Of Popularity Contests

Looks like Canada will be going to the polls. It's inevitable, in any event. Parliament is too fractured, too partisan. There are many issues on which the government cannot move forward. It's time to elect a new, a functioning government - whichever party that will represent - that will be enabled, through a majority presence, to do its duty by the country.

It's rather interesting how suspicious the electorate has become of late. We've been burnt a little too often by the self-serving, arrogant and self-availing political elites who have governed on our behalf. Canadians are not happy with inefficiency, with corruption manifesting itself throughout the system, particularly when it originates at the highest levels of power.

Wastefulness of tax dollars is never a wise decision to make. Mostly because the federal auditor-general has a habit of picking carefully about on a regular basis, with the unfortunate habit of high-lighting government inadequacies. Government programs in service to the population should be productive and useful, not wasteful and unneeded.

And we like our heads of government to be principled, to make intelligent decisions on our behalf, to exercise sound judgement. So when it comes to the public trust, there's a moveable feast. Of the three major political parties, there are three leaders with ideological agendas, and vastly differing personalities.

It's more than trifling to isolate the esteem or lack of, trust or lack of, promise inherent in or lack of, in the minds of the voting public. There's nothing very glamorous or compelling about Canadian politics and certainly not a federal election campaign. It's workmanlike and to the point; highly competitive and even a tad dreary.

A necessary evil. May the best candidate - hope springs eternal - win, and win with a majority, however slender. The results of a very recent Ipsos Reid survey produced some interesting insights. When asked how to rate the three leaders in response to four key queries, we can see who came out on top, and who rated poorly.

Question 1. Someone you can trust: 38% Harper; 32% Layton; 22% Dion.
Question 2. Best to manage the economy: 50% Harper; 23% Layton; 22% Dion.
Question 3. Committed to dealing with global warming: 38% Layton; 30% Dion; 27% Harper.
Question 4. Someone with a vision: 43% Harper; 27% Layton; 25% Dion.

Fascinating, truly fascinating. The political pundits foresee another minority government. Stephane Dion is determined to restore the Liberals to their traditional seat of power with himself, needless to say, established as prime minister. Jack Layton knows he hasn't a snowball's chance in hell to attain prime office, but he does see himself as an influential fixer.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper is gambling on the possibility, however seemingly remote, of a slim majority. It could happen. More people find him trustworthy, feel he's best capable of managing the economy, and recognize him as having a vision that might be good for Canada's future.

He's not done well with public apprehension on the environment. But given that Stephane Dion's major platform is just that and he runs second to Jack Layton, he might be considered an utter failure. Mr. Dion is no one's favourite. Not even his caucus's. His disadvantage is that he has impressed no one, and his most senior caucus members are juggling for their own advantage to unseat him.

So, despite that Canadians nurse their dark little suspicions about the controlling prime minister they have at present, they have also invested trust in his capabilities, his judgement and his honesty. The next few months, although not remotely approaching the glitter and drama of the U.S. election, may prove to be more than a little interesting.