Month: April 2010

Federal Tories win big on Harper's Ontario highway announcement

Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty were in Mississauga, Ont. this morning where, among other things, they announced that the two governments would jointly fund 43 highway projects in Ontario. Each jurisdiction would kick in about $69 million for a total investment of $138.7 million.

Now, even though Ontario's Liberal government would have played a major (and possibly the major) role in where that money will be spent, it turns out that that the vast majority of that money will be spent in — drum roll, please — ridings held by federal Conservative MPs. I've listed each project below and broken it down riding by riding. (And, as always, I welcome corrections if I've put one project or another in the wrong riding).

Of the $69 million in federal funds, $52 million will be spent on 24 projects in Conservative ridings. Ridings held by federal New Democrats will see 11 projects in this series of announcements which will get federal funding of a combined $10.17 million. There were just 4 projects in Liberal ridings that will divvy up just over $1 million in federal funding.

Let's compare that spending pattern against the seat distribution. Ontario has 106 seats in the House of Commons and the break down like this:

  • Conservatives: 51
  • Liberals: 38
  • NDP: 17

As a percentage of all Ontario seats, here's that breakdown again:

  • Conservatives: 48 %
  • Liberals: 36 %
  • NDP: 16 %

Today's announcement was about the disbursement of $69 million in federal funds and $69 million in provincial funds. Let's look at how that money was disbursed by riding by percentage:

  • Conservatives: 75 %
  • NDP: 15 %
  • Liberals: 1 %
  • (The balance – about 9 % – benefits multiple ridings or could not associated with a specific riding)

Here is the list of the projects announced today:

Project Description Federal Funding Party which holds project riding MP who holds project riding
East of Highway 400 easterly Orrville – Various highway rehabilitation $2,050,000 CPC Clement
Highway 6 – Rehabilitation of highway from Tobermory southerly to Mar, 67 kilometres $10,000,000 CPC Miller
Highway 7& 8 – Courtland Avenue to Highway 7 Interchange, Kitchener – Road rehabilitation $1,200,000 CPC Woodworth
Highway 9 – Clifford to Mildmay – Road rehabilitation $1,000,000 CPC Schellenberger/Miller
Highway 9 – Resurfacing of 2.4 kilometres west of Peel Road 50 to 1 kilometre west of Peel Road 7, 7.5 kilometres $2,000,000 CPC Tilson
Highway 11 – Rehabilitation of Highway 11, from Oro Medonte line 5 to Memorial Avenue, 16 kilometres of resurfacing $8,000,000 CPC Stanton
Highway 11 -Sedora Rd Underpass, south of Gravenhurst – Bridge rehabilitation $500,000 CPC Clement
Highway 17 – East and West Kenora – Rehabilitation and resurfacing of highway $3,050,000 CPC Rickford
Highway 21 – Road rehabilitation from Goderich to Sheppardton, 9 kilometres $4,900,000 CPC Lobb
Highway 23 – Newry to Perth Line 84 – Road rehabilitation $350,000 CPC Schellenberger
Highway 35 – Bridge rehabilitation of the Wilmot Creek Bridge $250,000 CPC Oda
Highway 115 – Peterborough Road. 10 to Highway 7A – Road rehabilitation $1,250,000 CPC Del Mastro
Highway 400 – Bridge rehabilitation of St. Vincent Bridge in Barrie $1,500,000 CPC Brown_P
Highway 400 – Bridge rehabilitation of the Innisville Creek Bridge in Barrie $250,000 CPC Brown_P
Highway 400 – Resurfacing of northbound lanes from North Junction of Highway 12 to the Severn River Bridge, 7.2 kilometres $1,100,000 CPC Stanton
Highway 400 – Regional Road 88, Bradford – Bridge rehabilitation $200,000 CPC Van Loan
Highway 401 – Bridge rehabilitation at the Stockdale Road Overpass in Trenton $300,000 CPC Norlock
Highway 401 – Bridge rehabilitation of the Farewell Creek Bridge in Oshawa $250,000 CPC Carrie
Highway 401 – Essex Road 42 Interchange 56 to Bloomfield Road eastbound lanes – Road rehabilitation $2,450,000 CPC Watson
Highway 401 – Herley Road. Underpass, Colborne (Site #21-294) – Bridge rehabilitation $750,000 CPC Norlock
Highway 401 – Orford Road to Furnival Road eastbound lanes – Road rehabilitation $2,000,000 CPC Van Kesteren
Highway 403 – Resurfacing of QEW/Highway 403 to Highway 6 in Burlington $4,150,000 CPC Raitt/Wallace
Highway 417 – Road rehabilitation from Highway 7 to Interchange 163 in Ottawa, 18 kilometres $4,050,000 CPC O'Connor
Huntsville & Parry Sound – Highway resurfacing $375,000 CPC Clement
Liskeard Lumber Road – Road upgrades and repairs $140,000 LPC Rota
Highway 401 – Bridge rehabilitation of Dixie Road Bridge $300,000 LPC Bains/Malhi
Highway 401 – Bridge rehabilitation on Renforth Road $325,000 LPC Malhi
Highway 410 – Bridge rehabilitation of Donovan Creek Bridge $250,000 LPC Dhalla/Malhi
St. Lawrence Parks Commission – Road & Bridge Repair – Road and bridge rehabilitation $3,550,000
Hamilton/Halton area – Various Bridge Repairs $1,100,000
Sudbury and North Bay areas – Highway resurfacing $500,000
York/Durham area – Various bridge repairs $1,100,000
McGraw Falls Bridge on Shabaqua Road – Replacement of existing water crossing infrastructure $300,000 NDP Rafferty
North Englehart Management Unit (EMU) Road – Road rehabilitation $50,000 NDP Angus
Spruce River Bridge on Black Sturgeon Road – Replacement of existing water crossing infrastructure $250,000 NDP Hyer
Agawa River Bridge – Bridge rehabilitation $1,250,000 NDP
Algoma area – Highway resurfacing $500,000 NDP
Highway 11/17/61 Safety Initiatives – Reconstruction, resurfacing and the addition of paved shoulders between Mackenzie and Birch Beach. $1,768,000 NDP Hyer
Highway 140 – Road rehabilitation from Highway 3 to Niagara Road. 23, 5.7 kilometres $3,000,000 NDP Allen_Ma
Nat River Bridge, East of Foleyet – Bridge coating $200,000 NDP Hughes
New Liskeard and Cochrane areas – Highway resurfacing $500,000 NDP Angus
South Trout Creek Bridge, West of Nipigon – Bridge rehabilitation $2,000,000 NDP Hyer
Thessalon River Bridge – Bridge rehabilitation $350,000 NDP Hughes

Guergis' hometown paper on those letters: "Another disappointing moment"

I've talked to a number of Conservatives over the last few days, particularly those involved in campaign outreach and fundraising for the federal party, and if there's one thing that they all agree on when it comes to Helena Guergis is that the issue is no longer one that only the so-called 'elites' in Ottawa are talking about. The trials and tribulations of the minister of state for the status of women has broken through the Ottawa bubble and is now ripe fodder for talk radio shows and coffee shop gossip. Some of these Conservatives also worry that the Guergis situation has the potential to tarnish the blue-collar “we-work-hard-and-play-by-the-rules” brand that Conservatives have been particularly keen to cultivate. Party fundraisers are now being told by potential donors that no more cash will be forthcoming until Guergis quits or is fired.

And now, Guergis hometown paper, the Collingwood Enterprise-Bulletin, has labelled her a disappointment.

Letters are a disappointment

Politics and election campaigns are one thing, but once the votes are counted and the declaration is made, the expectation is a Member of Parliament will represent all members of a constituency equally, not just those who may have voted for him or her.

The same goes for the member's constituency office. There's an electoral district association to represent the viewpoint of the party; the constituency office should be there as a non-partisan operation, as the main point of contact for a parliamentarian and his or her constituents — regardless of political orientation. Its staff are the member's representatives in the riding, attending events on behalf of the member. It is not there to act as a political shill for the member, rising to the member's defence to attack his or her critics – especially in the manner in which the staff for Helena Guergis have demonstrated.

A letters section in a newspaper is an opportunity for readers to be heard; a forum for free speech and the exchange of ideas on issues of the day.
Do we get letters from individuals who have a direct interest in the subjects being written about? Absolutely. And in many of those cases, the letter writer will identify his or her self and their interest.

For instance, we've had letters from Green Party candidates Stuart Starbuck and Peter Ellis — and they have always identified themselves as such. In this edition, Wasaga Beach mayoral candidate and former Liberal candidate Steven Fishman has a letter–and he has readily revealed his interest.
And we're certain we receive the 'fake grass-roots' letters, otherwise known as 'astroturfing'. These are usually churned out through a political campaign, or if there's a hot-button issue such as the environment or gun control. Never would we think such a letter would be produced by a representative's staffer, and done so in a manner in order to conceal the actual source of the letter.

It's somewhat telling the only correspondence we receive in support of the Member of Parliament would come from someone in her employ. And it's highly disappointing–and disturbing–those letters border on the saccharine in effusively praising the federal representative, while just as enthusiastically deriding anyone who dares to be critical of her…..

All in all, it is a another disappointing moment in the political career of our Member of Parliament.

[Read the entire editorial]

[Humour] Dear Shane: This time with a sponsor!

One of my favourite podcasts is the one CBC Radio 3's Grant Lawrence hosts (most) every week showcasing the latest in Canadian independent music. The podcast is mostly music but there's the occasional repeating feature such as "Dear Shane". In each segment, Shane Nelken, frontman for the Vancouver indie outfit The Awkward Stage, tries to provide advice and help to other travelling musicians, drawing on his "life of musical masochism."

In this recent "help-isode", Shane counsels Blaine Thurier of the New Pornographers, who is depressed. Unfortunately, because of budget cuts, CBC has had to take on a sponsor for "Dear Shane". I think the results are quite funny (safe for listening at work but be careful on the volume;)


Sign me up for the blue cheese cannon!

In Saskatchewan, health fundraisers will soon get their hands on patient files

Health foundations have a problem in Saskatchewan: It's expensive to fundraise, partly because it's tough to target appropriate donors.

Solution: Change the province's privacy laws to allow fundraisers to get their hands on the patient records of those who've just had a stay in a provincial hospital. Wait 60 days or some appropriate period, and then let the telemarketers at them.

Saskatchewan's information and privacy commissioner Gary Dickson says this is "inappropriate"

"I think it's a bad idea," Dickson told the Saskatoon Star-Phoenix. "I think what it does is it serves to undermine public confidence as we're building this very ambitious electronic health record. On the one hand, we're telling people, 'Don't worry about the protection of your personal information' . . . but what happens is we see, for no more compelling reason than just the convenience of health foundations, that information will now be shared on a routine basis.

Tags: ,

H1N1 costs; Afghanistan shutout; fundraisers to tap hospital patient records: Wednesday's A1 headlines and daybook

H1N1 ad bills; public shutout of Afghanistan hearing; and fundraisers to tap hospital patient records;  Listen to my four -minute audio roundup of what's on the front pages of the country's newspapers plus highlights from Wednesday's Parliamentary daybook by clicking on the link below.

Listen!

You can also get these audio summaries automatically every day via podcast from iTunes or via an RSS feed by subscribing to my AudioBoo stream. Both the iTunes link and the RSS link are at my profile at AudioBoo.fm. Lookin the top right corner of the "Boos" box.

Tags: , , , , ,

Paroles and pardons; the rising loonie; and questioning bilingual judges: Tuesday's A1 headlines and Parliamentary daybook

Paroles and pardons; the rising loonie; and questioning bilingual Supreme Court judges: Listen to my four -minute audio roundup of what's on the front pages of the country's newspapers plus highlights from Tuesday's Parliamentary daybook by clicking on the link below.

Listen!

You can also get these audio summaries automatically every day via podcast from iTunes or via an RSS feed by subscribing to my AudioBoo stream. Both the iTunes link and the RSS link are at my profile at AudioBoo.fm. Lookin the top right corner of the "Boos" box.

Tags: , , , , ,

Banks to Harper: Tear down the Senate, if you'd like, but only if you'll build a better one

Senate reform is back in style again. Steven Fletcher, the minister of democratic reform, tabled legislation last week that would limit Senators to a term of eight years. I had a chance to chat recently with Senator Tommy Banks, a Liberal from Alberta appointed by Jean Chretien in 2000, about this and other Senate reform initiatives and he passed on an essay he wrote on the subject in early 2007, when Prime Minister Stephen Harper took his first steps to Senate reform.

Banks argues that Harper's halfway measures ought to be opposed if for no other reason than they give the prime minister far too much power, power that, in Banks' view, Harper has already demonstrated he will abuse:

For example, under the terms of Mr. Harper’s initial proposals, any Prime Minister representing any party would be able, over the course of only two Parliaments, to appoint – yes, appoint – senators to every one of the 105 Senate seats. Talk about a rubber stamp! Any semblance of the institution’s independence would be gone.

And under his current proposals the Prime Minister retains the traditional role of recommending (to the Governor General) persons for appointment to the Senate. The Prime Minister would be under no legal or constitutional obligation whatever to recommend the appointment of any persons under an “indirect” election/selection process. She/he could simply ignore the process, Any Prime Minister could recommend (as is the case now) whomever he/she would like, and could simply decline to recommend the appointment of a person who the Prime Minister of the day simply didn’t like, notwithstanding an “indirect” election or selection, or whatever it might be called.

I have to add that the present Prime Minister, Mr. Harper, has demonstrated very clearly that he is not bound by any mere statute, even including his own law setting out fixed election dates, so long as he can resort instead to the conventional and constitutional prerogatives that have existed since Confederation.

Mr. Harper has professed the point that it is simply wrong that a Prime Minister has the power to, in effect, appoint persons to the Senate. Well then, if that is so, we’d better remove that power. If we are going to remove that sole convention-based prerogative of the Prime Minister – any Prime Minister – then we must remove that prime ministerial prerogative from the Constitution and from long-established common practice. The present proposals leave that prerogative securely intact and the Constitution untouched.

I’m sorry, but that’s not reform. No thinking Canadian could possibly believe that this would or could improve the Senate. It would in fact make the Senate far less-effective than it is now. Maybe that’s the real intention. The present Conservative government seems to regard any Parliamentary process as an inconvenience. They seem to have forgot that the government is supposed to be a function of Parliament, and not the other way ‘round.

There is a very long list of unintended consequences and of things that are absent in the present government’s proposals that are masquerading as “Senate reform” legislation.

If you would like to read some good, careful and informed thinking about Senate reform, I suggest you read a report (Number 83) by the Fraser Institute, a conservative think-tank, entitled “Challenges in Senate Reform: Conflicts of Interest, Unintended Consequences, New Possibilities”. This report is available on the Fraser Institute’s website: www.fraserinstitute.ca  

If we genuinely care about the prospect of Senate reform, I hope that Canadians will examine all sides of the question.   Most of us have not. If we’re going to tear down the house we have now, we should be sure that the one we build in its place will be a better one.

But, of course, tearing down the Senate as it stands now and building a better one needs the consent of the provinces and changes to the Constitution. Banks argues that governments of both political stripes have not had the political fortitude for that kind of work:

Committees of the Parliament of Canada, and some individual senators, have conducted more than a dozen in-depth studies on “reform” of the Senate over the past couple of decades. These have contained carefully-thought-out proposals for change, arrived at by people who, with all due respect to everybody else, have a pretty good understanding of how the Senate actually operates, as opposed to the cartoon version that is in the minds of most Canadians.   Each of the studies has contemplated substantive constitutional reform of the Senate.

These proposed initiatives have all been turned aside by successive governments of both stripes, who have not had the will to pursue them because constitutional change is, to put it mildly, difficult. But without constitutional amendments there can be no real reform of the Senate or of other aspects of Parliament including the current significant disparities in representation. The present proposals before Parliament do not, either individually or taken together, amount to the reforms we need if we want substantive change.  

The Liberal Party of Canada has for some time had a clear policy; that this kind of real change will be made by a Liberal government just as soon as the Provinces can agree among themselves at least on a beginning, and on the process of constitutional amendment that should be followed. The agreement of the Provinces, or at least of a substantial majority of them, is needed to make meaningful reform, because meaningful reform will require constitutional change; and constitutional change can’t happen without the concurrence of the two orders of Government – first the Provinces and then the Government of Canada.  

The proposals by the present government, one to limit the terms of senators to eight years, and another for indirectsenate elections – are not real or meaningful reform, in that they do not propose to alter the Constitution in any way. In fact, they have been painstakingly designed to avoid doing so.

If this Prime Minister were serious about Senate reform, he would get at it; do it for real. The present proposals are paper shams. They are mere garnish. Real reform needs meat and potatoes. Real reform would address the role and powers of the Senate and the means of directly electing senators. If we’re going to talk about electing senators, that is what is needed. That is what many Canadians want. That is the kind of reform that I would be able to consider supporting.

The Pope's silence; Tiger at Augusta; and trouble with a salmon fishery: Monday's A1 headlines and Parliamentary daybook

The Pope's silence; Tiger at Augusta; and salmon in trouble; Listen to my four -minute audio roundup of what's on the front pages of the country's newspapers plus highlights from Wednesday's Parliamentary daybook by clicking on the link below.

Listen!

You can also get these audio summaries automatically every day via podcast from iTunes or via an RSS feed by subscribing to my AudioBoo stream. Both the iTunes link and the RSS link are at my profile at AudioBoo.fm. Lookin the top right corner of the "Boos" box.

Tags: , , , ,

Helena Guergis and her mortgage: "In this town, nobody voluntarily resigns"

Helena Guergis, the minister of state for the status of women, is having a pretty rough month. Then, on Thursday, my colleague Glen McGregor had this in a piece in the Ottawa Citizen on Thursday:

Guergis paid $880,000 for the renovated four-bedroom house on Rock Avenue, a few blocks from Ashbury College, in the Lindenlea area of Rockcliffe.

Property records show she bought the 2,800 square-foot, two-storey home in late November and registered a mortgage for the full amount of $880,000.

The transaction was financed through a Bank of Nova Scotia branch in Edmonton, where Guergis’s husband, former Conservative MP Rahim Jaffer, held a seat until the last federal election.

It is unclear if Guergis bought the house with no money down, or whether the bank rolled an additional line of credit or other loan onto the mortgage to bring it up to the full purchase price of the house. Her office did not respond to a request for comment, saying only that her home and its financing were personal matters.

McGregor's revelation and Guergis' continuing difficulties came up this afternoon on CTV's Question Period:

Jane Taber (The Globe and Mail): And there's more on Ms Guergis. … there was a story in the Ottawa Citizen over the weekend from Glen McGregor talking about a new home that she has purchased in Lindenlea for $880,000 mortgage which it seems there's no down payment. Odd.

Robert Fife: (CTV News): That's right. And according to the Citizen story, she's got this house on the Athens on the Rideau crowd and she's, and apparently there's no mortgage on it. She's put no money down on this and she's got some kind of a loan, or, we don't know. They won't talk about it.

Tonda MacCharles (The Toronto Star): A mortgage on it, but it's not clear whether she actually had any down payment and what else was rolled into it.

Fife: So, anyway, she owes $890,000. The issue here is was Ms. Guergis given special treatment? We don't know that, but we're going to have to ask these questions now that the story is out. I will make a phone call to the ethics commissioner… Tuesday.. to ask the ethics commissioner: is this mortgage above board? Because if it isn't, if she's got special treatment that other Canadians have not been able to get in terms of a mortgage, then was it because of her position in cabinet that she was able to get this for a house? I think this could be quite a serious issue here. Maybe quite legitimate but, if there was special treatment here there needs to be brought out.

Taber: Let's point out the mortgage comes from Edmonton. Her husband is Rahim Jaffer the former MP from Edmonton. He was defeated in the last election.

Craig Oliver (CTV News): And well connected in that city. Here's what would worry me if I was Ms Guergis. It wouldn't worry me about anything I say or Bob says. What would worry me is off the top of this show, Tim Powers, who is a very well connected Conservative, suggested that Ms Guergis, you should be thinking about your future this weekend, considering what you want to do. What is he inviting her to do? He's inviting her, I think, to go to the Prime Minister and say I'm going to do you a favour, I'm quitting.

Fife: She won't do that. She's got an $880,000 mortgage, and in this town nobody voluntarily resigns. They've got a limo, and a staff, and they love this sort of stuff. She's not going to give it up. But there isn't a single Conservative in this town who is defending her. Not a single person. The only person who is, the reason why she's surviving right now is the Prime Minister, and the only reason he's keeping her on board is he doesn't want to do [fire her], he follows Jean Chretien's line that if you throw somebody overboard now the opposition will be back braying for the next child.

The most popular posts for the 100,000 who visited here last month

Just over 103,000 different people dropped by to visit here last month. Thanks to all who dropped by and please, drop me a line, if there's something you like/don't like about the place. A reminder that this site is separate from my employers at Canwest, where much of the content you're seeing here is now mirrored at our Politics and the Nation blog. And, if you're still confused, please check out the disclaimer/disclosures at the bottom of the left-hand column of this window.

We served up nearly 240,000 page views here in March, 2010. What was most popular? Here's the list of the most popular posts, by page views, for last month, a year ago last month, and five years ago last month. Political geeks might be interested that five years ago, a blog post about a speech to the Liberal Party's national convention by a Harvard wonk named Michael Ignatieff was the number three most popular post that month. 

Here's the 20 most popular posts in March, 2010, followed by the date they were originally posted:

  1. Jaffer judge is a Tory (Tue 09 Mar 2010 04:40 PM EST)
  2. Vic Toews writes: Reporters advancing "Liberal spin" on Jaffer case (Wed 10 Mar 2010 11:15 AM EST)
  3. Ann Coulter, Young Conservatives, and MPs (Tue 23 Mar 2010 05:50 PM EDT)
  4. The attacks begin: Dissing the Liberal "thinkers' conference (Tue 23 Mar 2010 12:56 PM EDT)
  5. Do politics matter in the Jaffer case? You betcha … (Tue 09 Mar 2010 06:55 PM EST)
  6. Chretien, now the party elder, on new ideas and Conservatives (Fri 26 Mar 2010 11:43 AM EDT)
  7. The Cat in the Hat: Slightly Revised for the Times (Fri 19 Dec 2008 02:13 PM EST)
  8. Fowler: Liberals don't stand for much; will endorse any policy that gives them power (Sun 28 Mar 2010 12:00 PM EDT)
  9. The Hudak App goes live: Thoughts about mobile apps and politics (Sat 06 Mar 2010 10:09 AM EST)
  10. Fowler: On Harper's "reckless" Middle East posturing; and political pandering to ethnic voters (Sun 28 Mar 2010 12:55 PM EDT)
  11. PM takes Commons' speech straight to YouTube (Wed 10 Mar 2010 02:37 PM EST)
  12. Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Hockey (Sun 07 Mar 2010 11:39 AM EST)
  13. F-35 – Test Flight (Wed 10 Jan 2007 03:07 PM EST)
  14. Chinooks and Globemasters: Boeing wins nearly $4 billion from Ottawa (Fri 11 Aug 2006 09:38 PM EDT)
  15. A bad day for the Liberals: "We look like fools" (Wed 24 Mar 2010 01:29 PM EDT)
  16. 24 Sussex Drive — Great for street hockey (Mon 19 Jun 2006 10:46 AM EDT)
  17. Love it or leave it? Federal Budget: The Day After (Fri 05 Mar 2010 12:37 PM EST)
  18. How to win votes and influence people: Harper versus Ignatieff (Fri 26 Mar 2010 04:54 PM EDT)
  19. How bad is U.S. unemployment? Really, really bad (Mon 15 Mar 2010 05:22 PM EDT)
  20. Liberal conference a prelude to a platform and, some hope, electoral success (Tue 23 Mar 2010 12:28 PM EDT)

Meanwhile, here's the most popular posts here a year ago, from March, 2009 (I've hyperlinked the top 5; feel free use search functions in left/right columns to find the rest):

  1. Harper and Obama: The Phone Call (Mon 30 Mar 2009 10:22 PM EDT)
  2. So tell me again: Why did we spend $3.4-billion on these things? (Fri 23 May 2008 10:08 AM EDT)
  3. Political Twits (Tue 31 Mar 2009 07:01 PM EDT)
  4. The Onion gets it right — eight years early (Mon 19 Jan 2009 10:30 PM EST)
  5. Good news: 5 cities to post economic growth; Bad news: 5 cities to post economic growth (Tue 31 Mar 2009 09:34 AM EDT)
  6. HST coming to Saskatchewan? B.C.? (Mon 30 Mar 2009 10:59 PM EDT)
  7. Parliamentary Computer Network crashes (Tue 31 Mar 2009 05:22 PM EDT)
  8. Conservatives give grant to conservative magazine (Fri 27 Mar 2009 10:51 PM EDT)
  9. The size of the inaugural crowd: A journalist's dilemma (Sun 18 Jan 2009 10:20 AM EST)
  10. Who's heard Tory attack ads on the radio? (Fri 16 Jan 2009 12:29 PM EST)
  11. Cool Xmas gifts: My USB turntable (Sat 27 Dec 2008 11:40 PM EST)
  12. The only leader to stand up to Harper … (Thu 29 Jan 2009 12:05 PM EST)
  13. Is a seniors program being used for a little pork barrel politics? (Fri 27 Mar 2009 10:20 PM EDT)
  14. Wheat Board politics: Ritz vs Goodale (Mon 09 Jun 2008 12:50 PM EDT)
  15. Himelfarb to be Iggy's Chief of Staff? (Wed 25 Mar 2009 01:46 PM EDT)
  16. Fun with iTunes or Bob Willis is NOT Lionel Richie (Wed 10 Sep 2008 11:04 PM EDT)
  17. Soft launch of David Akin's "Album Art Emporium" (Sat 28 Mar 2009 10:06 AM EDT)
  18. Daniel Leblanc and his day in court — for simply being a good reporter (Sat 21 Mar 2009 06:22 PM EDT)
  19. Inching back to Twitter (Wed 18 Feb 2009 11:15 PM EST)
  20. When it comes to press relations, do you like Obama or Harper? (Fri 20 Feb 2009 09:10 PM EST)

And, finally, the top 20 most popular posts five years ago, from March, 2006:

  1. Looking for John and Jackie Knill (Thu 30 Dec 2004 01:38 PM EST
  2. Air Canada and a new Celine Dion video — right here! (Mon 01 Nov 2004 10:33 PM EST
  3. Michael Ignatieff on liberalism and the Canadian Liberal Party (Fri 04 Mar 2005 09:34 AM EST
  4. Globe and Mail does RSS (Fri 11 Mar 2005 04:29 PM EST
  5. Bill Cameron: 1943-2005 (Sun 13 Mar 2005 07:11 AM EST
  6. Blog post gets Solberg in hot water (3-8-2005) 
  7. A tax break for hybrid car owners? (2-28-2005)
    A Porsche moment (1-10-2005)
  8. Wheels Up (2-21-2005)
  9. Ukraine's Viktor Yushchenko  (2-25-2005  )
  10. Hard at work  (3-5-2005)
  11. Toronto — most expensive airport in North American to land your jet (Sun 21 Nov 2004 09:56 AM EST
  12. Grande Place – Brussels (Fri 25 Feb 2005 03:14 PM EST
  13. To debate or not debate (Wed 09 Mar 2005 02:11 PM EST
  14. CIBC is getting sued over fax fiasco (Fri 25 Feb 2005 07:23 AM EST
  15. Half-empty or half-full: An alternative view of the tech sector (Wed 02 Mar 2005 10:30 AM EST
  16. Young Liberals launch MuzzleGate.ca (Wed 16 Mar 2005 03:27 PM EST
  17. Mercedes' SmartCar (Thu 20 Jan 2005 01:03 PM EST
  18. A rush to become Canadian (Tue 08 Mar 2005 09:39 AM EST
  19. The Grande Place at Brussels (Mon 21 Feb 2005 07:17 AM EST)

Tags: , , , ,