Here it is folks. Bookmark and spread the word.

http://democraticSPACE.com/canada2008 (offline)

We have a large number of bloggers writing from across the country and across the political spectrum. These articles can be sorted by date, by party, by topic, by region, or by author. We have individual riding pages, where you can comment on each race (and we may also add a separate discussion forum). And of course we have the riding-by-riding projections. Keep in mind we are still adding content to the riding pages (past election results, candidates, news feeds, etc) and still posting the projected winners, but it’s mostly there. Note also we have not added candidate ads — the ads shown are for the Ontario 2007 election to illustrate how it works. The goal is to have the site more or less complete by the start of the news cycle Monday morning.

I’ll be posting over there until mid-October.

DemocraticSPACE will launch its Canada 2008 coverage on Sunday, September 14, giving us one full month of election coverage. We have assembled a large team of bloggers from across the country and across the political spectrum, providing reports and commentary on local ridings and regional issues. Also, we will also provide poll tracking, riding-by-riding projections, and riding-by-riding discussions, and more. As we did for the Ontario provincial campaign, we are also offering candidates and parties advertising opportunities. So stay tuned for the launch of our new site on Sunday, September 14.

Update: 3:20pm PT. Includes Sep 10 Ekos and Sep 10 Nanos.

According to the latest DemocraticSPACE projections, the Conservatives are on the verge of a majority government (which requires 155 seats). Current projections put the Conservatives at 146 seats on 37.7% support, the Liberals at 92 seats on 26.9% support, the NDP at 30 seats on 17.5% support, the Bloc at 38 seats on 8.6% support (32.5% in Québec), and the Greens with no seats and 8.3% support. These projections are based on regional polling data for all major Canadian pollsters between 2 Sep and 10 Sep. Regional breakdowns are below.

CONSERVATIVE	LIBERAL	NDP	BLOC	GREEN	OTHERS
37.7%	26.9%	17.5%	8.6%	8.3%	1.0%
146	92	30	38	0	2

Ontario
The Conservatives are currently projecting at 52 seats on 39.6% support, the Liberals 42 seats on 33.9%, the NDP 12 seats on 16.6% and the Greens no seats on 9.0%.

Québec
The Bloc Québécois is currently projecting at 38 seats on 32.5% support, the Conservatives at 17 seats on 27.2% support, the Liberals 18 seats on 20.1%, the NDP 1 seat on 13.1%, and the Greens no seats on 6.2%.

British Columbia
The Conservatives are currently projecting at 21 seats on 37.5% support, the NDP 9 seats on 27.0%, the Liberals 6 seats on 22.3% and the Greens no seats on 11.9%.

Alberta
The Conservatives are currently projected to win all 28 seats on 62.9% support, the Liberals at 17.2%, and the NDP at 9.9% and Greens at 8.5%.

Prairies
The Conservatives are currently projected to win 20 seats on 43.5% support, the NDP 4 seats on 28.1%, the Liberals 4 seats on 20.5% and the Greens no seats on 6.2%.

Atlantic Canada
The Liberals are currently projected to win 20 seats on 38.0% support, the Conservatives 8 seats on 31.4%, the NDP 3 seats on 24.0% and the Greens no seats on 6.0%.

9 September 2008

The Honourable Jack Layton
Leader, New Democratic Party
300 - 279 Laurier West
Ottawa, Ontario K1P 5J9

Dear Jack,

I run DemocraticSPACE, a non-partisan election website that some 300,000 unique Canadians visited during the 2006 election campaign. As you might imagine from the website’s name, I place democratic principle above partisan politics.

So it is with great disappointment that I write to you today to express my solemnest condemnation of your actions in denying the Green Party a place at the debate table. As it stands, the Liberals, Bloc Québécois, and Greens stand ready to debate. Only you and Stephen Harper are refusing to debate if Elizabeth May speaks. In join forces with the Conservatives to deny the Greens a voice, you have betrayed your principles and the principles of the New Democratic Party.

In doing so, you have lost my vote. In 2006, I proudly cast my vote for the NDP on principle. The NDP once stood up and demanded that minority voices be heard in parliament. But I see now that this principle has given way to the search for a few more votes, afraid of what giving the Greens a voice might do to your bottom line. So as it stands today, in 2008, I will cast my ballot for the Green Party — a direct response to your decision to put petty politics ahead of principle. I am not alone.

I will not waste your time outlining the reasons why the Greens deserve a seat at the table, but suffice to say — like it or not — the Greens are now a major player in Canadian politics. And as such, they deserve a seat at the table. Far from shying away, you should be eager to outline your differences. By refusing to debate, you look weak. Worse, you align yourself with a leader (Harper) who has shown outright contempt for democratic values.

It is my greatest hope that you will have the courage to reverse course, to listen to the thousands of Canadians of all political stripes who are outraged by the decision to deny the Greens a voice, and, in particular, the part you played in this injustice. With your participation, Stephen Harper will be isolated; if he refuses to debate when all other leaders will, it will to his detriment and to your benefit. It takes a strong leader to admit when he was wrong; given your campaign is built around “a new strong”, you would do well to demonstrate that strength.

Sincerely,
Gregory D. Morrow
DemocraticSPACE

Update: my fellow non-partisan James Bow finds himself in the same position.

Update: it seems that the heat Jack Layton has been taking is having some impact. Layton is backing down, but only because the “debate about the debates” is “becoming a distraction” (i.e. taking him off-message), not because he thinks he was wrong. Leadership is admitting when you were wrong.

We are hoping to launch our new Canada 2008 site on Sunday, September 14, so we will have exactly one month of election coverage. In addition to our seat projections and riding discussions, we are also doing something a little different this time — we have recruited a team of bloggers from across the country and across the political spectrum, who are going to blog about what they are seeing on the ground in their local ridings from both non-partisan and partisan perspectives. We have a pretty good sized team so far, but we need more bloggers, so that we can cover as many local races as possible. You will blog directly on DemocraticSPACE (we use Wordpress, which really truly idiot-proof, so no computer expertise is needed), and you can of course cross-post on your own blog. If you are interested, email Greg Morrow at gdmorrow@gmail.com. Also, if other bloggers out there could spread the word, we would appreciate it.

I will re-print the CBC story in full:

Canada’s broadcasters will not allow the Green Leader Elizabeth May to participate in the leaders’ debates during the federal election campaign, the networks announced Monday afternoon.

The consortium of networks, which includes the CBC, said three of Canada’s parties were opposed the May’s inclusion.

“It became clear that if the Green Party were included, there would be no leaders’ debate,” the consortium said in a press release.

“In the interest of Canadians, the consortium has determined that it is better to broadcast the debates with the four major party leaders, rather than not at all.”

The parties that will take part in the debates are the New Democrats, the Liberals, the Bloc Québécois and the Conservatives.

The debates will take place Oct. 1 and Oct. 2.

Given that 80% of Canadians said the Greens should be allowed to debate, this has to be seen as a failure of Canadian democracy. How is it possible for other parties to decide whether or not their competition is allowed in the debates? We’re stunned.

Update: Reaction to the Greens exclusion is has been overwhelmingly against the decision (for all but the most partisan):

Andrew Coyne — “Democracy Takes a Beating”
Dr. Dawg — “Green exclusion: an anti-democratic travesty”
Stageleft — “Elizabeth May Scares 3 Out Of 4 Political Leaders”
Saskboy — “Party Leaders are Sooky Babies - Media Cartel”
BlastFurnace — “Voters believe in democracy; the networks don’t”
Challenging the Commonplace — “Exclusion of May sends Votes to Greens”
DivaRachel — “Old Boys Club keeps Liz May out of debates”
Sean in Saskatchewan — “May Cut Out of Leader’s Debate…Shame!”
Law in Cool — “Green Party Barred from Election Debates”
The Vanity Press — “Greens Excluded”
Dymaxion World — “Unacceptable”
Cyberwuff — “Green Party excluded from televised debates… again”
ThreeSeven — “May: She joins the debates or I don’t pay for this election”
Russell Ormond — “Tories, Bloc, NDP opposed May’s inclusion in debates”
John Laforest — “Elizabeth May Belongs in the Leaders Debate”
D’Arcy Norman — “on democratic leader’s debates”
The Breadbin — “NO, you May not???”
Ray Arygyle — “Election Debate Outrage”
Far and Wide — “Screwed”
Jennifer O’Meara — “No girls allowed at the debates?”
John Waugh — “Opportunism trumps principle”
Canadian Journalism Project — “Greens and the election debate”
Pogge — “If True, This is Disgraceful”
The Angry Cupcake — “Greens Can’t Participate in Leaders’ Debates”

Update: Andrew Coyne reports that the Bloc Québécois has broken ranks — they are denying that they told the media consortium that they would not attend the debates if the Greens were included. As Coyne notes, you would have a debate that included Dion, Duceppe, and May already. If Jack Layton relented, the only guy standing in the way of the Greens inclusion is Stephen Harper. It’s highly unlikely he would skip the debate if all the other leaders were participating. So it comes down to Jack Layton. What do you say Jack, are you willing to stand on principal and let the Greens speak?

Update: even many of the newspaper editorials are also critical of this decision, which is notable given the extent to which the media is consolidated in Canada (such that many newspapers are owned by the very people who denied the Greens participation - note how canada.com is curiously silent on the issue, which means a plethora of newspapers apparently have no opinon).

Toronto Star — “TV debate hypocrisy”
Globe and Mail — “A club without Greens”

Update: It also appears that NDP leader Jack Layton is taking a lot of heat from his own supporters for his crass political move not block the Greens participation in the debates.

Ottawa Citizen — “NDP Facebook supporters blast Layton over debates”

Update — the Winnipeg Free Press seems to understand the message in a cartoon from today:

According to the latest DemocraticSPACE projections, the Conservatives are edging closer to majority government territory (which requires 155 seats). Current projections put the Conservatives at 143 seats on 37.2% support, the Liberals at 94 seats on 28.1% support, the NDP at 29 seats on 17.4% support, the Bloc at 41 seats on 8.0% support (31.6% in Québec), and the Greens with no seats and 8.3% support. These projections are based on regional polling data for all major Canadian pollsters between 24 Aug and 6 Sep. Regional breakdowns are below.

CONSERVATIVE	LIBERAL	NDP	BLOC	GREEN	OTHERS
37.2%	28.1%	17.4%	8.0%	8.3%	1.0%
143	94	29	41	0	2

Ontario
The Conservatives are currently projecting at 49 seats on 37.7% support, the Liberals 46 seats on 35.7%, the NDP 11 seats on 15.6% and the Greens no seats on 10.1%.

Québec
The Bloc Québécois is currently projecting at 41 seats on 32.3% support, the Conservatives at 14 seats on 26.0% support, the Liberals 18 seats on 21.6%, the NDP 1 seat on 13.2%, and the Greens no seats on 6.0%.

British Columbia
The Conservatives are currently projecting at 22 seats on 39.9% support, the NDP 8 seats on 25.6%, the Liberals 5 seats on 21.7% and the Greens no seats on 11.5%.

Alberta
The Conservatives are currently projected to win all 28 seats on 61.1% support, the Liberals at 17.6%, and the NDP and Greens at 9.9%.

Prairies
The Conservatives are currently projected to win 20 seats on 43.7% support, the NDP 4 seats on 27.2%, the Liberals 4 seats on 21.6% and the Greens no seats on 5.7%.

Atlantic Canada
The Liberals are currently projected to win 19 seats on 36.0% support, the Conservatives 9 seats on 31.1%, the NDP 3 seats on 26.4% and the Greens no seats on 5.9%.

Today, the campaign for the 40th Canadian election began. And so began a test of Canadians’ conscience. The ballot question is actually quite clear: do I cast my vote to maximize my interests in the present, or to maximize my childrens’ interests in the future? Or more simply: do I choose short-term economic concerns or long-term environmental concerns? It is, at heart, a test of conscience, especially for a people who see themselves as on moral high-ground with respect to their short-term, small-thinking American friends.

On the one hand, Canadians will hear that we face “uncertain times”, that it is “too risky” to do things any different than we’ve always done (quite literally the slogan on the Conservative website says: “Canadians cannot afford risky experiments at a time of uncertainty”). It is the ultimate Conservative message: vote for the status quo over change (oh, and, by the way, since our leader is a hard-ass, he’s also a stronger leader than the erudite professor). In fact, this was precisely John McCain’s script against Barack Obama until he, too, decided to jump on the “change” bandwagon. On the other hand, Canadians will hear that it’s time for baby boomers to take care of the mess their generation created, to put the environment first, so that their children and grandchildren can live in a better world. The difference isn’t between risk and no risk, but rather short-term risk and long-term risk; risk is unavoidable, as it always is when the future cannot be known with certainty.

But, Canadians being Canadians — that is, moderate, reasonable, generally-risk-averse folks — voters will want their cake and eat it, too. Both messages (economy and environment) will probably have a least some resonance with the average voter. The party that makes the most compelling case for balancing both the economy and the environment will be the party that forms the next government. The Conservatives have the upper hand, because in an age where even the most polluting oil companies pitch themselves as “green” (a practice known as “greenwashing”), it is easy to sound green, even if you have no intention of actually following through. So, expect the Conservatives to greenwash just enough to make it look like they care. And, as the perceived tax-cutters, most people generally think the Conservatives are best placed to keep the economy afloat (even if it is naive to think the federal government really has that much influence). Moreover, the “change” position is split 3, if not 4, ways to Sunday (Liberal, NDP, Green, Bloc). The only progressive party who can realistically form the government — the Liberals (sorry, NDPers) — have no choice but to argue for consolidation of the progressive vote.

This is likely how the campaign plays out. But there is a missing narrative here. The Conservatives have erred in framing environmental responsibility in direct opposition to economic progress. Stephen Harper assumes that “going green” will automatically be harmful to our economy. And how is the average voter to know any different? S/he can’t. Unless, of course, the progressive parties convince voters that the exact opposite is true — that inaction on the environment will seriously harm our economy in a world where even the most egregious companies recognize its bad business not to get on board the green train.

It’s not that it isn’t true — indeed, the evidence from countries that have taken action on the environment is very positive, from flourishing economies to job creation — but it is not an easy sell. It’s going to take more than obtuse statements about “green-collar jobs”, which don’t mean much to the folks who’ve just lost their well-paying factory job and now struggling to pay the bills earning minimum wage.

Most importantly, it means being honest with voters, to treat them with respect by telling them not what they want to hear (such as “we will ensure you will always have cheap gas”) but rather telling voters what they need to hear (that they need to make better choices if they want their children to enjoy the quality of life they enjoy). Government will do its part doing what each of us cannot do on our own, but it is incumbent upon each and every voter to take it upon themselves to go green — and if the experiences elsewhere are any indication, chances are, they’ll even save a little green a long the way.

DemocraticSPACE will soon launch its coverage of the October 14 Canadian general election. In the meantime, check here for updates and articles.

In advance of Sunday’s election call, the Conservatives have been traveling around Canada dishing out pork — as is, cash to support projects in ridings that are key to their push for a majority government. The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is tracking the Conservative spending spree — a whopping $8.8 billion since June 2. They’ve put together a handy list (note: PDF). Here are some examples of the the vote-buying, keeping in mind all of these have been announced in the last 60 days. So much for doing things differently.

Québec got a whopping $4 billion in general infrastructure funds, $1 billion for work on the Champlain Bridge, and $187.5 million in highway funds, which should help the Conservatives profile in the province, which is the key to their winning a majority. And Bombardier, a key Québec employer, also got $350 million in subsidies.

CFB Trenton got $500 million to re-hab its facilities, and another $2.1 million for water infrastructure, which should help rookie MP Rick Norlock get re-elected in Northumberland-Quinte West, a riding the Conservatives won by 5% in 2006.

Beauport got $18.3 million for a new park. That should help the Conservatives hold Beauport-Limoilou, a riding they won by just 820 votes in 2006.

Lawrence Cannon got $6.1 million for a rec center in Chelsea in his home riding of Pontiac, which he will face tough competition. As the government’s Québec lieutenant, Cannon has been announcing the billions of dollars throughout Québec.

Northern Ontario got $13.6 million for various economic development and infrastructure initiatives. This should help Tony Clement — who announced the funds — hold his riding in Parry Sound-Muskoka, which we won by a scant 28 votes in 2006.

Rick Dykstra annouced $1.8 million for a housing project in his riding of St. Catharines, which should help him hold it — he won by just 246 votes in 2006.

Niagara Falls got a whopping $62 million in infrastructure funds, which certainly will help Rob Nicholson hold the riding, which he won by 5% in 2006.

Vancouver Island got $147 million in rural infrastructure funds, which should help the Conservatives re-take Vancouver Island North from the NDP’s Catherine Bell, who won the riding by just 616 votes in 2006. Another $2.2 million was given to improve several Vancouver Island harbours.

St. John’s got $2.5 million for a rec centre and another $1.1 million for Memorial Universal, which should help the Conservatives hold two key ridings of St. John’s East and St. John’s South-Mount Pearl, where both incumbents are retiring.

Toronto got $622 million for its subway extension, which may or may not help Conservative candidates in North York, home to ridings with the biggest chance (although still slim) of voting Conservative in Toronto.

Jewish groups around Toronto got nearly $400 million, as the Conservatives hope to make in-roads with the traditionally Liberal-voting Jewish population. Montreal Jewish organizations got nearly $150 million.

Manitoba got $718 million for infrastructure, which should help in critical ridings such as Winnipeg South, Saint Boniface, and Elmwood-Transcona, which the Conservatives hope to win. And Winnipeg itself got $5 million for a park, another $4.4 million for mental health research, and $43.4 million for Bristol Aerospace (for the Joint Strike Fighter program).

Peter Mackay’s riding of Central Nova got $8 million in tourism dollars and $1.9 million in economic development funds, which should help him fend off the challenge from Green Party leader Elizabeth May. Mackay also announced the $870 million agreement with the Province of Nova Scotia on retaining energy revenues.

The North received $18.3 million for aboriginal skills training, which may help the Conservatives in Nunavut, which they are targeting to win.

The Gaspésie got $5.5 million for road work, which should help the Conservatives win two targeting ridings of Gaspésie-Îles-de-la-Madeleine and Haute Gaspésie-La Mitis-Matane-Matapédia. Another $7.3 million went to re-hab Rimouski’s port, another targeted riding for the Conservatives.

Baie-Comeau got a whopping $46 million for port improvements, which will help the Conservatives win targeted ridings in the Côte-Nord and Saquenay regions. Another $6 million was targeted for the region for entrepreneurial development.
The town of Grand Falls in the riding of Tobique-Mactaquac got $4.5 million for a civic centre, which should help rookie MP Mike Allen hold the riding, which he won by just 336 votes. Allen has been busy running around New Brunswick making multiple funding announcements.

Kamloops got $42.8 million to improve the Trans-Canada highway in a riding where the incumbent MP Betty Hinton is retiring and where the Conservatives face challenges from both the Liberals and NDP.

Tobacco farmers got $300 million, which should help the Conservatives hold several key ridings in the Southwestern Ontario.

And the list goes on and on… you get the idea — give money to targeted ridings or regions and hope it demonstrates what electing a Conservative means to your area.