Pundits and pollsters are predicting the coming election campaign will be among the most heated -- and possibly the dirtiest -- in Canadian political history.

If the parties manage to stay on topic and stick to their messages, then health care, taxes, and government ethics are just a few of the key issues that will play out over the airwaves and in the blogosphere.

Here's a preview of what we're about to hear, and which party stands to makes gains:

GOVERNMENT ETHICS

In the aftermath of Justice John Gomery's first report on the now-defunct federal sponsorship program, government ethics has once again come under the spotlight.

Every party is promising to clean up the way government operates, and to introduce measures that would increase transparency and efficiency.

After Gomery released his report on the sponsorship scandal, Prime Minister Paul Martin asked the RCMP to further investigate the federal program.

Martin also banned for life 10 prominent Liberals from the party -- including former public works minister Alfonso Gagliano -- who were named in the report.

In November, 2005, Tory Leader Stephen Harper unveiled the Conservative accountability act, which would provide more power to independent officers of Parliament, including the auditor general and ethics commissioner.

It would also include measures to ensure federal grants and contracts "provide value for taxpayers' money; "real protection" for whistleblowers; reform of access to information laws; and merit-based appointments to public office.

The NDP has also pledged to toughen up conflict-of-interest guidelines, crack down on expense accounts, and implement a Parliamentary review of senior appointments to bodies such as Crown corporations, agencies and boards.

Who stands to gain or lose?

With the spectre of the sponsorship scandal still haunting their every move, the Liberals have the most to lose from this issue. In fact, in Quebec, where the sponsorship scandal had most resonance, Liberals already slipped badly in the 2004.

The Bloc Quebecois stands to make further gains in Quebec, where voters still associate the sponsorship fiasco with federal Liberals.

As for the Conservatives, they must be cautious not to overdo the negative rhetoric, as they could be branded as more concerned with being on the attack, then drafting proactive solutions.

HEALTH CARE

The Supreme Court of Canada ruled last spring that long waits for medical care in Quebec violate that province's charter of rights.

Since then, the NDP has the Paul Martin government for its alleged failure in curbing increasing privatization of the health care system.

It was over that rift that NDP Leader Jack Layton said he would no longer prop up the minority government, which ultimately led to the election call.

Justice Minister Irwin Cotler said he doesn't believe that the Canada Health Act has been weakened by the ruling.

In the 2005 budget, Liberals unveiled $805 million over five years in new direct federal health funding that includes money for wait times initiatives; flu pandemic preparedness; and to improve data collection of health performance information.

But the NDP insists more needs to be done to protect public health care as a fundamental Canadian right.

Meanwhile, the Conservatives say they would establish maximum acceptable wait times through an arm's length process based on clinical evidence, not political decisions.

The Bloc says it would create an independent health-care system, run by Quebec, preserving the concept of universal health care.

Who stands to gain or lose?

While the Liberals have increased health care funding, they could be vulnerable to attacks over their inability to reduce wait-times and the increasing privatization of health care.

The NDP, which has been vocal on its position against privatized health care, could stand to gain support.

Meanwhile, the Conservatives must tread carefully on the issue.

With 11 days left in the 2004 campaign, Alberta Premier Ralph Klein said he would be introducing changes to Alberta's health-care system that might be interpreted as violating the Canada Health Act. He said those changes would be announced June 30 -- two days after the vote.

Martin pounced on the statement, accusing Tories of having a "hidden agenda."

ECONOMY

Canada's fiscal outlook appears to be promising with near-record low unemployment, low interest rates, and a string of federal surpluses.

The Liberals contend the economy is thriving under their leadership, and unleashed a series of good-news spending announcements in the days that before the election call.

Indeed, federal coffers are overflowing with an $11.2-billion budget surplus -- the latest in a string of surpluses -- which is nearly three times more than initially forecasted.

But the Conservatives say they are unimpressed by the spending frenzy, saying there is no way the government can keep all their promises.

Layton has also criticized the Liberals' sudden generosity, calling it "unbridled pre-election chaos."

Who stands to gain or lose?

The Liberals have the most to gain as the latest torrent of spending announcements will hit home with the most unlikely of voters – those who don't think too much about politics and would react on an emotional level, observers say.

However, while the Liberals deny their party is trying to buy the goodwill of the voters, the spending spree could come back to haunt them if it resonates among voters as a move that is reminiscent of the sponsorship program.

Meanwhile, the Conservatives could gain ground if they release a sharp economic blueprint instead of attacking Liberals over their financial legacy.

The New Democrats scored points when they brokered a $4.6-billion deal with the Liberals, to secure NDP support for the minority government on the crucial budget vote.

But they could face criticism over the deal, which traded corporate tax cuts for new spending on social programs, which some criticized as being too costly.

IMMIGRATION

The Canadian immigration system is hampered by policies that prevent skilled immigrants from arriving and finding gainful employment in their professions.

All parties agree that Canada needs more newcomers to offset labour shortages.

In the 2005 budget, Liberals pledged $398 million over five years for integration and settlement.

The Tories say they would encourage skilled immigrants to make Canada their destination of choice and develop a process to evaluate standards in countries of origin to establish a system for recognizing credentials and experience of immigrants.

Meanwhile the NDP promises to work with the provinces and territories to better recognize foreign credentials of professionals, and to help attract and retain immigrants to maintain labour force.

As for the Bloc, the party promises that a sovereign Quebec would develop the tools to set up better immigration policies to attract newcomers.

Who stands to gain or lose?

While the Liberals have pledged funding toward integration and settlement, and vowed to increase newcomer intake, they could come under fire for failing to successfully implement such policies.

The Conservatives say the Liberals have been making such promises for years.

Meanwhile, the Liberals could try to play up a stereotype that brands the Conservatives as anti-immigrant.

In the days before the election call, MP John Reynolds, the Conservatives' campaign co-director, called Immigration Minister Joe Volpe a "sleazebag" -- after Volpe accused Conservatives of being anti-immigrant for voting down one of his bills.

TAXES

Tax cuts that affect a broad swathe of the Canadian public could become a key election issue.

In the latest fiscal update, the Liberals promised about $30-billion in personal and corporate income tax cutes over the next five years.

Meanwhile, opposition members blasted the cuts as a Liberal strategy to buy votes.

The Tories, who have been long promising broader tax cuts, are expected to offer more tax relief, starting with reduced personal income tax rates.

The NDP pledges to ensure all Canadians who make less than $15,000 do not pay federal income tax.

As for the Bloc, the party promises to minimize the gulf between the very wealthy and the very poor by reducing taxes on the middle-income class and levying heftier taxes on the wealthiest citizens.

Who stands to gain or lose?

The Liberals could come under fire for introducing tax cuts days before an election call, what opposition members have called blatant electioneering.

The Conservatives could stand to gain if they promise tax cuts that go above and beyond what the Liberals have promised.