As the leadership race for the Progressive Conservative Party of New Brunswick heats up, many people have been throwing their support behind the candidates.

Today, I’m throwing my support behind Robert MacLeod.

Although, it look’s like I’m not the only one.  Today, Bruce Fitch, a former leadership candidate, withdrew from the race and is now supporting Robert.

Robert is the best candidate to lead our party, and I am very confident in his abilities to organize this party heading into the next election.  His platform can be found here.

Selecting Robert brings us one step closer to making history by making Shawn Graham’s Liberals the first party (in the history of New Brunswick) to be kicked out after one term in office!

As you may remember, I launched a Facebook application earlier this year called Politics in Canada.

Since the launch, the number of people using it has grown to over five hundred!

With a new Federal Election on the way, I’ve decided to start making some updates to the application.

One of the changes includes new charts.  These new charts are much easier to read!

The interactive support maps are also filling up as more users specify their location.

Be sure to check out the Politics in Canada application.

Look forward to seeing new parties being added and new features as they are requested!

A great article appeared in the newspaper this past weekend. It was titled “Premier refuses to lead“, and it couldn’t have explained the problems in the province any better.

If you haven’t had the chance to read it, make sure you do!

Here is the full version:

There has certainly been no shortage of controversial decisions emanating from the Shawn Graham Liberal government since the Legislature reconvened for its spring session. Undemocratic health reforms, eliminating parental choice in French second language education, drastic cuts to silviculture, not to mention increasing our provincial debt. Yet through all these announcements and the controversies that have followed, there has been one constant: the absence of Shawn Graham from the debate.

Not once since the debate on health reforms began almost four weeks ago has Shawn Graham stood in the Legislature to explain or defend his government’s plans. Every time a PC MLA asks the Premier why he has allowed his Health Minister to seize absolute control of the health care system and eliminate democratically elected boards, the Premier remains in his seat and allows the Health Minister to answer.

We have seen similar events with respect to the government’s French second language education reforms. When PC MLAs ask the Premier why he has allowed his Education Minister to eliminate French language education in anglophone schools prior to Grade 5, the Premier chooses to remain in his seat and allows the Education Minister to answer.

Now to be fair, this is not something that just began three weeks ago. Ever since Shawn Graham became the Premier he has bent over backwards to distance himself from the negative aspects of his government. Other examples of this include the government’s decision to scrap the HST Rebate, the $60 million grant given to the Caisse Populaires, and of course the disappearance of private personal health records.

The last time the Premier did roll up his sleeves and get involved in a debate, he ended up causing more anger and resentment than there was in the beginning. The Premier’s performance during the post-secondary education debates last fall was not strong. In the end, he had to admit that he and his government made a mistake and he was forced to create a second PSE task force to review the work of the first. While we are waiting for the second report the Premier continues to be in damage control mode. He has tried to get out of trouble by freezing tuition fees for a year. Of course this will help universities, but community colleges are still being ignored by this government. There is no plan to help community college students with their financial troubles. There is no plan to help community colleges with their infrastructure challenges. And there is no plan to address the skilled labour shortage that is being driven by private industry. The province keeps focusing on importing skilled labour from India and China while refusing to fulfill their promise to create 12,000 new community college seats that will provide more training and employment options for New Brunswickers.

Looking back at the history of our province, I would suggest that we have had some strong governments and great leaders, of whom my two favourites would have to be Bernard Lord and Richard Hatfield. Based on what I have read, Shawn Graham would likely point to Frank McKenna and Louis Robichaud as his mentors. I can’t help but think how none of the political leaders mentioned above would have allowed their governments to needlessly go down such a divisive and controversial path as Graham is doing now. When it was necessary to take tough decisions, these former Premiers stood up and provided leadership.

Now I can appreciate that being Premier is a tough job. Essentially you are the CEO of a $7 billion organization and there are mountains of information that must be processed quickly every single day. But it appears to me as though Shawn Graham is more interested in shaking hands, cutting ribbons, and posing for pictures than he is in explaining and defending the decisions his government has made. New Brunswickers expect a Premier that will stand up, provide leadership and participate in the debate, not someone who will sit on the sidelines because it is the easy thing to do.

Of course this begs the question, if the Premier is not interested in leading the province through tough times then why did he run to be Premier?

-Robert MacLeod

Today, the Saint John Board of Trade released it’s reaction to the Liberal government’s decision to make “transformational changes” to the health care system in New Brunswick.

“We are pleased that the consolidation of selected non-clinical services under a new public sector company. That will most certainly build efficiencies into the health system and reduce infrastructure costs” said Nathalie Godbout, Chair of the Saint John Board of Trade. “We do, however, have some concerns surrounding the announced changes to the way health care will be administered in New Brunswick.”

I will to say that I do agree with Nathalie. I am very supportive of eliminating duplication of services. There is no need to have eight people doing a job that only requires a few people. I just wish that was the main change made.

Unfortunately, the government has also decided that we, the people, are not capable of electing people ourselves, they have decided to appoint the members of the health boards for us.

Yes, you heard me right, this government is changing our current democratically elected health board into a government appointed organization. I do not believe that they should be appointing people to such important positions without letting us vote.

The Saint John Board of Trade also raised some other good points:

• What will be the impact to our medical school?
• How will the implementation of the new trauma system be impacted?
• Where will the money raised by organizations in support of the Regional Hospital and St. Joseph’s go? Will it be divided among other hospitals?

And most importantly - do the savings the government is proposing ($20 million in 5 years on a $2.2 billion budget=1%) warrant such a drastic move?

Think about that, such drastic changes and it will only change 1% of the entire budget. It really is a sad day for democracy in New Brunswick.

“Demand the ballot as the undeniable right of every man who is called to the poll, and take special care that the old constitutional rule and principle, by which majorities alone shall decide in Parliamentary elections, shall not be violated.” - John Bright

The Progressive Conservative Party of New Brunswick will choose it’s new leader on October 18th, 2008.

The main convention will take place at the Aitken Centre at UNB in Fredericton with several satellite voting stations around the province.

So far there are no confirmed candidates; however, there are many great potential candidates

Robert MacLeod, the party president, says “I am optimistic that we will have some great candidates and am looking forward to a great race, a great convention and of course, I am also looking forward to the next leader who will help bring the Progressive Conservative Party of New Brunswick back to government.”

I am very excited for the party to select a new leader that can take on this incompetent Liberal government. I am so fed up with Shawn Graham and his gimmicky marketing campaigns. People wanted change; but, we need to be living within our means - we can’t raise taxes every time a government want to bail out a badly run company.

I think the next leader needs to focus on the core items that will move this province ahead the most. The main items I will be looking for in the campaign include: promoting and encouraging small business, boosting our eduction systems, and dramatically increasing immigration (all cultures and languages).

Keep watching here for more news!

There are a lot of words being thrown around the community these days. Andrew Oland is one such recipient of these words. Let me attempt to explain. Andrew was a member of a task group that was setup to gather input and create recommendations regarding post-secondary education in Saint John. These recommendations were then handed off to a commission who’s job was to take the input of all the task groups and create a report for the provincial government.

This final report contained some controversial recommendations, and it is for this reason that people are starting to go out of their way to discredit Andrew. But why you might ask? Simply because they lash out at anyone involved in the report - no matter what they actually recommended.

The fact is Andrew’s task group recommended expanding UNB-SJ, moving NBCC-SJ to Tucker Park, creating a single president and board of directors to manage the two independent institutions, and to increase the number of education options offered at the two campuses. Notice that I never once mentioned downgrading UNB-SJ or Polytechnic. That’s the important observation people need to make. Andrew is not advocating that the campus be downgraded or changed. He is advocating that it be expanded and offer more options for students. How can you argue with that?

For the full story on what the task group recommended to the commission, check out this story from the Telegraph Journal: Create an educational powerhouse.

This has been a busy week. Since starting the “Don’t Boycott Moosehead!!!” group, the numbers have grown to over two hundred! I’ve received many encouraging messages and thanks from local people. I’m proud of the support and encouragement I have received thus far. The great news is that because of our show of support, I’ve been asked to answer questions for a story that will be published in The Baron, UNB-SJ’s student newspaper. The story will be looking at the “Boycott Moosehead” issue.

As I had stated to the person from the newspaper, I am expecting a fair and balanced article that is not biased against our group. Furthermore, I am publishing my answers to the questions ahead of time to ensure that it is quite clear where I stand before any articles are released. For your reading pleasure, I present to you “Why I’m not boycotting Moosehead”:

1) How did you hear about the “Boycott Moosehead” campaign?

I first heard about this when a friend joined the “Boycott Moosehead” group on Facebook. Once I read what the group was about, I immediately started a “Don’t Boycott Moosehead” group. I had no idea that my group would grow so quickly. Within two days, we had well over two hundred supporters. Our group understands that there is a difference between the person and the company. It is acceptable to disagree with the person; however, boycotting the company is not the way to handle the issue. It only sidetracks us the root problem – one recommendation in the education report.

2) How do you feel about the Boycott? Its premise? It’s future?

I feel that this boycott is nothing more then a way for people, who are angry with the report, to lash out at anything remotely related to the report. I also feel that this issue is being blown out of proportion. The group’s members are professors and students at UNB-SJ. These people should know first hand the contributions Moosehead have made in the past and in recent years. Keep in mind that Moosehead was a major driving force, in this community, that pushed to create the campus in Saint John.

Over the years, Moosehead has consistently made large contributions to both the infrastructure and students at UNB-SJ. These contributions include: countless scholarships, supporting UNB-SJ Athletics: Adopt-a-Seawolf Program, $480,000 in direct donations to UNB, $150,000 UNB-SJ Residence Fund, $150,000 UNB-SJ Student Centre, $50,000 Project: Venture, and most recently - $100,000 to UNB Forging the Future campaign (all of which has been dedicated to the Wallace McCain Centre at UNB-SJ’s King Square location). This does not include any money which the Oland family has given out of their own pocket. This money started flowing when the campus opened and has continued to this day. Why would Moosehead, a company who fought so hard to create this campus and invested hundreds of thousands of dollars, want to close or downgrade the campus?

3) What affect do you think the Boycott will have on Saint John if it becomes the popular position? On the Commission on Education report?

I am frightened that people in our community will think twice before working on task-groups and committees for fear of backlash to their employers. Is it fair to boycott a local company because an employee worked on a task group that submitted ideas to a commission that wrote a controversial report? To be perfectly clear, Andrew Oland is an employee of Moosehead. He is one of three presidents at the company. The final important note is that the task group he was a member of did not advocate turning UNB-SJ into a Polytechnic.

When working on groups, such as the task-group, you are representing yourself, not your company. As a community, we need to be encouraging people to get involved more often. This community desperately needs more local people driving the issues at the provincial level. Instead of criticizing the person after the fact, let’s encourage people to get involved early on to provide their ideas!

4) How do you feel about the Commission on Education, which this Boycott is one response to?

I do not want to see the University downgraded into a Polytechnic. I want to make that quite clear to any readers. I have also signed the petition going around on Facebook. I do believe; however, that the report needs to be looked at from an unbiased perspective from both sides. It will have been a waste of time and money if the entire report is ignored because of one recommendation. We need to take the good from the report and promote that just as much as protest the bad. It may not be as glamorous, but it’s necessary to show that we support improving the system where it can be improved. I also believe that we need to focus on critiquing the report and its recommendations, not the authors. It’s the recommendations that we should be arguing over, not who wrote it and who they work for. Let’s encourage healthy debate instead of silly boycotts!

Shawn Peterson