Tuesday, October 2, 2007

London--Fanshawe

I found an article written prior to the dropping of the writ about the London—Fanshawe. It deals with constituency flyers mailed out from Liberal MPP Khalil Ramal paid for by taxpayer dollars. The article says as follows:


“The latest Ramal flyer to circulate to homes in the London-Fanshawe riding shows a picture of Ramal shaking hands with London Police Chief Murray Faulkner. The flyer claims Ramal has been a leader in providing significant resources for local policing.”

These flyers were sent out prior to the writ being dropped and therefore were perfectly legal. But that did not stop the riding’s PC candidate, Jim Chapman, from making these allegations that I consider outrageous:

Chapman believes the photo was used without Faulkner's permission and is "in contravention of a long-standing policy against involving law enforcement officers in partisan politics. This suggests a serious ethical lapse on the part of Ramal's handlers," Chapman said, "or a lack of understanding on their part about what's legal and what isn't."

I’d be surprised if the police chief would have agreed to have a picture taken with Ramal unless he accepted the fact that the photo might be used for promotional purposes (anyone getting their picture taken with a politician ought to know that the picture could be used for political purposes). As far as a long-standing policy against involving law enforcement officers in partisan politics, such a convention may exist. However, there is no law against involving law enforcement officers in partisan politics. But even this in this case is a moot point. The flyers were technically pre-writ non-partisan constituency newsletters. And in those non-partisan constituency newsletters, I suspect politicians have their photos taken with police chiefs all the time. Note that the Toronto Police Association publicly endorsed John Tory when he was running for Toronto mayor. As far as “a lack of understanding on their part about what's legal and what isn't” is concerned, it is clear that Ramal’s handlers know perfectly well what is legal and what isn’t. They know there is no law against putting a politician’s photo with a police chief in either a constituency newsletter or campaign material. They also know that issuing constituency newsletters prior to the writ dropping is perfectly legal and that is what they did. Even the NDP candidate for the riding, Stephen Maynard, acknowledged that Ramal broke absolutely no rules. Maynard said so himself in the article.

(http://www.londontopic.ca/article.php?artid=4798)

On a closely related note, London—Fanshawe is one of the strangest ridings in the province. In 1999, the riding should have easily gone Liberal. But the NDP vote was at 24%. This split the vote and allowed the PC candidate to come up the middle with 38%. In 2003, the PC incumbent came in third. It was by far the most 3-way of a race in the province and is likely to be so again this time around. In 2006, the riding went NDP federally in another perfect 3-way race. Current London North Centre Liberal MP Glen Pearson was second and a socially conservative Tory candidate was a very close third. One can compare previous election results in this riding easily because there was no boundary change whatsoever in the Federal 2004/Provincial 2007 redistribution. London—Fanshawe and it’s predecessor ridings were bellwether ridings that voted for the same party as the party winning government every time. This applied both federally and provincially. That is why it was a little bit surprising to see London—Fanshawe to go NDP in the 2006 election because that was the first time in a very, very, very long time since the area had elected an opposition member federally or provincially. So that’s why its outcome provincially is uncertain. Any of the 3 parties could win and some people are banking on an NDP win for the capable but young Stephen Maynard (25). If the riding does go NDP, that will be something. If it goes NDP but if at the same time the province-wide trend is still Liberal, that will be quite amazing. But you never know. The legislature once had a member younger than Maynard. Coincidently he was also from Southwestern Ontario. His name was Kimble Sutherland. He was 24 years old when he was elected in the 1990 Ontario election in a fluke. He was a student-activist type. He agreed to run, never expecting to win. Although he was a passionate New Democrat, he was really only meant as a place-holder for the “un-winnable” Oxford riding. Sutherland was probably as surprised as anyone on election night that he had won. He was a University student at the time. I’m not sure whether he was able to finish his degree while being an MPP. He obviously wasn’t able to win re-election in 1995 but came a credible second. Sutherland may well hold the record for the youngest MP/MPP/MLA/MNA/MHA who happened to be a member of the governing party. Here is an interesting tidbit about Sutherland from Wikipedia:

“He first became active in politics in 1981, when he joined the local NDP riding executive during a provincial campaign.” Sutherland was born in 1966. At the time of the 1981 election, Sutherland was 14. I am not sure whether parties other than the NDP allow 14 year olds to be on a party’s riding executive.

Speaking of people named Sutherland, I can’t believe political icon Kiefer Sutherland has been arrested for DUI. I think this may eliminate the possibility that Kiefer could ever run for political office in Canada. I’m shocked that this happened. I thought Kiefer was an outstanding actor and I can’t believe he did this. At least now he won't run as a star NDP candidate.

No comments: