Ontario Politics

2014 Person of the Year

Posted on by CalgaryGrit in Ontario Politics, Person of the Year | 1 Comment

Every December, I name a “Person of the Year” – the individual who left their mark on Canadian politics over the past year, for good or for bad. Below is a list of recent choices:

2013: Rob Ford & Naheed Nenshi
2012: Allison Redford
2011: Jack Layton
2010: Rob Ford & Naheed Nenshi
2009: Jim Flaherty
2008: Stephane Dion
2007: Jean Charest
2006: Michael Ignatieff
2005: Belinda Stronach
2004: Ralph Klein

I’ve never picked Stephen Harper because, duh, obviously the Prime Minister is going to have an impact on politics. And 2014 was no exception. In a year which was very much the prelude to the 2015 election, it was inevitable that Harper would be front in centre – would he call an early election? Would he take a walk in the snow? What would he do with the surplus?

So if you strip Harper away, who does that leave?

The attacks on Parliament Hill stunned the country and will not be soon forgotten, but I doubt terrorism and security will be the defining issues of the next election. Kevin Vickers deserves every honour we can bestow but we’re singling out individuals who made a political impact, not heroes.

The death of Jim Flaherty was another tragedy that exposed the human side of politics. But with the exception of Flaherty’s doubts on the merits of income splitting, Joe Oliver has largely continued on the course his predecessor set.

The real world also cast its ugly shadow into the surreal world of Toronto municipal politics, with Rob Ford’s cancer diagnosis. Although John Tory winning something is a small miracle, he was elected precisely because he won’t inspire national and international headlines. So expect his impact on the national scene to be rather muted in the coming years.

So we’re left looking to the provinces for our person of the year. And there are no shortages of candidates.

The implosion of my 2012 Person of the Year Alison Redford was breathtaking, and might very well be the deathblow to Canada’s longest serving government…Oh wait. Who’s that riding into town on a horse to save the day? Why, it’s Jim Prentice. In only a few short months, Jim Prentice has taken the PCs from death’s door to a point where they are basically guaranteed to govern until 2020. Obviously enough, one of the all time great capitulations by Danielle Smith helped. The only thing holding me back from naming Prentice as my Person of the Year is that these “out of the ordinary” events have become rather ordinary in Alberta. As the cliché goes, these are just the sort of things that happen to governments during their 12th term.

Elsewhere, the Manitoba NDP and Newfoundland PCs are in the process of imploding, and seem destined for defeat unless they can find their own Jim Prentice. New Brunswick said hello to a new Premier, and PEI said goodbye to theirs. In Quebec, Philippe Couillard‘s victory doesn’t feel so surprising, but we forget how certain everyone was of a PQ victory. One PKP fist pump later, and no one is talking about another referendum.

The story was very much the same in Ontario. Which brings us to the Woman of the Year:

wynne jog

Although Kathleen Wynne led wire-to-wire, her victory was far from certain. The Liberals were going for a fourth mandate, and many die hard Liberals privately acknowledged they didn’t really deserve re-election. Baggage has a way of building over 10 years, and Wynne did not enjoy Prentice’s ability to come in as an outsider with clean hands. Hudak and Horwath both had paths to victory, and a scenario where the Liberals got squeezed to third place wasn’t outside the realm of possibility.

Yet Wynne was bold, and proudly progressive. Her opponents certainly made life easier for her, but she was a rookie against two leaders who had done this before. And she won. Decisively.

Though many in Ontario would disagree, Ontario is not Canada. Yet behind the scenes, the Ontario election served as a testing ground for the federal parties, and the lessons learned will be applied federally. Mulcair’s sharp turn to the left this fall was no doubt a response to the backlash Horwath saw for running to the right of the Liberals. And the Tim Hudak campaign of 2014 will serve as a cautionary tale for decades to come.

Since her win, Wynne has inserted herself into the national dialogue in a way Ontario Premiers have been shy to do in the past. Kathleen Wynne may not look or sound like Danny Williams or Ralph Klein, but she appears eager to assume the title of chief antagonist to the Prime Minister. Regardless of whether or not she ever gets her dinner date with Stephen Harper, she’s a player on the national stage. That will matter if Ontario turns into a battleground in 2015, as most expect. On pensions, on pipelines, on the environment – expect Wynne’s voice to be heard not just in Ontario, but nationally.

Wynne Wins

Posted on by CalgaryGrit in Ontario Politics | Leave a comment


We know Kathleen Wynne likes to run, but this spring she was running against 10 years of baggage, a widespread time for a change sentiment, and more scandals than the opposition could fit in a 30-second TV spot. Luckily, she was also running against Tim Hudak.

Given these challenges, the election was Hudak’s for the taking (or Horwath’s – more on that later). Out of the gate, he claimed control of the agenda, dominating the headlines every day. This was a page out of the Harper 2005 Playbook, when he took a break from Gomery to announce his 5 priorities. For Harper, it was very much about reassuring voters he was fit to replace a government most were ready to replace.

The problem for Hudak was that the agenda he laid out was nothing at all like Harper’s. The 5 priorities were populist fluff few could disagree with – a GST cut, a wait times guarantee, an accountability act, cash for parents, and tough-on-crime legislation. Some may not have agreed with them, but it’s hard to be against tax cuts. Harper suddenly looked less scary than the private healthcare, pro-gun, anti-abortion caricature that had been drawn of him two years earlier. By showing his agenda, he eased fears about a hidden agenda.

However when Hudak took control of the campaign, he showed an agenda that was just as harsh as anything the Liberals could have accused him of hiding. By inviting controversy, the debate became all about Hudak rather than the Liberal record. Most shocking was his pledge to axe 100,000 public service jobs, something the Liberal campaign pounced on and didn’t let go of. Suddenly, Hudak was playing defense on what he hoped would be his strongest turf – jobs. It certainly didn’t help that his math was (once again) suspect.

Despite a strong debate performance by the PC leader, the ballot question had already shifted from change and corruption to Hudak’s plan. That left a suddenly centrist Andrea Horwath squeezed out of the picture with little to say – another abject failure for the NDP, on the heals of disappointments in Nova Scotia and BC.

The Wynne campaign, meanwhile, kept a laser focus on Hudak. When forced to talk about their own plan, they wisely steered the conversation to pensions – the one clear idea in a rather smudgy financial blueprint.

Winning elections is all about framing the election around the narrative you want, and that’s what Wynne was able to do…by letting Tim Hudak control the agenda.

2014: Year in Preview

Posted on by CalgaryGrit in Federal Politics, New Brunswick Politics, Ontario Politics, Quebec Politics, Toronto Municipal Politics | 7 Comments

We don’t know what will make headlines in 2014. After all, most political predictions are about as accurate as a Forum poll.

So I won’t try to guess how 2014 plays out, but here are a few things we can reasonably expect to see this year:

  • With the new electoral map coming into force, all parties will begin nominating candidates, as they gear up for the next election. And since the media loves election speculation, there will no doubt be more rumours of the 2015 election being moved up to 2014 – though I can’t imagine Harper would want to go to the polls before what figures to be a popular 2015 budget.
  • It’s likely that Robocon or the Senate Scandal will resurface at various points during the year. Moreover, senate reform could move to the forefront, especially if Harper decides to tack a referendum question onto the 2015 vote.
  • We know the Conservatives will introduce legislation on prostitution at some point this year, and you can be sure debate will continue to swirl around the Keystone pipeline.
  • We know there will be a by-election in Macleod, and we know the Conservatives will win it. More competitive will be Trinity Spadina, if and when Olivia Chow steps down to run for Mayor of Toronto.
  • Speaking of which, it seems likely that Rob Ford will continue to horrify and entertain us all right up to the October 27th municipal election. For one day at least, Torontonians will be right when they think the whole world is watching them.
  • New Brunswick has a fixed election date set for September 22nd. The Liberals, on the rise across the Maritimes and led by 31 year old Brian Gallant, are the favourites with a 2:1 edge over the ruling PCs in most polls.
  • Quebec and Ontario elections seem likely, and both should be hotly contested. Expect the PQ’s “Values Charter” to be a major election issue in Quebec, and transit funding to be front and centre in Ontario.
  • Byelection Results Roll In

    Posted on by CalgaryGrit in by elections, Ontario Politics, Polls | 2 Comments

    With most of the results in, it appears the Liberals have held Scarborough-Guildwood and Ottawa South, with the NDP winning Windsor-Tecumseh and London West, and Doug Holyday squeaking it out in Etobicoke-Lakeshore.

    On the surface, this is a disastrous result for Kathleen Wynne, losing three seats and seeing her party’s vote fall by an average of over 15 points. The Liberals finished a distant third in Windsor and London, two ridings they won handily in 2011.

    But byelections are all about expectations, and this is roughly what people expected from the Liberals. So it’s Tim Hudak who, despite scoring a long sought-after breakthrough into fortress Toronto, finds himself being declared the “loser” of the night by many. Go figure.

    While I would never dispute that Tim Hudak is a loser, he didn’t receive much help in the expectations game from Forum research, which had the PCs leading in 3 ridings – and up by 16 points in Ottawa South. Consider this another reminder we really didn’t need to put much stock in superficial robopolls answered by 1 in 100 numbers called, in byelections where under a third of of public votes.

    By-Election Day In Ontario

    Posted on by CalgaryGrit in by elections, Ontario Politics | 1 Comment
    Holyday isn't going to lose any votes because of the scandal surrounding the truck behind him. But he might because of the guy to his left.

    Holyday isn’t going to lose any votes because of the scandal surrounding the truck behind him. But he might because of the guy to his left.

    Ontarians head to the polls in five ridings today, to replace five outgoing Liberal MPPs.

    The fate of the government does not hang on these by-elections. If the Liberals hold all five seats, they’d be one floor crossing or resignation away from a majority, but that would take a small miracle. As such, the by-elections will likely be spun as a referendum on Kathleen Wynne’s first 6 months in power, even though we have binders full of case studies showing that byelections are almost always about the local candidates and local dynamics.

    With that, here’s my guess at how they’ll unfold tonight.

    Windsor-Tecumseh: This one looks like the only seat that isn’t really in play, with the polls and pundits in agreement that Dwight Duncan’s old riding is going orange. Windsor is NDP country, and the ongoing economic troubles there leave the ground fertile for Andrea Horwath’s message.

    London West: Chris Bentley took this riding by 8,000 votes in 2011 and 14,000 votes in 2007. So when labour leader and former NDP member Ken Coran decided to run for the Liberals, many called him an opportunist. But wouldn’t you know it? His candidacy has crumbled, and the riding as now viewed as a PC-NDP toss. My guess is it will go PC, but we shouldn’t be surprised by anything there tonight. Hell, Al Gretzky is running for the Freedom Party – and who would vote against freedom or a Gretzky?

    Ottawa South: This riding has been red, federally and provincially, since 1987. A lot of McGuintys have won a lot of elections during that time. With the Liberals running Dalton’s constituency aide John Fraser, I initially had this pegged as a Liberal hold on the strength of their ground game, but I’m going to revise my prediction to the PCs. Not so much because of the polls (though they do point that way), but because of the ongoing controversy surrounding the riding’s former MPP. Just as Calgary Elbow voters sent a message in Ralph Klein’s old riding in 2007, it wouldn’t surprise me to see Ottawa South voters make a statement tonight.

    Scarborough-Guildwood: It appears that Adam Giambrone is heading for a richly deserved third place finish. And with the NDP failing to gain traction, it seems unlikely the Liberals will bleed enough to lose a riding Margaret Best won by 20 points two years ago.

    Etobicoke-Lakeshore: This has turned into the most interesting contest, with Deputy Mayor Doug Holyday taking on councillor Peter Milczyn. It’s a tough race to call, with two high profile candidates, a retiring MPP scarred by McGuinty’s war with the teachers, Rob Ford injecting himself into the campaign, and a silly scandal around a garbage truck. All of this in a very unique riding that is part “Ford country” and part a wall of waterfront glass condos. So your guess is as good as mine but, for me, “sitting councillor” beats “out-of-riding Deputy Mayor” more often than not. Doug Holyday may be competent, but he’s not a political superstar by any means.

    Add it all up, and you get 2 red, 2 blue, and 1 orange seat tonight, but I wouldn’t be surprised to be surprised. A few robocall polls don’t shed a lot of light on things when one in a hundred surveys are completed and one in three eligible voters bother to cast their ballot. Politics is the last thing on the minds of Ontarians right now, so it may very well come down to which campaign is best able to drag their supporters to the ballot box kicking and screaming.

    Provincial Unrest

    Posted on by CalgaryGrit in Alberta Politics, BC Politics, New Brunswick Politics, Newfoundland Politics, Nova Scotia Politics, Ontario Politics | 11 Comments
    Alison Redford, after seeing her latest poll numbers.

    Alison Redford’s approval ratings have fallen to “Stelmachian” levels

    Angus Reid has released their quarterly Premier approval ratings. As per usual, Brad Wall is more popular than God, and everyone else is a little more human:

    Wall (SK): 64% approve, 28% disapprove
    Alward (NB): 41% approve, 50% disapprove
    Selinger (MB): 38% approve, 49% disapprove
    Wynne (ON): 36% approve, 37% disapprove
    Marois (QC): 33% approve, 62% disapprove
    Dexter (NS): 30% approve, 62% disapprove
    Redford (AB): 29% approve, 66% disapprove
    Clark (BC): 25% approve, 67% disapprove
    Dunderdale (NL): 25% approve, 73% disapprove

    While Wall’s number sticks out, there are a few other interesting tid-bits from this poll:

    1. Obviously enough, these numbers spell bad news for Darrell Dexter and Christy Clark, who are both heading into elections considerably less popular than the opposition leaders trying to defeat them. Still, it’s worth recalling that this same poll found just 19% of Ontarians approving of McGuinty a mere 10 weeks before re-electing him in 2011. Sometimes you can win without being loved.

    2. The danger may be less imminent in Newfoundland and Alberta, but the Tory dynasties in both provinces must be feeling a bit like the New York Yankees this season – it’s far too early to count them out, but you have to wonder if this is the begining of the end.

    Redford’s numbers are right around where Ed Stelmach’s were when the Tory establishment mounted a putsch 2 years ago. Like Stelmach, Redford won with little caucus or establishment support, and has struggled to keep up with the Wildrose fundraising machine.

    I don’t think the Tories will or should force her out, but when your approval rating is below Raj Sherman’s, you need to at least watch your back.

    3. A lot of Ontarians still haven’t made up their minds about Kathleen Wynne.

    4. The most surprising finding, at least for me, was that the Premier of New Brunswick is named David Alward. Who knew?


    Posted on by CalgaryGrit in --- 2013 LPC Leadership Race, 2013 OLP Leadership Race, LPC Leadership 2006, NDP Leadership 2012 | 20 Comments

    The Liberal leadership race is the first real test of the supporter system, and with the cut-off to sign up and vote now passed, we have our first indication of how successful the experiment has been:


    That’s over twice as many members as the NDP recruited last spring, and over 100,000 more than the highly competitive 2006 Liberal Leadership Race. It’s hard to say if this boom is due to the supporter system or Trudeaumania II, but as the following table shows, by any metric you use it’s one of the most successful leadership drives in recent memory:

    Race Format Candidates Eligible Per Vote Per Pop
    2013 LPC WOMOV Supporters 8 294,002 10.6% 0.9%
    2013 OLP Delegated Convention 7 45,000 2.8% 0.4%
    2012 NDP OMOV 7 128,351 2.9% 0.4%
    2011 BQ OMOV 3 36,341 4.1% 0.5%
    2011 BC Libs WOMOV 4 92,000 12.2% 2.1%
    2011 AB Libs WOMOV Supporters 5 27,567 21.6% 0.8%
    2009 ON PC WOMOV 4 42,000 2.9% 0.3%
    2009 ON NDP OMOV 4 23,908 2.8% 0.2%
    2006 LPC Delegates Convention 8 185,000 2.6% 0.6%
    2004 Conservative WOMOV 3 251,000 5.7% 0.8%
    2004 ON PC WOMOV 3 61,104 4.0% 0.5%

    It remains to be seen how many of these supporters will actually vote, but when it comes to collecting contact information and bringing new blood into the fold, the numbers are encouraging. The Liberals signed up 0.9% of all Canadians and 10.6% of their previous election voters – both totals greatly exceeding any federal leadership race of the past decade.

    Of course, huge sign-ups for the 2011 Liberal leadership races in BC and Alberta haven’t translated to electoral success, so it’s a little premature to start measuring the drapes at 24 Sussex.

    But this contest appears to have given the Liberals a jolt of life, which is not always the case during a de facto coronation. Paul Martin capped his decade-long regicide in 2003 with restrictive membership rules and a process that left the party divided. The Party establishment was so enthralled with Michael Ignatieff in 2009, that they didn’t even bother giving members a say.

    You can argue all you want about Trudeau’s qualifications and readiness for the job, but at the very least this is a coronation that has brought hundreds of thousands of new Liberals into the fold. Open and competitive races are no doubt more difficult on the frontrunner than hotwired acclamations, but both the party and Trudeau will be stronger in the long run because of this process.

    Lessons Learned

    Posted on by CalgaryGrit in 2013 OLP Leadership Race, Ontario Politics | 3 Comments
    Goodbye Minister of Finance Takhar. Hello Minister Responsible for Seniors Takhar.

    Goodbye Minister of Finance Takhar. Hello Minister Responsible for Seniors Takhar.

    You win some, you lose some. Or so I hear.

    Regardless, win or lose, we can all take home valuable lessons from the OLP leadership race – and with no fewer than 5 other Liberal leadership races ongoing in Canada, these are rules all Liberals should heed.

    1. Play Nice: It likely shouldn’t be a surprise that the majority of the defeated candidates and delegates went to Wynne over Pupatello, considering the latter had spent much of the race belittling them and, just days before the convention, proclaimed “When I stand back and look at the cast of candidates, even I would pick me.”

    Nice almost always beats arrogant when it comes to delegated conventions.

    2. Leadership races are more about values than policy: Glen Murray was probably the most substantive candidate in the race, and he didn’t make it to the convention. Harrinder Takhar and Charles Sousa had reams of economic plans, but few took notice. On the other side, I bet half the delegates at Maple Leaf Gardens couldn’t name a single concrete policy proposed by either of the frontrunners.

    Again, this isn’t anything new. In the 2006 leadership race, Stephane Dion had green scarves, handed out tree seeds at events, and talked a lot about the environment, but it was Michael Ignatieff who actually proposed a carbon tax. Yet it was Dion who owned the issue and rode it to victory.

    Even though she didn’t win, Pupatello’s “Jobs, Jobs, Jobs!” focus with few details to support it up was exactly the right card for her to play. Sometimes you need policy to define yourself, but it rarely proves to be the decisive factor.

    3. You snooze you lose: Timing is everything in politics, and the stars seemed aligned for Gerard Kennedy. He offered the party its best opportunity to rebuild its relationship with teachers. His years away from Queen’s Park meant the OLP could move beyond recent set-backs and reboot. Every poll showed him to be the most electable candidate, at a time when the Liberals are in very real danger of losing the next election.

    Yet Kennedy waited to get into the race, leaving him barely 10 days to put a team together and sell memberships. By the time his campaign was in gear, Pupatello and Wynne – who had been planning this for years – had already snatched up most of the key organizers and the “may the best woman win” narrative had already been framed.

    Every contest is different, but I suspect Martin Cauchon’s last minute entry to the LPC leadership race will leave him facing many of the same challenges.

    4. You can win by losing: If anyone ever wonders why candidates who clearly have no shot of winning enter leadership races, take a look at what Cabinet Portfolios Charles Sousa and Eric Hoskins find themselves with next week.

    5. …but not always: Conversely, the rise and fall of Harrinder Takhar shows there are no guarantees. After a strong showing at the delegate selection meetings, Takhar appeared poised to be the kingmaker and a power player in the party moving forward. After a week of bad press and a clumsy convention floor endorsement of the runner up, Takhar’s stock is now lower than it was before the race began.

    6. Confront tough issues head on: Kathleen Wynne could have danced around the issue of her sexual orientation, even after the Toronto Star declined to endorse her because she was a lesbian. Instead, she met it head on in what was universally regarded as the best speech of the convention.

    7. Never bring Dufflet chocolates when you go a courting.

    As Good as Being There

    Posted on by CalgaryGrit in 2013 OLP Leadership Race, Ontario Politics | 1 Comment

    The mainstream media coverage of this weekend’s OLP leadership convention has focused on backroom deals and electoral implications – but this misses the very human element of leadership conventions, which is where blogs still hold a certain degree of relevance.

    I therefore encourage everyone to read the following accounts – Misters Goldenberg and Hopkins, especially, provide powerful illustrations of just how meaningful Kathleen’s win was for many.

    Adam Goldenberg: Why Wynne’s Win Matters

    Matt Hopkins: Kathleen Won

    Jeff Jedras: Day 2 a Wynning Day at #olpldr

    Jamie Callingham: The Great OLP Leadership Convention of 2013

    Convention Math

    Posted on by CalgaryGrit in 2013 OLP Leadership Race, Fun with Numb3rs, Ontario Politics | 3 Comments

    Wynne Pup

    On Saturday, Maple Leaf Gardens was a cauldron of emotions. There were tears, broken promises, dashed dreams, and shrieks of pure unadulterated joy. That’s to be expected when you bring 2,000 people with very different motivations and beliefs together, and ask them to figure out who will govern a province of over 12 million people.

    Yet despite all of that, in the end, what mattered more than the signs and scarves and speeches were the cold hard numbers. So it’s worth pausing to study the math behind Kathleen Wynne’s historic victory:

    The First Ballot

    The big story of the first ballot was Wynne’s jump to within 2 votes of Pupatello. To get a sense of where that support came from, it’s important to not look at the number of delegates elected but at the number who were actually registered at the convention and eligible to vote after backfills, alternate bumps, and no-shows are taken into account:

    Pupatello   495
    Wynne 454
    Kennedy 253
    Takhar 235
    Sousa 200
    Hoskins 100

    There were also 67 registered independents and 320 registered ex-officios. Here’s how they broke in round one:

    First Ballot

    That means 40 delegates either didn’t vote or ate their ballots – including at least one Takhar delegate, unless Harrinder forgot to vote for himself.

    The real story of this was Wynne picking up over 40% of the uncommitted voters. Pre-convention reports had her 10-15 behind Pupatello in the ex-officio count, so it seems likely she was able to snag most of the independent voters – and I guess that shouldn’t be too surprising, given many of them were former Glen Murray supporters.

    Until we read the tell-all memoirs in 20 years, we won’t know for sure what was going through each candidate’s head at this point, but Wynne’s bounce certainly shifted the odds in her favour, perhaps prompting Hoskins to also shift his endorsement. It also meant the path to a Kennedy victory now relied on more aggresive math – with Hoskins moving to Wynne, Kennedy would have needed at least three-quarters of Takhar and Sousa’s delegates to reach the final ballot. This likely killed any talk of a third option, explaining Takhar’s bizarre move to Pupatello after the deadline to withdraw.

    The Second Ballot

    Second Ballot

    With the race now clearly a two-woman show, Kennedy was only able to grow by 4 delegates, and Sousa fell by 19. While no candidate is ever able to deliver 100% of their delegates, both the numbers and what I saw on the floor suggest that’s almost exactly what happened. Pupatello’s vote jumped by 218 – toss in the 18 confused Takhar delegates who voted for their unofficially withdrawn leader, and you nearly hit Takhar’s first ballot number on the money. Similarly, Wynne’s gain of 153 was nearly spot-on to Hoskins’ first ballot total (though some high profile Hoskins supporters did go to Pupatello, including the Right Honourable John Turner).

    While Kennedy and Sousa could have stayed around and pushed the inevitable back to midnight, both recognized the reality of the situation and withdrew. A Sousa-to-Pupatello and Kennedy-to-Wynne scenario would have set up an interesting final ballot, but it does not appear that either candidate nor their supporters had much appetite to back Pupatello, whose team had spent much of the campaign belitleling them.

    Both men marched to Wynne, effectively sealing the deal. Unless the protestors outside burned the building to the ground, the math was now such that there was virtually no way for Pupatello to hold her lead.

    The Third Ballot

    As Jeff Jedras reports, some delegates decided it wasn’t worth waiting for the burst water pipes to be fixed and called it a day. Still, all but 57 stayed and voted:
    Third Ballot

    Together, Kennedy and Sousa moved 89% of their vote to Wynne on the final ballot – remarkable when you consider the historical norms, but likely in line with what Takhar and Hoskins also delivered.

    Perhaps the timid nature of the campaign left most delegates without strong feelings towards either of the frontrunners, so they figured they might as well follow their man. Perhaps the short timeline gave candidates little time to woo delegates for second ballot support. Perhaps the four defeated candidates all commanded an unusually high sense of loyalty from their troops.

    Whatever the reason, this convention came down to cold, hard, delegate math. And the math worked for Wynne a lot better than it did for Pupatello.

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8   Next »
    Plugin from the creators of Brindes Personalizados :: More at Plulz Wordpress Plugins