nazi regime for at least the remainder of this campaign?

A nice thought, but don't bet it will necessarily happen.

Such name-calling stems from two parties that both now think of themselves as grassroots Western populists going head-to-head for the same turf in roughly the same sanctimonious manner.

Sadly, this name-calling will likely only get worse.

The participants would have us believe all this rancor stems from the fact Reformers and New Democrats are at diverse ends of the political spectrum, but in reality, that's more the excuse than the explanation.

Provincial Tories, after all, are as far right as federal Reformers, yet Bill Boyd and Roy Romanow seem to get along famously. (Remember Liberal leader Jim Melenchuk's conspiracy theories earlier this session?)

One major difference between provincial Tories and federal Reformers, however, is the latter is perceived to be a far greater threat to wrest away support from the NDP. (It was Reform in Saskatchewan and B.C. in particular that robbed the NDP of party status in the last parliament and it's Reform in such traditional NDP territory that New Democrats are competing with this election.)

So when Saskatchewan NDP backbencher Andrew Thomson stood up in the legislature last week and likened Reform leader Preston Manning to a brown-shirt, goose-stepping Nazi, it was far less an isolated case of bad judgment than it was the culmination of an increasingly bitter feud over territory and power.

What was so disheartening about Thomson's remarks for anyone who's sick and tired of the meanness in politics is how reflective it was of some New Democrats' feelings towards Reform.

It wasn't just the giggles and immediate cheers of appreciation from NDP backbenchers as Thomson made his statement last week. Nor was it just Justice Minister John Nilson's initial remarks that Manning should have thicker skin when compared with a regime that exterminated an estimated eight to 10 million Jews, Slavs, gypsies, homosexuals and mentally disabled in brutal concentration camps. (Like Thomson, Nilson deserves credit for having the courage and decency to apologize for his remarks.)

What was truly frightening is how perfectly acceptable such intolerance and sanctimony was in NDP circles, as would be further demonstrated by Agriculture Minister Eric Upshall's comments a day later.

The day after both Thomson and Romanow apologized for the remark, Upshall was heard to say in the legislature about Thomson's Nazi reference: "If you throw a stone in the dark, and the dog yelps, you know you hit the dog."

Even in the wake of condemnation across the country and from B'nai B'rith Canada for the way Thomson's remarks had trivialized the world's most horrible moments this century, Upshall did not have the grace to apologize. Sadly, he didn't even have the courage to admit he said it.

One can only assume Upshall got away with it because New Democrats weren't really upset or even embarrassed by his remarks.

For all-too many New Democrats, political rivals are more than just enemies -- they must be vilified as evil.

Long before Thomson's, Nilson's or Usphall's comments last week NDP campaign literature was already referring to Reform as extreme and intolerant. "They don't reflect Saskatchewan values," NDP Humboldt candidate Dennis Gruending wrote in one handout. (Even federal leader Alexa McDonough responded to Thomson's remarks by piously suggesting the public should be warned of Reform's ultra-right agenda. Tuesday, she was back at it again, accusing Manning of hate-mongering and leading us towards civil war with Reform's unity position.)

Reform is right in calling for such trash talk to stop.

The problem is, Reformers should have been practicing what they now preach.

Reformers' condemnation of New Democrats as professional politicians only interested in MPs' pension has hardly been any less severe.

Nor has Reform shied away from using similar vicious language when it comes to its own political enemies.

As long as the gun-control issue has been around, we've heard the gun lobby comparing federal Justice Minister Allan Rock to Hitler. Reformers have made the comparison and others in the party have been completely comfortable hearing these comparisons at gun rallies without correcting them. (So when did this ''fresh start" to politics begin?)

It's been abhorrent politics on both their parts.

But given what's at stake, don't expect it to stop.

From The Leader-Post, May 21, 1997

NDP should have won this session with ease


Article By Murray Mandryk

There is no doubt the NDP government won this Saskatchewan legislative session.

Its only problem was, the NDP should have won the session in a first-round knockout -- not in a 12-round decision.

And one day down the road, people may yet point to the Second Session of the Twenty-third Saskatchewan Legislature and say: "That's when the chinks in the NDP armor first started to show."

Evaluating any particular session is simple enough. Just ask yourself: "What one or two things emerged that will stick with the voters by the next time they vote?"

For the governing NDP, the answer was simple and positive.

Tax cuts.

The surprising decision to lower the provincial sales tax to seven per cent was a risky move. Ultimately, though, it will be a profitable one as the NDP will insure that voters remember come the next provincial election, likely in 1999, that the government chose to cut taxes sooner than later.

A tax cut, alone, can be the knockout blow for a governing party in any one session. Accompanied by a ferocious combination of fiscal/economic development good news, it should be lethal.

Add to the PST cut the fourth consecutive balanced budget, further debt reduction culminating in a credit rating upgrade by the Dominion Bond Rating Service (DBRS) out of the BBB category back into A (low) and some very good news on the job-creation front in the year's first four months and what we've got is the complete package from Premier Roy Romanow's NDP government this session.

For the opposition parties -- both of which went into this session with their own reasons for optimism -- it was a frustrating 51 days.

The Liberals came into this session after a big byelection win in North Battleford and a rejuvenating leadership race in November.

But new leader Jim Melenchuk became the invisible man whom the NDP took great delight in mocking because he was also on the Liberal caucus payroll as "researcher." Disorganization and an inability to sink their teeth into the important issues continued to plague the Grits.

The Tories, too, had great potential this session if for no other reason than they had nothing to lose. No Saskatchewan politician seemed to be enjoying the assembly more than PC Leader Bill Boyd.

But as if the ongoing PC fraud scandal wasn't enough, Cypress Hills MLA Jack Goohsen's criminal charge last month of procuring a juvenile prostitute sapped the life out of Boyd and the Tories.

Tax cuts. Balanced budgets. Jobs. Debt reduction. Your major opposition still in disarray and your other opposition plagued by scandal.

This was the dream session for the NDP.

Or at least it should have been.

And for not emerging out of this session in better shape, the NDP has only its own arrogance to blame.

Consider where the NDP got into problems this session: John Nilson saying there is no problem with young offenders stealing cars; Eldon Lautermilch and a host of NDP backbenchers attempting to discredit the provincial auditor so Jack Messer could more easily hide SaskPower profits; the resignation of highways minister Andy Renaud in the wake of what he admits was "inexcusable behavior"; attempting to cover up SaskTel's $16-million loss on NST; the Guyana Power Corp. and SaskPower's unwillingness to disclose anything; Andy Thomson's Nazi references; and Chief Electoral Officer Myron Kuziak's refusal to release his report on party spending until after the June 2 federal vote.

What do they all have in common? All can be attributed to NDP disdain: Trust us, we're smarter than you. We know best. We can do or say whatever we want because we're the ones in power.

Will smugness be an issue with voters two years from now? Isn't good, balanced-budget government enough? Well, ask Allan Blakeney.

The NDP did walk away with a win this session.

But they didn't get their knockout.

In fact, they walked away far, far more bruised than they ever should have been.

From The Leader-Post, May 22, 1997

Can candidate Tony Merchant learn new tricks?


Article By Murray Mandryk

The first Palliser riding resident that Liberal Tony Merchant encountered this evening of door-knocking appeared to be the type that had a bone to pick with the candidate.

But whatever grudge he might have held quickly evaporates after a few soft words and kind strokes from the long-time Liberal and one-time MLA -- a politician whose skills on the stump appear considerable.

We shouldn't be all that surprised.

Labrador retriever pups tend to be quite forgiving.

"You still have your dog, Tony?" asks Merchant's campaigning companion Daryl Shirkey.

"I still have my dog," replied Merchant, patting the young Lab.

It's news that will come as a relief to many -- not the least of which would be Merchant's white Siberian Husky whose fame stems from a January 1996 flight with his master that would have ended in a crash landing had Merchant not manually lowered the landing gear.

Asked why the dog was with him, Merchant -- presumably joking -- told CKTV's Wayne Mantyka it was specifically in case of such a crash landing: "My theory is ... you sleep with the dog for the first couple of days and then you eat him on the third or fourth day."

But this Pallliser black lab pup bore no malice.

The dog's owner, though, may have been a little wary ...

Perhaps the best line to so far emerge from the Saskatchewan federal campaign has come from Social Services Minister Lorne Calvert -- an NDP MLA from Moose Jaw intimately familiar with the Palliser seat.

"The problem with our (NDP) candidate (former party executive director Dick Proctor) is name recognition," Calvert said. "That, however, is the same problem the Liberals have."

Albeit almost 19 years since he last held public office, Merchant has never strayed far from politics or the public eye.

After losing a bitter and expensive provincial Liberal leadership campaign in the late 1970s, he threw himself into federal politics as a federal candidate in 1979 and 1980. He lost to Simon de Jong both times.

Then Merchant re-emerged as a candidate for the Regina Wascana Liberal nomination four years ago against Ralph Goodale. It became know as in infamous pizza war, where Merchant "sold" 1,068 Liberal youth memberships by enticing local high school students to come vote for him at the nomination then come to a "pizza party" later. Merchant lost the nomination by 200 votes.

Add to this a flamboyant legal career as a family and divorce lawyer, his representation of Colin Thatcher during his custody battles and as a Thatcher witness at the convicted murderer's trial plus plenty of anecdotes along the way like last year's near-plane-crash story, and there's one certainty about Tony Merchant:

You love him or you hate him. Indifference is seldom an option.

There is plenty of canine in Merchant, himself, in this election campaign.

He's sleek as a greyhound (nattily attired in his trademark double-breasted pinstripe suit), clever as a fox (when it comes to connecting voters and Liberal policies), loyal as a collie (at defending Liberal policy and Prime Minister Jean Chretien on doorstep) and tenacious as a pit bull (stumping 12 to 14 hour days).

Unfortunately for Merchant, it's the pit-bull aspect of his personality that many voters most easily recall.

Like him or not, no one can question his work ethic, commitment to the party or considerable political skills honed by 25 year in the business.

It's evident on the doorsteps where his reception is -- not surprisingly -- friendly. (He was campaigning , after all, on Regina's McCallum Street where he lives.)

An older woman who says she can't shake his hand become of her arthritis is seamlessly informed of the Liberal's new prescription drug policy.

A young woman earning about $10 an hour receives a recitation of job creation statistics in the four-year period before and after the Liberals took power in 1993 win and is told that success is mostly due to federal Finance Minister Paul Martin's success reducing interest rates.

An economist who says he wants to hear new ideas other than the Martin-driven deficit slashing is bluntly told by Merchant: "We're absolutely determined to get the deficit (down)."

And all -- especially those votes on the fence -- are left with the message that Liberals "could be within five seats of a minority government, either way" so a Liberal vote here will make a difference.

Without his history, he appears to be the ideal candidate.

With his history, he's ... well ... Tony Merchant.

An old political dog. And you know what they say about old dogs and new tricks.

From The Leader-Post, May 24, 1997

Nystrom aims to provide some opposition


Article By Murray Mandryk

By New Democrat Lorne Nystrom's own rough estimates, today's doors in the Qu'Appelle riding will be around the 40,000th he's knocked on as a candidate for federal Parliament.

It's his ninth election since he first ran and won as a brash 22-year-old in 1968. About 4,000 to 5,000 doors knocked on per election.

Seven out of eight elections and for 25 straight years, Nystrom was elected to the House of Commons from Yorkton-Melville with margins of victory that averaged 4,850 votes. Ended there, it would have been an exceedingly successful political career.

But after losing by 1,000 votes to MP Gary Breitkreuz 3 1/2 years ago, Nystrom is back.

Perhaps it's some weird addiction to the door bell, but it certainly can't be because life outside the House of Commons was either unsuccessful or dull.

Within six months of his defeat, he was in Zimbabwe helping train African National Congress designates who would become the South African parliament's senior officers after that country's first free election.

He completed a research project in Russia for Harvard University, served as an advisory to the Canadian Unity office and signed on to the Canadian Club's expenses-paid roster of speakers who travel the nation.

The corporate world also beckoned. He's been a commission salesman for Crown Life and secured a huge benefits package from the Saskatchewan Government Employees Union. (It was a deal that was not without its political controversy, though. Kevin Yates, an SGEU vice-president and chair of the public sector negotiating committee, was also Nystrom's campaign manager in his bid for the NDP Qu'Appelle nomination.)

And his Regina-based consulting firm has been pitching a billion-dollar megaproject -- the 3,600-kilometre Alliance Pipeline Project pipeline that would run through Saskatchewan from Fort St. John, Alta. to Chicago.

Add to this an estimated $49,154-a-year MP's pension (he turned 50 last year) and you can see there is ample reward for any politician that's knocked on enough doors.

"I obviously don't need the money," Nystrom said.

But today Nystrom is about as far removed from the corporate world of life insurance and megaprojects or the world of United Nations diplomacy or Ivy League School research as he could be.

On Garnet Street in north central Regina, you'll pay more for a new Honda Civic coupe (around $17,000) than you would for some of these houses. About every second or third doorstep is adorned with a "beware of dog" sign to discourage break-ins.

So why is he here and not retired from active politics? It can likely be best explained by what he's saying on these doorsteps.

About two-thirds of Saskatchewan people, according to NDP polling, say Prime Minister Jean Chretien needs opposition in the House of Commons.

Lorne Nystrom says the exact same thing ... to each voter that responds to his knock.

It's a message that works here.

"I've been NDP all my life," said one young man in his 20s. "I want one of those big kick-ass signs."

In about 20 stops this particular afternoon, Nystrom gets requests for four signs. Two come from young native women who both say they've never voted anything other than NDP.

He's already got some 1,500 signs up in the Qu'Appelle riding -- a good many of them in this part of Regina. Nystrom estimates that each sign represents about 10 votes, which would translate into, if his theory is right, a 6,000-vote-plus victory.

Of course, not every one agrees they need more opposition in Ottawa. Or even believe that Nystrom and the NDP are the opposition they want.

At a recent all-candidates meeting in Fort QuAppelle -- part of the 50-per-cent rural area that makes up half this seat -- Nystrom was bluntly asked what he was doing back in politics after being rejected by Yorkton-Melville voters in 1993.

And even on this solid NDP street Nystrom and the NDP still have their detractors.

One man vows he'll never vote NDP because of a fight he had with former provincial NDP agriculture minister Gordon MacMurchy more than 20 years ago over proper compensation for a gas line that went through his farm.

But even this voter agrees Chretien needs some opposition in Ottawa.

Nystrom is determined that opposition won't be Reform.

"(Reform leader Preston) Manning has been setting the agenda for too long in this country," said Nystrom who, like many New Democrats, has a hard time masking the contempt for the party that defeated him 3 1/2 years ago. "We need a large and vibrant NDP caucus."

So it's back to the doors for Nystrom.

Only a couple thousand more to go this campaign ...

From The Leader-Post, May 28, 1997
Back to
Archive
Index
Go to
Leader-Star
June 1997
Archive
Regina
City Beat
Features
& Columns
Sports Connections Customer
Service
Prairie
Mall
Wellness Business
Link
Classifieds 'Rider
News
LP OnLine
Index