The federal election campaign has been under way for weeks now and nothing much has been happening in the polls although I suspect we’ll see some movement by the time you read this column.

Either people have been bored to tears, have made up their minds or simply disengaged for the holiday season. My guess is that things will change after this weekend.

According to a recent poll by The Strategic Counsel released by CTV and the Globe and Mail, 66 per cent of respondents believe the upcoming federal election is about the need for change. 60 per cent of respondents support the NDP notion that the election is about finding a strong voice for Canadians in Parliament while 44 per cent of respondents believe the election is about economic management and keeping the economy strong.

Are these really the ballot questions or is there something else lurking beneath the surface?

Stephen Harper believes the question is “Which party can deliver the change of government that’s needed to bring political accountability to Ottawa?” Clearly he can’t get beyond the sponsorship program or is it same-sex marriage?

There are a number of questions that could serve as the ballot special. Do Canadians want tax-cuts or quality child care programs? Do voters want GST reductions or better healthcare services?

With an aging population and the graduation of baby-boomers to retirement status, should Canada be opening its doors to new immigrants? Should we be developing programs to encourage seniors to work beyond traditional retirement age?

What’s more important to Canada’s future, tax cuts or access (affordability) to post-secondary education? Maybe the question will be “which leader is best able to deal with Quebec and the unity of Canada?”

Is the ballot question about the banning of hand-guns? Is it about crime and drugs and gang warfare? Is it about national security and the fight against terrorism? Is it about leaks and RCMP investigations? Is it about national defense or Canadian sovereignty in the Arctic? Is it about productivity and the deployment of human capital (wow that would create a national yawn)?

Is it tied to Canada’s relationship with the United States? Do we want to be more closely integrated with the U.S. economy? Do we want to stand shoulder to shoulder with our American friends in continental defense? Do we want to create more space between U.S. and Canadian policy on trade and defense matters? Do we want to share our water and increase our energy exports to the United States?

Is it about lower taxes and less government? Is it one of Ralph Klein’s five questions to the federal party leaders concerning fiscal imbalance (meaning the provinces want more money), post-secondary education/skills-training, transportation (not sure what he’s looking for here), the role of provinces in the development of Canada’s foreign policy and their involvement in world trade talks?

Is it the implicit question in Klein’s queries i.e. should the Government of Canada transfer its fiscal, trade and international responsibilities to the provinces so we can have ten voices instead of one in the international community?

Is it Stephen Harper’s promise to create a visible military presence in major Canadian cities under the banner of “territorial defense units”? It’s not clear who they would defend against but presumably it would be neighboring provinces.

Is it about leadership or the values implicit in a specific leader and/or his party? Harper’s cries of corruption and the need for accountability appear not to have captured the imagination of voters so the question must have more to do with values than misbehavior.

Will the question relate to Quebec? According to an Environics’ poll, Bloc supporters (currently 54% of Quebecers) thirst for status and recognition, a need to be held in high esteem and respect by others. That would explain why Quebec was so insulted by sponsorship revelations, the finger-pointing of Gomery and the dismissal of senior appointees from crown corporations.

Collectively, these actions embarrassed Quebecers, injured their pride and showed a lack of respect for their feelings and insecurities.

Mr. Harper would be the obvious beneficiary of a “change” vote but that prospect is scary for many if not most Canadians.

Consider what he told the Council for National Policy, a right-wing U.S. think tank in 1997 “your country (the U.S.) and particularly your conservative movement, is a light and an inspiration to people in this country and across the world”. Are Canadians really inspired by right wing conservative Republicans like Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and George W. Bush?

Or consider this Harper statement “In terms of the unemployed, don't feel particularly bad for these people. They don't feel bad about themselves, as long as they're receiving generous social assistance and unemployment insurance”. Umm!

At the end of the day, there is one issue that over-rides all others and that is management of our economy.

Fifteen years ago, under a Conservative government, this Country was on the verge of bankruptcy. Paul Martin pulled us back from the brink, turned things around and today we have the funds to pay for heathcare, employment insurance, social security, job creation and seniors’ pensions.

We also have the money to invest in education, literacy and dozens of other programs. Stephen Harper would squander it all in frivolous tax cuts and military build-ups.

In my view, a thriving economy will be the glue that binds Canadians together. It will be the salve that brings Quebec in from the cold. By the 23rd of January, I think the ballot question will be very clear “who would you rather have managing the Canadian economy Stephen Harper or Paul Martin?”

Happy New Year!