The smiley guy having so much fun? Evil Jay Hill.
As I told you a few hours ago, I was on to ask a question in QP today. Wednesdays in the House of Commons are tougher than most sessions. Coming out of their morning-long national caucuses, MPs are always feisty, combative and more mindlessly-partisan than usual. QP borders on a riot. Questioners are purposefully intimidated with catcalls, shouts and personal insults. Ministers who answer are mercilessly ragged.
The only way any MP can hear any other member speak is to have the earphone on, and the volume knob on the desk cranked to full. Those who get up to ask or answer a question, and remove their earpiece, speak unhearingly into a wall of noise, only a small fraction of which is picked up by the television microphones.
Standing and speaking in this environment is like trying to give a speech in the middle of a schoolyard brawl surrounded by Harlies doing wheelies. Faintly in the background is a small round man in black robes crying, “Order, order!â€
So, I was on for a question, after having made it through the daily selection process. But it would be a single question only, scheduled for late in QP, not leaving any opportunity for a retort or rebuttal. My topic: the price of gasoline. I wanted to ask Mr. Harper if he still stood by his old conviction that slapping GST on top of all other gas taxes was unfair. Did he still believe double taxation was wrong? What would he consider doing to help consumers?
As expected, the topic came up a few minutes before my turn. In response to questions from the NDP and Bloc, natural resources minister Gary Lunn stood and told a whopper. You think gas prices are bad? Just imagine if the Liberals were in power and brought in Kyoto – then you’d see today’s gasoline prices rise by 60 per cent, he said.
A short distance from me, Stephane Dion was clearly angered, shaking his head vigorously at the allegation. And why not? Lunn has just taken a report written for the government on a worst-case analysis of implementing the accord, turned it into instant Liberal policy, and then used it to attack the very people who disputed its conclusion. It was a classic policy smear, which the Conservative benches were now rewarding with a lusty round of applause and shouted encouragement.
Micheal Ignatieff looked over at me and raised one of his trademark eyebrows. It was instantly obvious that if I asked my question it would provide the government with another opportunity to hammer on an untruth that the constraints of QP would not allow to be corrected. Making it worse, of course, was the fact that I had revealed the nature of my question on this blog, asking recklessly for your input. I looked up, directly across at Conservative whip Jay Hill, into his evil eyes, and those of his seatmate, prickish house leader Peter van Loan. Yeah, they knew.
Suddenly, Liberal house leader Ralph Goodale appeared at the side of my desk, bowing his head so his words could not be made out by the enemy opposite. He asked me what I thought about the changing environment, the mounting danger. As we spoke, Hill shouted out our names and Conservative MPs around him ignored the Speaker’s plea for order and joined in the braying. There was less than a minute before my name would be called. Goodale asked in hushed tones if I might consider changing the topic of the question, but said, “It’s all your choice.†He melted away.
I laughed as he left, feigning a joke to try and divert Hill and van Loan and Stephen Harper, who were watching intently. Yes, it was only a single question about the price of gas, and nothing would change because of it. But in the intense unreality that exists on the floor of the House of Commons, where clashing politicians abandon logic and debate in favour of beheading and evisceration, it was a high moment. At least for me. What would I do – stay with the gas question sitting in front of me, take the hit, accomplish nothing for consumers, give more airtime to a lie, do more damage to the leader and watch the triumphant standing ovation opposite?
I decided no. Fifteen seconds later the Speaker called my name, and I rose.
To view the video, click here.
193 comments ↓
That question period event spoke volumes on this dysfunctional event.
Hopefully your video is seen by many.
Just out of curiosity what is the size of the audience you are blogging to?
Average monthly hits, 2,000,000+. — Garth
Yea, and it is too bad idiots like Grammer Purist and Shadow now have an audience to spew their stupidity .
I do not think this government is going to keep getting away with these non-answers. A lot of us would like our elected representatives to act like adults. We are funny that way.
I must say I appreciate this blog and your insights. Keep up the good fight.
CNN has reported that Al Gore’s mansion uses so much electricity that his electricity bill is $2500/month.
His actions don’t quite match his words…sound familiar Garth?
I get more disillusioned and angry with our Canadian government as each day we are witness to the rude childish behaviour of suppose to be adults. I would certainly like to cut their paycheques for each day of inaction on their part. Wouldn’t it be nice, since they want to imitate the American president’s behaviour, if we could start proceedings to impeach some of our “great leaders”!!!
Wait a sec, he went back to the whole floor crossing incident AGAIN???
You know, I just hate everything about this current regime. It makes me sick to my stomach.
The whole thing sucks Garth, my heart goes out to you.
All I can say is WOW. What a bunch of imature bullies. And we’re suppose to trust them to run our country? I say to the Bloc, NDP & Liberals, fire the bastards on our behalf. The quicker the better.
Hi Garth,
I’m glad you were able to get out into some sunshine for a few minutes at least afterwards. I don’t know how you stand it, time after time. But you do have the support of everyone around you and that’s great. You spoke well. You didn’t come across as tho you were speaking into a wall of noise. Tho I guess, once you were on your feet they started up.
I am surprised that the speaker does not direct someone to at least try to answer the question you put. And each time van Loan looks weaker, more childish, petty, foolish and stupid. And the fact that he and the grown men around him find it all so hilarious, that income trusts can be blown off so easily, that it’s more important to them to mock an MP who is trying to get answers for his constituents and the PM is ok with this time and time again sends a clear message to people who watch this. They have no respect for anyone. Not us, not you, not themselves. They must have some sort of pecking order they use instead of respect, fear based I’d guess.
Their message wasn’t very flattering for the Harpo party or for van Loan himself if they are continuing in election mode. Can’t see this behavior scoring points in the polls.
Do you think they ever watch reruns of QP to get an idea of how they might look to the world? Or do they lie to themselves as they lie about most everything else?
The answer to your last two questions in the House are evidence of a small minded mean spirited government that has no respect for the citizens of Halton. Small minded because their petty little fight with you has consumed them and mean spirited because they choose to take it out on the citizens for Halton. Absolutely no respect for democracy!
Garth,
Why don’t you take all of those incidents in which you asked a legitimate question and Van Loan gave you his trademark non-answer and turn it into a commercial? Just so the electorate can see that it’s not just one isolated incident of deflection, rather, a chronic avoidance of accountability. After seeing a half-dozen or so of these, back-to-back, I think a very clear picture will form.
Oh, and while you’re at it, I think a similar running collage of endearing Baird angry face/finger-points would be quite effective.
There must be tonnes of material to mine…
fire the bastards on our behalf. The quicker the better.
By Irene on 05.03.07 1:50 am
Sheeesh, Irene, I’m 3rd-born, and dad and mom were married by then. Ooops, I’m not a NeanderCON!
You have to READ the damned report to discover how damned stupid the “new” PMSH government REALLY IS!
Study on Income Trusts
Report 14 – Study on Income Trusts
Adopted by the Committee Feb 22, 2007
Presented to the House Feb 28, 2007
http://cmte.parl.gc.ca/cmte/CommitteePublication.aspx?COM=10479&Lang=1&SourceId=195913
A number of the Committee’s witnesses commented on the methodology and assumptions underlying the Department of Finance’s analysis and estimation of the federal revenue loss — or tax leakage — associated with income trusts.
Some witnesses suggested that the actual tax leakage is lower than the estimate provided by the Minister, if a leakage exists at all.
In the view of Mr. Don Francis, for example, there is no tax leakage.
Similarly, Mr. Cameron Renkas said that studies done by BMO Capital Markets have not shown any tax leakage.
According to Mr. Yves Fortin, the allegation of the existence of a tax leakage is unfounded, and the tax leakage argument is incorrect and unsubstantiated. In his view, the measures contained in the draft legislative proposals — rather than the existence of income trusts — would lead to a loss of tax revenue. He noted that any allegation that income trusts are not taxed is incorrect, since they are taxed at the level of the trust unitholder rather than at the level of the trust. Moreover, he characterized the methodology used by the Department of Finance in its 2005 consultation paper — which the Committee was told has not changed — as faulty.
Mr. Gordon Tait suggested that, in his view, some of the assumptions used by the Department of Finance are flawed.
So you wanted to ask a question about the price of gas, and your party decided that the answer might come across as a negative for your party and so, instead of asking a question you thought was important, you changed the question and suggested to the government that it should reverse the decision to tax income trust – a policy that your party thought was the right one. That is, you asked a question that you already knew the answer to, on an issue that your party and the government are in agreement, in order to try to embarass that other party instead of asking the question that you wanted to for fear that it would embarass your own party?
Face it Garth – your as big a part of the problem as everyone else in Ottawa.
I stand by my words, and try every day to be effective in representing the issues my constituents care about. You are not one of them. — Garth
By colin on 05.03.07 6:46 am
How much did you LOSE on Income Trusts?
“try every day to be effective in representing the issues my constituents care about.”
…unless the Liberal House leader tells me not to. Then I just forget that and go for an easy attack. Right?
Wrong, my Con friend. I have many issues voters want raised, and income trusts is near the top of the list – especially after the Town Hall meeting in Halton last Thursday night. As much as you Harperites do not want to hear about it, well, tough. — Garth
Why don’t you take all of those incidents in which you asked a legitimate question and Van Loan gave you his trademark non-answer and turn it into a commercial? Just so the electorate can see that it’s not just one isolated incident of deflection, rather, a chronic avoidance of accountability. After seeing a half-dozen or so of these, back-to-back, I think a very clear picture will form.
Oh, and while you’re at it, I think a similar running collage of endearing Baird angry face/finger-points would be quite effective.
There must be tonnes of material to mine…
By Dube on 05.03.07 6:13 am
I agree more people should see what happens in QP. I wish they would re-run QP in the evenings when more people could watch it. Or make these videos available on You Tube.
I also think Garth did the right thing in rethinking what question to ask, one that would have the best outcome for his constituents. He is doing his job and doing it well. I wish we could say that about more MPs.
” stand by my words, and try every day to be effective in representing the issues my constituents care about.”
…Unless the Liberal house leader tells me not to. Right.
And I didn’t lose anything on income trusts. My finacial advisor thought that there was too much of a risk that government would close the loophole as the Liberals were arguing should happen. Good thing I listened.
And that means you have no sympathy or understanding for those who did not? May others treat you the same during your next misfortune. — Garth
The cons better get some answers. When it becomes election time personal attacks, blaming the previous government ,and the bulls**t non-answers are not going to fly with voters.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/05/03/court-detainees.html
Cancel the Goon Show II – take out the garbage – ècrasez l’infâmie!
Garth;
It occurs to me that you are not going to get any respect until you win re-election as a Liberal. Why don’t you just cut the crap and run?
I’m disappointed that you didn’t ask the “price of gas” question. However, with the way the HOC is these days, I can’t blame you for whimping out.
In your opening remarks on your video you spoke about how frustrating it is to you that the government does not answer questions that are asked on behalf of constituents.
You do realize that under Paul Martin and Jean Chretien the Liberals were kings and queens at not answering legitimate questions in QP. This is nothing new.
Why the double standard now?
Becasue Mr. Harper promised to be different – open, accountable and transparent. Well, guess what? — Garth
Based on the government’s projections for their own plan. Dion’s $35 carbon levy
would increase gas prices by 14% not 60% – roughly 15 cents more at today’s prices.
That is, you asked a question that you already knew the answer to, – Colin
Well, this gets to the heart of QP. Which opposition MP, or government MP for that matter, ever asks a question they don’t know the answer too?
The answer, never.
And then again, which MP or either side isn’t expecting the response they recieve, be it a stinging tongue lashing from on of the government Goons if it be an opposition MP or a hearty standing O if it be a government MP?
As for the guy in the black robes, is his name “Black Adder.”
Why the media covers QP I have no idea.
As my father used to say when we switched on the TV. to watch a moronic comedy show, “Don’t insult my intelligence!”
CANADA CRUMBLES while the CPC BUMBLES
The Harpoonoid bobbleheads will never answer a legitimate question. It is all LIES, BLACK MAGIC MARKERS and FAXES. Complete BUFFOONS and SOTS running scared and gutless to call an election.
Clairvoyants, blush make-up and a new tie can’t hide the gross mismanagement of this country.
http://caiti-online.blogspot.com/
It was stupid for the opposition to bring up the subject of gas prices knowing full well the price will jump in any event due to Kyoto. Now the government is going accuse everyone of being hypocrites. Last year they screamed about rising gas prices, last week it was about fighting climate change and yesterday it was gas prices again. Raising gas prices is one key to deter consumption in the fight against climate change. To argue to do the opposite is stupid.
BTW It seems we are to late in any event . We now only have 15 years to turn things around. Even Bill C-30 is insufficient to meet this NEW deadline. Looks like the government is going to have to shut parts of industries down.
Hey, I hope they keep up this childish, smirky and pathetic mode. Keep it up you Conservative spies reading this blog. Keep it up.
Why? Because more and more people are realizing that you guys haven’t got the maturity and dignity to handle the position of the government of Canada.
Helen Hunt, the famous political journalist in the U.S. said it is exactly like the Bush method. There you go, an “American” journalist with very high respect sees that you are using the Bush tactic.
So, keep it up – amongst my friends and relatives the talk is – you are not ready to be the government of Canada. You’ve been in 15 months and you can’t even take responsibility like an adult -forever in the blame someone else mode.
I love it – keep it up because you are turning Canadians off daily.
We need mature grown ups in government who act with some dignity and take responsibility. You haven’t been able to do that – you’ve FAILED.
And that means you have no sympathy or understanding for those who did not? May others treat you the same during your next misfortune. — Garth
I, for one, do. It’s important.
However, it’s been beaten to death and there are other important issues out there. Let’s move on to something else.
You wouldn’t be moving on if you lost 20% of all the money you had. This issue is far, far, from being over. It goes to the heart of the question of trust. — Garth
JACK and GILLES worse than “FRANK and GORDON” making the Canadian BEAVER look bad!
My last rant for the morning. Layton re: DOAN and the NHL Linesman. “It cast a shadow”. Sure Jack , you never cussed out a referee..come on. Most refs shake it off. Look , there are people having to pay 50 cents to make a phone call and the ATM’s don’t dispense small amounts…OMG! Better still Jack..you can go back to analysing the Environmental Quiz Results on the NDP web Site. Those are some tricky questions I must admit! Then there is dat guy Gilles that actually started to stand up and fight for something other than blood money. I was shocked at his behaviour on CTV cameras where he actually used the F word and no…it wasn’t French or France.
Garth, it might be time to get another MP to ask the questions in the house since it is evident that you are not going to get an answer. I would like to hear PMSH answer something but you know now and in the future PVL is not going to allow it and then nothing gets answered.
The answer is the important thing so have someone else ask it. It’s getting ridiculous and I can sympathize with you but your constituents (Me not one of them) would maybe rather have an answer instead of the regular attack we all know is in waiting from PVL.
I am far from being done yet. No surrender. — Garth
Garth – Who commissioned and wrote the worse case scenario report on Kyoto?
If it were some right winged think tank, then maybe you should have exposed the fact, made it clear that it was not Liberal policy and asked PMSH your question on gas prices anyway.
Especially if the price of gas does go to $1.60. Just think of all that tax revenue the government’s going to get because PMSH once again didn’t keep his promise!
BTW. What is the Liberals policy on GST paid on gas? Just checking you’re not “calling the kettle black!” (No different from the CPC!)
The report was commissioned by John Baird. The Liberals, to my knowledge, have not put forth a GST-gas policy. But I have. — Garth
A more balanced article on the Afghan detainee fiasco in the Vancouver Sun:
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/columnists/story.html?id=6dbcfeb1-8672-4a6f-9646-ccb178c636ff
Garth, do you consider it acceptable that a former spokeperson for a terrorist organization plays a significant role as a party organiser for a major political party in Canada and can even yeld influence and broker deal on the process of electing the leader of this party that can potentially become PM one day? Don’t you see something totally wrong with this picture?
I see a politically-charged question full of unproven allegations written by a Conservative. Next? — Garth
You wouldn’t be moving on if you lost 20% of all the money you had. This issue is far, far, from being over. It goes to the heart of the question of trust. — Garth
Stop twisting my words! I did not say that it should be over. I said that there are other issues out there that deserve some acknoledgement.
What about the price of gas? What about poverty in Halton? What about the environent?
Seems to me you are spending most of you time and energy on the income trust issue.
Yesteday, you were given the opportunity to show that you are interested in other issues besides the income trust issue. You failed.
I can’t help it if you want this issue to disappear. So does Mr. Harper. — Garth
Garth – is the Honda more environmentally friendly than the Hog? I’m not talking noise pollution!
Um. Not why I bought it. — Garth
READ THE INCOME TRUST EVIDENCE! From finance committee meeting #59 Tues Jan 30 running for 2 hours, 19 minutes.
http://cmte.parl.gc.ca/Content/HOC/committee/391/fina/evidence/ev2644057/finaev59-e.htm#Int-1861395
Hon. John McKay Scar—Guildwood, Lib.
Thank you, Chair.
We’re all in favour of facts around here.
I wonder, Minister, if you could reverse the decision of your department to send Mr. Tait blacked-out copies of this document. Mr. Tait apparently asked for documents on November 10, and he was sent all of these blacked-out documents on loss in federal tax revenues allocated by province, etc. So if we’re ever going to deal with facts, we would like to at least have the facts, as you see them, before the committee. I wonder, could you do that?
NO PROMISE/COMMITMENT MADE BY FLAHERTY!
The second question is with respect to the apparently permanent loss of about $30 billion to $35 billion in Canadians’ savings—hard-working Canadians, as you’re fond of saying.
I have in my hand The Globe and Mail globeinvestor.com chart dated yesterday, and it shows that loss as a permanent loss of $35 billion. You apparently think taking $35 billion out of Canadians’ savings is worth this alleged leakage of something in the order…well, we’ve had an inflation of numbers from $200 million to $300 million to $800 million, and if I read The Globe and Mail headlines correctly this morning, it’s $1.3 billion. So you apparently are prepared to dip into Canadians’ money to the tune of $35 billion for this leakage.
Then when you start to parse the leakage, it divides into three arguments. The first argument is the pensions/RRSP argument, and you call it tax-exempt. It’s not correctly stated. As any other person would understand it, it’s not tax-exempt; it’s a tax deferral. If in fact my RRSP is now tax-exempt, I think we can all quit and go home, because we’re all happy little campers. It is a tax deferral.
The second issue is with respect to the losses to foreign investors of about 22%. Why not close off the other loopholes as well? Apparently, it’s a 15% withholding tax with respect to bonds and other remittances to other holders of Canadian securities. With the balance of the money, which is approximately 40%, the argument is that the effective tax rate for those who hold trusts is higher than distributions under corporate entities.
It’s very difficult, Minister, to make a reasoned assessment as to whether in fact the advice you’re receiving is correct when all you receive is blacked-out documents.
First, will you re-instruct your officials to give us the full document? Second, would you please comment on whether you received any analysis as to the impact on the market with respect to your decision?
NO PROMISE/COMMITMENT MADE BY FLAHERTY!
Thank you very much.
Finance Committee Chair, [Pallister] aided and abetted by Flaherty, Ablonczy,
Del Mastro, Dykstra, Wallace and senior finance STONEWALLED and BAMBOOZLED throughout the proceedings.
Remember the promise of honesty and transparency from Stephen Harper?
Where is it?
RUMOUR HAS IT.
Now that the Ontario Government banned access to FACEBOOK, it is rumoured that CPC will ban access to Garth Turners Web Blog. Studies concluded that staffers reading the blog were getting high levels of depression, anxiety, fear and embarrassment. Other types of trauma were unfortunately blacked-out as being too sensitive but a copy can still be obtained by fax from opposition party headquarters.
“Seems to me you are spending most of you time and energy on the income trust issue.”
ERIC FOREMAN,
The world will be effectively dead in 15 years while Nero plays and Rome burns.
I see a politically-charged question full of unproven allegations written by a Conservative. Next? — Garth
Garth, take your own advice and answer the question of one of your costituents that actually voted for you in teh last election.
Facts: The former spokeperson for a terrorsit organisation, you know who, is an active organsior for the Liberal Party and he did actively participate in the last Liberal Party leadership convention. This is a matter of record, not allegations. Do you really not have a problem with this?
I sure do. This is a political smear regarding an event of more than two decades ago about a person who has never even been questioned in regard to it, whose non-immediate relative, elected by the people, was attacked gratuitously in the House of Commons by PMSH seeking to make yards on the anti-terrorism bill sunset clauses. The conclusions this question reaches seem unsustainable. Unless, of course, you have evidence. Please furnish something more than one controversial article in the Vancouver Sun. — Garth
The report was commissioned by John Baird. The Liberals, to my knowledge, have not put forth a GST-gas policy. But I have. — Garth
Well small wonder the conclusions of the report are what they were! You should have asked the question with the appropriate jab at Mr. Baird.
So what is your suggestion for a GST on gas policy? The standard disclaimer applies that the opinion voiced on this blog is that of the blogger (Garth) and not the LPC!
Colin from Ontario posts : “So you wanted to ask a question about the price of gas, and your party decided that the answer might come across as a negative for your party…”
Colin. Please reread Garths story and work on comprehending.
The Harper Goon Squad had already taken a question about gas prices (which they refused to answer) and used it to stage a vicious tirade of LIES.
Mr. Turner decided not to give them another opportunity to spout their lies in parliament again. Instead he raised another equally important question which the Harper Goon Squad ignored.
The Harper Goon Squad is an absolute embarrassment to Canada.
Their “accountable and transparent” government lie was probably the biggest one in a long string of lies.
Canadians are not fooled though. This government is going to be gone, and Harper and his goons will be thoroughly humiliated in their defeat.
Mr. Turner, please please do not let the thug mentallity of the HGS (Harper Goon Squad) get to you. YOU sir, are doing something right for Canadians, in a place where so many don’t care about their constituents. PLEASE keep asking the HGS questions. Each time they respond as they do, they make themselves look bad, not you.
Thank you Mr. Turner, for standing up for democracy against the HGS dictatorship thugs.
We need your help, and we appreciate you Mr. Turner.
Not why I bought it. — Garth
Last comment for this AM. Not a trick question, I think I once suggested you get a real bike…and you’ve followed my advice! Although I could see you on a nice BMW K series touring bike!
My wife would have loved one of those but she settled for a Honda too!
Smart girl. — Garth
“Seems to me you are spending most of you time and energy on the income trust issue.â€
ERIC FOREMAN,
The world will be effectively dead in 15 years while Nero plays and Rome burns.
By KPK on 05.03.07 8:52 am
If you weren’t at last Thursday’s meeting, you don’t have any sense of the FURY and desire for REVENGE among trust investors.
BTW, WTF are you doing here?
BTW, WTF are you doing here?
Pyotr Petrobitch,
What do you mean?
Hi Garth,
I’m no expert, but it seems to me the Liberals have stepped in it a bit with this one. It looks like your team is promoting low fuel costs, which can only be construed by discerning Canadians as being anti-environmentally friendly.
There are still many skeptical Canadians out there when it comes to the CPC. So, I believe that the Libs have to, at every avenue, seperate themselves from the CPC by promoting environmental solutions and policy that are directed at being environmentally-friendly, that perpetuate conservation and that incite research, investment and development in alternative energy sources. That means that when it comes to energy prices, you either say nothing or you provide Canadians with alternatives. To do otherwise, to fight to lower fuel prices while stating that the CPC environmental policy is lacking is confusing. And anyway, Canadians are already confused as to why your team has not come out stronger against the CPC’s environment plan.
M. Dion has to be decisive and convincing in his messaging that Kyoto is the way to go. Consider how Mr. Harper managed to dupe so many for so long into believing that he is competent and compassionate. Being decisive and staying “on message” pays huge dividends.
Respectfully,
-R
Jacking up gas prices is hardly a long-term envitronmental solution, and yet penalizes families who today have no option but to drive long distances to work, live in areas without efficient public transit, or inhabit the 95% of Canada that is not urban. Canada’s government is erring in artificially raising gas prices through tax, especially when little of that money is finding its way into transit infrastructure or the pursuit of green energy alternatives. — Garth
By KPK on 05.03.07 9:11 am
THE TOPIC IS GARTH’S QUESTION REGARDING INCOME TRUSTS! WTF are you doing here?
Once upon a time the Conservatives were well-respected, orderly, dedicated individuals.
While I know QP is theatre, it has become BAD theatre. It’s disgusting to watch the caricature Bush-like behaviour of the ‘new government’. Can’t they give a straight answer without deflecting or personally attacking the opposition? Do they think Canadians are impressed by their immature bullying and buck-passing?
When will the current government get on with the business of running the country and stop behaving like buffoons?
Something tells me not as long as Harper is in charge. His people act like puppets reading from a bad script.
It’s a disgrace and embarrassment to watch their behaviour. Canadians want answers. Whether or not we agree with one side or the other doesn’t matter. Just answer the question and stop being so childish.
Oh, and don’t think we don’t notice how much money is being spent Mr. PM. You will never buy my vote, or the vote of the vote of the rest of us little people, the ones who don’t hold party memberships. What do you have to show for your time in office?
Petty, mean-spirited behaviour. Doesn’t speak well for our country.
“Seems to me you are spending most of you time and energy on the income trust issue.â€
ERIC FOREMAN,
The world will be effectively dead in 15 years while Nero plays and Rome burns. – KPK
Yes. The are more pressing issues.
For example, I went to a meeting in Burlington about the poverty problem here in Halton. I didn’t realize how great the problem is here, because you never think of Halton that way.
And, I have an electric grass mower and a hybrid vehicle. It’s frustrating for me to see the damage done by one ten year old polluting gas mower. Can’t we do something about that?
And, I’ve told Garth twice that, regarding the income trust issue, :
“I did not say that it should be over. I said that there are other issues out there that deserve some acknoledgement.”
Yet, he’s twisting my words, and responding with:
“I can’t help it if you want this issue to disappear. So does Mr. Harper.” — Garth
Garth;
I’m frustrated that you’re twisting my words. Is this what Stephen Harper does to you? I guess all politicians are the same, eh Garth?
I can’t have any sympathy about what Stephen Harper does to you if you dish out the same.
Foreman – why does he keep asking questions? He seems to support the fact that Harper and his not-too-intelligent caucus kiddies don’t ask questions – why the double-standard? Why does he expect answers from anyone else. Fair is fair.
About this terrorist nonsense – the person in question was about 8 years old when the Air India event happened and hadn’t met the girl he was going to marry for many, many years later.
You can pick your spouse, but you can’t pick the relatives. This is such a bad and pathetic issue from the Conservatives I wonder just how “dumb” a government can get.
If you weren’t at last Thursday’s meeting, you don’t have any sense of the FURY and desire for REVENGE among trust investors. – Pyotr Petrobitch
I do. One of my friends was screwed by this. Again, it’s important.
However, other issues are important as well. If we don’t fix the environment, many of us will die.
I sure do. This is a political smear regarding an event of more than two decades ago about a person who has never even been questioned in regard to it, whose non-immediate relative, elected by the people, was attacked gratuitously in the House of Commons by PMSH seeking to make yards on the anti-terrorism bill sunset clauses. The conclusions this question reaches seem unsustainable. Unless, of course, you have evidence. Please furnish something more than one controversial article in the Vancouver Sun. — Garth
Garth, I am not talking about Bain, I am only talking about Darshan Singh Saini, his past involvement as the Ontario spokeperson of the terrorsit group Babbar Khalsa, his cuurent status as an active Liberal Party organisor and the fact that he was very active during the last Liberal Convention when Dion was elected leader of the party.
Let’s forget that he’s Bain’s father-in-law and deal with Darshan Singh Saini, who he is and his active involvement with the Liberal Party. Do you have the courage to have an open and factual based discussion on this issue?
Sure, but I have nothing to add. Never met Darshan Singh Saini. Have you? — Garth
“If you weren’t at last Thursday’s meeting, you don’t have any sense of the FURY and desire for REVENGE among trust investors.”
Pyotr ,
I’m sure they were. These meetings are like radio phone in shows – people with the biggest beefs show up or call in. It
isn’t a reflection on what the general population feels.
What I find amusing is that people want tougher measures to address climate change than what the government is proposing. The problem is a large proportion of the TSX is composed of oil, gas and resource companies. Any serious action against them will cause the market to plummet impacting retirement savings even further and not JUST for seniors. Chances a good chunk of Canadian mutual funds you own in your RRSP have investments in the oil and gas sector as well.
That comment makes no sense at all. These folks are angry because they voted for Stephen Harper the candidate based on a distinct, clear and oft-repeated promise. As PM, he reversed himself, caused a loss of $25 billion of private savings, and now turns his back. This is an issue of more than money, more than the markets and more than politics. Mr. Harper lied. He hurt people. He needs to be accountable for that, as you would expect. He is our prime minister. If we cannot trust the person in that position, we cannot trust government. There is nothing more serious. — Garth
The other day when I saw the Harper regime drop a little bit more in the polls I felt great.YES!But the Libs did not gain enough.
Now we see the LIBS,NDP and BLOC taking on this issue of Shane Doan.My advice Garth.Let the NDP and the BLOC got for it.Even if it helps your cause in QC.It might with hockey fans and those who see more important issues as priorities.
It seems many voters are getting totally fed up with question period.Maybe this is part of the reason for the CONS decline.Lies and broken promises the other reasons.Keep truckin’..er! Bikin’
By ERIC FOREMAN on 05.03.07 9:21 am
Birdie-Boo[!]-Baird has not provided anything which remotely addresses climate change. For me, it’s women and children first!
His wardrobe lacks the red-button nose and appropriate polka-dot suit. The CPC side of the house is occupied by absolute clowns. His attempt to discredit Elizabeth May was nothing more than an attempt at manipulation.
Sure, but I have nothing to add. Never met Darshan Singh Saini. Have you? — Garth
I never sayd or implied that you had anything to do with it, and I frankly believe that.
My 3 questions for you are:
1. Do you agree that a formers spokeperson for a terrorsit organisation should not be allowed to be a Liberal Party organisor?
2. Should the Liberal Party distance themselves from a known member of a terrorist organisation?
3. If you agree with 1 and 2 above, will you raise the issue internally within the party and push for an offical and public position of teh Party on the issue (this might not neccessarly be the one you agree with)?
Terrorism is something I take very seriously and I strogly believe that anybody with direct links to terrorist organisation must not yield any influence and have no involvement in political life as well as any levels of government.
PS: This discussion is not about Bain at all.
I do not have evidence this guy was a spokesperson for a terrorist organization, and I asked you to furnish proof. Cough it up. — Garth
Ad: Do you forget that Jason Kenney also addressed and apparently endorsed a terrorist organization during one of its rally’s??
Are you questioning Kenney’s affiliation with terrorist organizatons as well?? And he is already an elected M.P.??
And as you know the person you mention as never been charged with a crime-
His attempt to discredit Elizabeth May was nothing more than an attempt at manipulation. – Pyotr Petrobitch
I don’t agree. Every reasonable person has distanced themselves from this comment (even Dion, who is in relationship with the Greens).
Obviously, you are not reasonable. You have just joined “the wingnuts”.
By KPK on 05.03.07 9:26 am
Dismissive NONSENSE, more than adequately answered by Garth’s comment.
If you’re suggesting oil co CEO’s can’t walk and chew gum at the same time and address macro concerns, I wonder where you got your education.
“JUST seniors? Radio call-ins?”
The government MESS on income trusts is every bit as serious as the Enron bankruptcy. The only difference is that 2.5 million people won’t be appearing naked in a Houston public square.
We have a legitimate grievance and I’ll be damned if I’m going to let go of it. Every CPC party member is going to pay big-time! I’ve only banked the embers while waiting for an opportunity.
“Seems to me you are spending most of you time and energy on the income trust issue.â€
ERIC FOREMAN,
Eric, everyone has their areas of expertise, I think Garth would acknowledge that his is financial…there are other party members who have expertise in other areas, you should write them. One is dreaming if one expects their local MP to know everything about everything. I am sure of I brought something to Garth’s attention outside his area of expertise and it was important, he would attempt to find out and get back to me in due course, not immediately.
Ah, and top of the morning to ye all,
What have we to talk about today?
Well, how about PMSH’s GUTLESS REFUSAL to apologize, as the Prime Minister of Canada, to the aboriginals who suffered under the Residential School Program?
Why, especially after the HoC passed the Bill 270 to 0, would Harper NOT want to do his duty?
I will let the Star article explain.
Harper continues shameful legacy
Note: As of today PMSH can no longer choose when to call an election. As soon as Royal Ascent is signed, only the Opposition can bring the Harper pissant excuse for a government DOWN!
Tomorrow would be an excellent day to take back Canada from these self appointed arseholes who think they are leaders.
No more Nice Guy…no more…’Can’t we all get along?’ No, NOW is the time to bring this fiasco to a halt, and it is the DUTY of the Official Opposition Parties to do so as soon as possible.
Oh, and let’s call Hillier and O’CONnor onto the carpet as well.
Time to come into class from recess boys and girls. There is a Parent Teacher meeting coming soon, and this parent is not happy at all about the state of things, and still believes a solid paddle to the petard communicates corrective neural messages to the brain.
Oh, yes, and let us not forget the shame the opposition paries hold in their gutless silence allowing May hung out to dry!
Disgusting!
“He needs to be accountable for that, as you would expect. He is our prime minister. If we cannot trust the person in that position, we cannot trust government. There is nothing more serious.” — Garth
Yes, I’m sure this will be an election issue. My point was even if people managed to change the government’s mind on income trusts, things probably wouldn’t get any better because of action taken on other issues like climate change which WILL impact markets. The broken income trust promise ranks up there with Chretien’s GST bravado – I’ll give you that. It also contributes to the high degree of cynicism about politics in this country.
Speaking for myself, I sold my trusts after the previous government was toying with the idea of changing the rules which caused the markets to temporarily dive. I stayed away from them ever since. Now I’m considering dumping my Canadian investments as well – before disaster strikes AGAIN. Got any green investment tips?
Eric Foreman,
However, other issues are important as well. If we don’t fix the environment, many of us will die.
NOW, Finally, the POINT of it all! Thank you Eric!
Garth, do you support the committee hearing today, initiated by the Bloc and some of your Quebec based Liberal colleagues, to have Hockey Canada explain the captaincy selection of Shane Doan for Team Canada?
I think this is political stupidity, with the unfortunate potential to enflame linguistic tensions and toast a fine hockey player in the process. No, I do not support it. — Garth
Honourable Sir, Garth, keep up the good work!
Oh, yes, and let us not forget the shame the opposition paries hold in their gutless silence allowing May hung out to dry!
Disgusting!
By Bill-Muskoka on 05.03.07 9:53 am
http://www.rbcinvest.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/PEstory/LAC/20070503/COLETTS03-11/Letters/commentLetters/commentLetters/1/1/17/
It appears in Globe & Mail as well, Bill. Helluva RamButt!
NOW, Finally, the POINT of it all! Thank you Eric! – BILL-MUSKOKA
Are we buddies now?
I feel like “Emoticon Susan” on those 7-Up commercials, heading towards “Elevator Small Talk Tony”.
I think this is political stupidity, with the unfortunate potential to enflame linguistic tensions and toast a fine hockey player in the process. No, I do not support it. — Garth
Right On! Why are the other parties playing into the BQ’s hands?
Breaking New!
Apparently, Elizabeth May is an educated “adult” and is the “leader” of the Green Party and is an adult responsible for her own actions. And, she has taken that responsibility.
Breaking News! Harper’s kiddie caucus are not allowed to think – they read the PM approved scripts during QP. They don’t have adequate answers or explanations for their failures.
Like all kids – they play the blame game until mummy gets to the truth.
PS: not a good picture of Jay Hill – he looks like he just sat on a whoopie cushion. Of course, this would be the intellectual level of his seat in parliament.
Garth, I’m frequently disgusted by the behaviour of “so-called adults” in the House, and would support a move by the opposition to strengthen the role of the speaker in establishing order.
The Liberals, Bloc and NDP have the numbers to pass this one just as you did with Bill C-288. I’m not sure what it needs to look like, but I leave that up to you and your colleagues.
As for gas pricies…
Yes, higher gas prioes will be hard on consumers, but they are inevitable.
Now that you speak for the Liberals, asking for manipulation of gas prices to a false lower price just clarifies that the green scarves are just what we thought, an article of clothing to be abandoned when real action on environmental issues gets too hot under the collar.
You’ve revealed where the Liberals really stand, and I thank you for the clarification so that voters will not be fooled that the Liberals will deliver climate change action. The Libs may be slightly better than the Cons, but only just, and it seems neither will deliver what we need.
What a weenie!
The broken income trust promise ranks up there with Chretien’s GST bravado – I’ll give you that
By KPK on 05.03.07 9:58 am
Follow the bouncing ball for a sing-a-long. Chretien’s GST promise suggested something MIGHT come in the future … It didn’t DESTROY existing seniors’ nest eggs. You must have LONG ARMS ‘cos
you’re really reaching with that comparison.
No, I do not support it. — Garth
WOWSA WOWSA!! Yesterday you didn’t have a single thought or opinion – not even a twinge of a feeling – on the topic. Today when you see how DISGUSTED the whole country is with this low-class pandering, you don’t support it in the least.
My how a good night’s sleep clears the mind eh? And that cheat sheet of talking points really helps too.
God, you are soo much what you complain about every day.
I really enjoyed the CBC’s coverage of Liberal member Ms. Falco trying to backskate during the committe hearing this morning. And here you are doing the same thing today… Synchronized damage control.
Actually I have spoken to no colleagues about this, am aware of no talking points, and hoped it would simply disappear over night. This is a complete waste of time, which is why I did not waste time on it yesterday. You have a strange mind, my friend. — Garth
Obviously, you are not reasonable. You have just joined “the wingnutsâ€.
By ERIC FOREMAN on 05.03.07 9:46 am
AAAAAAWWWWW, shucks Eric, you are far too complimentary to me. How’s ’bout the feller who was in the church with Elizabeth May?
Is he a wingnut too?
Careful now, we wouldn’t want the committee for public decency and thought control to make a misstep.
I sent a note to all party leaders. I reminded them Scott Goodyear and Jacques Villeneuve are racists too!
You have a strange mind, my friend. — Garth
By Lawrence Garvin on 05.03.07 10:18 am
Not strange…twisted to make you look bad…but not strange…it is understandable, there on many on here who like to catch politicians. I am not a great fan of politicians but to spend time trying to catch you is a waste time for us both. My read is you are the best choice in Halton at the moment and i don’t see that changing in the foreseeable future.
… and hoped it would simply disappear over night.
Why would it disappear overnight when your colleagues scheduled an inquisition for this morning? And why would you be completely unwilling to utter a peep about it yesterday? Were you afraid of fanning the flames and sparking civil unrest? LOL
Geeze, Garth, show a little humility (and a little good humour) and just admit that this episode makes you all look like a pack of braying jackasses. And the finger-pointing this morning just adds to the hilarity. Laughter is good for the soul and you’ve done me a world of good this morning.
I don’t care. It’s stupid. May it go away. — Garth
Garth, It’s good to see you are in favour of no GST on gas sales, but if the Liberal party is not with you on this issue, are you just wasting time and effort? Be upfront with your constituents, and let them know if there is nothing you can do about it within the confines of the Liberal Party.
I joined this party to influence it, as I tried to do with the Conservatives. That is the role of an MP, not to roll over and accept the way things are. Man, you would make a lousy hippie. — Garth
“Their assessment comes as the government launches a new $905,000 advertising offensive on radio stations to promote its green initiatives and respond to critics, such as environmentalist David Suzuki and former U.S. vice-president Al Gore, who have called the plan a big disappointment and a fraud designed to mislead Canadians.”
Now who’s paying this $905,000 attack initiative? Taxpayers? How much has it cost for Flaherty’s advertising (I heard mega bucks)? How much has it cost taxpayers for Harper’s continual show and tell campaiging across Canada for a year?
Is there anyway to find out? I want to know as a taxpayer.
By ERIC FOREMAN on 05.03.07 9:46 am
Come election time, you’ll be able to ask truthfully, ‘Where’s Mikey Wallace?’
And, I will cheerfully say, ‘I looked and there he WAS … GONE!
Garth, I agree with you. It is not the role of an MP to roll over, and accept the way things are. That is why I had such high hopes when you sat as an Independent, and had the opportunity to be in the fore front of a real change in our democratic system.
Unfortunately, as it is becoming clearer and clearer by the day, you have not accomplished any such change, when you joined the Liberal Party and I fear that my hope may be lost.
Oh, get a grip. Asd an Indie I had no influence over anything, especially national policy. In the sixty days since I joined the Liberal caucus I feel I have made a significant contribution to platform. That will become evident in due course. — Garth
Tidbits:
Hill was one of seven Canadian Alliance Members of Parliament ejected from caucus for “questioning the abilities” of then-leader Stockwell Day.
In 1999, Hill was accused of making a “racist remark” to African-Canadian Parliamentarian Gordon Earle
Yup, Jay, just keep laughing.
So the PMSH guvver-mint (big $) indoctrination squad $905,000 is going to GO AGAINST some expert opinion in the street today.
“Basically, the intensity cap and trade program for large final emitters looks like it has far too many loopholes (so-called flexibility provisions) to cause much in the way of (greenhouse gas) reductions in Canada,†Mark Jaccard, a professor at B.C.’s Simon Fraser University’s school of resource and environmental management, said in an e-mail.
The economists also suggested the government was overestimating the short-term benefits of its policies, such as the $15-per-tonne carbon tax that companies could pay into a technology fund to offset their pollution levels.
“I think it’s pretty unlikely it will put the brakes on that (on rising emissions) quickly,†said David Keith, from the University of Calgary.
Don Drummond, chief economist at the TD Bank Financial group, said he was puzzled by the government’s assertions that its plan could cost the economy up to $9 billion in its worst year.
“That is just an extremely simplistic calculation,†he said. “I don’t think anybody could do (those calculations), because there are not enough details.â€
Is Birdie-[Boo!]-Baird on a WAG or SWAG with this one? I think it’s both, much like Flim-Flam Dim-Jim Flaherty on income trusts.
May it go away – Garth
“Please, please, please. Make it go away.”
Maybe Mr. Dion, Mr. Duceppe, Mr. Layton and Mr. Harper should apologize to Mr. Doan in a formal press conference. Maybe then it would go away. Why don’t you join me in calling for a public apology from all party leaders?
In 1999, Hill was accused of making a “racist remark†to African-Canadian Parliamentarian Gordon Earle
Yup, Jay, just keep laughing.
By slg on 05.03.07 10:59 am
I got one that’s comparable to thet thar one. Visualize Jay Hill and Chuck Strahl opposite Don Newman wearing their best crap-eating (Hey their party designation) grins, trying to explain why they rolled over and accepted that ‘onerous, abusive, fraudulent, and costly gold-plated MP pension plan’ that had earlier been the subject of Fryer* Tuck’s pink piggy exhibit on the parliamentary lawn.
My word[ings], it has the consistency of what you’d find in #3 waste lagoon without having to use a paddle.
*Fryer Tuck, soulful boy, aka Kenney, aka SnakPak. Did he ever work at Studebaker’s ONAN division?
Eric Foreman,
Are we buddies now?
Let’s not get to personal too soon, eh? LOL
Seriously Eric, this is how I work. Anyone, you or anyone else who makes a comment that is truthful and unbiased, and that carries the obvious any thinking person can readily see, I will generally acknowledge and support their statement.
I have a sense about what is said and the true import behind it. When I detect the typical partisan crap that most rely on I tend to reject it. In short, I believe in individuals, not groups, and discern accordingly. I have Conservative, Liberal, and NDP, as well as Green friends. I deal with one issue, not a lump of all issues in dicussions with them. Sometimes I accept their poijtn of view as better than my own. Sometimes they do likewise. Sometimes we just agree to disagree. Sometimes we get pised at each other because I stand my ground. I keep an open mind, but take responsibility for making my own decisions, and do not go along to get along.
I am as critical of one political party as another. The amount of criticism is based on their actions. Some are overlooked because they are merely unimportant. Some are applauded because they show backbone and integrity. Then there are those that have no other purpose but to decieve and attack. They will most likely garner my comment in a negative and satiristic or sarcastic manner. If they are too gross of idiocy, then they get BOTH BARRELS. Why? because people need to find the common ground to make society work. Some people have to have it their way, but not at my expense.
At the end of the day, I make observations and proffer a different viewpoint. No one is required to accept anything I say because we are all free people.
Those who demand I conform to their errant thinking I reject like I would swat a Blackfly or mosquito…No emotion, no anger, just removal of an annoyance.
Now, let’s take an example shall we? The fiasco, IMHO, over the Hockey player. For crying out loud this is not an issue for the Parliament. It is a waste of time, stupid, childish, and only shows how little minded people can be to protect a sacred cow.
Only about 25% of Canadians even care about hockey. It is a game, and for the most part a boring, brutal, unsportman like, and fine for those who enjoy such entertainment. it is a not a ‘national’ issue as to who is chosen.
Only those whiners wanting power, attention, or the government to intervene in matters beyond their duty would even raise the issue.
So, there is one exemplar of things I find ridiculous as a topic of discussion here on Garth’s blog.
BTW, my favorite hat is the Disney ‘Lion King’ featuring Scar. On the front is Scar and the three Hyenas. On the back it reads ‘Help! I’m surrounded by idiots!’ Now scar is the Bad Boy in the fantasy cartoon. The Hyenas could be equated to the trolls that plague the blog world. I have to have compassion for Scar because he is now, in effect, the victim of the idiots. Yet, he still deserves all he brought on himself by association with the hyenas.
So, I can relate to the lesson. Don’t affiliate with deceptive losers.
There be a moral there I think?
Anyway, I have got to get at work. have a good day!
More tidbits:
The Harris government’s welfare policies were put under scrutiny in August 2001, when a pregnant woman in Sudbury died while serving a house arrest for welfare fraud. The woman had been confined to her apartment for three months, and reports indicated that her pregnancy was “exacerbated by sweltering conditions in her apartment”.
[edit] Energy Minister
Baird was returned to a more prominent cabinet position in August 2002, when Eves separated the ministries of Environment and Energy and appointed him to head the latter department. As Energy Minister, Baird was initially entrusted with implementing the government’s plan to sell off part of Ontario’s Hydro One.[34] A few months later, he became unexpectedly involved in two major and interrelated policy reversals.
The Energy ministry came under intense media scrutiny in late 2002, when hydro rates increased significantly in many parts of the province. Critics argued that the Progressive Conservative government’s price deregulation policy (implemented before Baird became Energy Minister) was responsible.
Baird was given additional responsibilities as Minister responsible for Children on February 8, 2001. His department increased funding for child services early in the year, amid a significant increase in provincial demand.[30] In November 2001, the provincial media obtained a confidential government report recommending 40-45% cuts in provincial child-care programs”
Yup, Baird keep blowing that hot air.
“Environment Canada predicting hot, dry summer for almost the entire country”
Better take away this guy’s water glass and get him to so some serious work on the problem!
http://www.thestar.com/images/assets/216382_4.Gif
Say BOO[!] to Birdie-[Boo!] Baird 4 me.
I do not have evidence this guy was a spokesperson for a terrorist organization, and I asked you to furnish proof. Cough it up. — Garth
Garth, that a matter of record and neither him, not Bain have ever denied it. A lot of newspapers have reporterd this as a fact. Sorry, I have no access to the members list and their functions for this terrorist organisation to show to you. If you do not believe, why don’t you ask Bain himself. He’ll confirm it.
I have long since stopped viewing newspaper artucles as evidence of anything. By the way, his name is Bains. If you’re going to character assassinate someone, try to get the name straight. By the way, what is yours? — Garth
More on Huey, Dewey and Louie:
He served as Harris’s Assistant Principal Secretary from 1992 to 1995, and played a “leading role in drafting policy directives for the Common Sense Revolution”.
When Mike Harris resigned as party leader, Clement ran to succeed him in the party’s 2002 leadership election. During this campaign, his relationship with rival candidate Jim Flaherty deteriorated significantly. The atmosphere between them became poisoned through a series of personal attacks (some have suggested that Flaherty’s campaign was behind a broadside that described Clement’s wife as a lawyer for abortion doctors). While both Clement and Flaherty were perceived as being on the right wing of the party, Clement challenged his opponent’s policies on the homeless, a proposal to ban teachers’ strikes and other issues.
He also introduced elements of private delivery within the single-payer public system by approving a private cancer care clinic in Toronto and entered into a public-private partnership for a hospital redevelopment in Brampton. His supporters launded him as an innovative and effective administrator, while critics disapproved of his advocacy of public-private partnerships and gave him the nickname “two-tier Tony”.
Gee, and your shareholdings in drug companies … hmmmm…
I’ll to quite reading – I’m feeling nautious reading this stuff.
Garth,
This is a great piece of storytelling, and I think the two pieces (the debate on this blog and your most recent entry) taken together can make for an awesome case study in interactive representative democracy.
There’s something distinctly innovative about all of this. It really does remind me of the days when an MP used to represent a very small riding, and knew everybody in it.
It’s great because this is truly consultative democracy.
I used to watch the Alliance hammer the Liberals on gas taxes from 1999 through 2002, usually I think it was Kenny and Thompson who used to ask about it…even though Thompson’s constituents got a farmers break on the fuel prices. Martin used to stand up, or, if the question was later on in QP, whoever the Minister of the Treasury Board would stand up and say that any tax cuts would be quickly eaten away by a rise in prices.
The Alliance would boo.
And so it went.
It’s just funny now that the shoe is on the other foot.
I truly think that the answer to fuel prices should be policy driven, and tied in with health and community incentives.
I agreed with the Liberal answer 1999-2002, and the Martin answer 2004-2005 (fuel taxes that go to municipalities…what do you have against municipalities?)….and I must admit, I semi-agree with the Conservative answer today.
However — what’s lacking is any sort of vision of what to do with those fuel taxes. The Cons got nothing. I think this is the real chink in their armor.
The evolution of US gas taxes is a very interesting subject and there are really important policy lessons that fall out of that. You would think that the Conservatives would follow their own pragmatic ideology and adopt those lessons.
But they don’t. They’re just happy to have it go into General Revenue, and have a cent or two go towards municipalities.
Where the hell is the vision?
Or is the Conservative vision of Canada just a group of gray haired white men stomping on the face of future generations?
So – what is the LPC projection for the true cost of implementing Kyoto?
so far the only estimate says we’d have a 60% increase in the cost of gas. surely between you, Stefan,and Elizabeth, you have the correct number.
Garth–
It’s not about “jacking up prices”. It’s about representing the complete cost of a litre of gasoline at the pump. This includes what it costs to clean up after it is burned (and naturally that money needs to be directed to that task). The market cannot work if prices do not represent costs.
On principle, I agree that double taxation is not good. I would be happy to see the tax reformulated. But I don’t want to see a net decrease.
Speaking of slander and character assassination, Liberals owe Mr. Hillier and apology on their knees. This man served his country for years, even in uniform. Liberals accused him of ‘acting on his own’ resulting in detainees being tortured. They refused to accept what Mr. Harper told them and continued to slander him:
Martin approved a detainee policy
Cabinet correspondence; Negotiations for transfer agreement with Afghans
Andrew Mayeda and mike Blanchfield, CanWest News Service, with files from James Cowan, National Post
Published: Thursday, May 03, 2007
OTTAWA – Former prime minister Paul Martin gave approval almost two years ago for then defence minister Bill Graham to negotiate a detainee transfer agreement with the Afghanistan government, say documents obtained by CanWest News Service.
The revelation, contained in Cabinet correspondence and Defence Department briefing notes, comes as the Harper government continues to face heavy criticism over its conduct of the Afghanistan mission and allegations that detainees were abused after being transferred to Afghan authorities.
The documents show that Mr. Martin, who has yet to speak publicly on the controversy, was briefed on the agreement more than six months before it was signed.
In a May 27, 2005, letter from Mr. Graham to Mr. Martin, the then prime minister was told that Canada planned to negotiate an agreement with the Afghan government that spelled out “explicit undertakings” on how the detainees would be treated.
The same day as the letter, Mr. Graham “authorized the Canadian Forces to seek arrangements with relevant authorities on the transfer of detainees,” according to a Defence Department briefing note. “The Prime Minister concurred with this approach on 10 June 2005,” states the note.
The documents appear to debunk a growing narrative in Ottawa that General Rick Hillier, the Chief of the Defence Staff, acted on his own and without proper government supervision when he signed the controversial detainee deal on behalf of the Canadian government in Kabul on Dec. 18, 2005.
~When will Dion apologize? L
I have long since stopped viewing newspaper artucles as evidence of anything. By the way, his name is Bains. If you’re going to character assassinate someone, try to get the name straight. By the way, what is yours? — Garth
So ask him, why is that so hard.
BTW, let’s check the Liberal Party record:
Chretiene personally intervened to release Khader, an Al Qaeda operative from Pakistani custody. We all know what Khader did.
Martin, in BC, spoke to a gathering of the youths associated with a terrorist organisation and even called them the fresh blood that will renew the Liberal Party.
Dion allowes a former spokeperson for a terrorist ogranisation to be party organisor.
At this point, I really hope and pray that this is just naivity from the Liberal Party leadership.
I emailed my MP yesterday and told her that I didn’t care for the partisan crap and race to be the most unethical and if it continued she and the party would lose my support.
I know it’s not all at the feet of the Cons but they seem to have created situation where every has to shout and heckle for parity.
It’s shameful.
Whatever your political stripe, how can you not be embarrassed by this? Mr. Turner rose to ask a legitimate question on behalf of his constituents in the House and not only received no answer, but was lambasted by Mr. Van Loan.
I don’t care which party forms the government (I supported Garth as a PC and I support him as a Liberal): we, as citizens and taxpayers, deserve better than this. Canadians don’t elect their MPs to go to Ottawa and act like petulant children in a sandlot dispute. Can we PLEASE have some decorum and civility in the House – along with some direct responses?
I suppose Mr. Turner can take some consolation in the fact that if the government wasn’t ashamed of its actions, it would have answered the query directly – not in a personal attack.
Breaking News:
New Afghan prisoner deal
The so-called government of Canada has found themselves in Court over the Afghjan prisoner isue. No wonder harper avoids questions like the plague.
Elizabeth May said what she said but she is not alone on the Chamberlain list.
http://www.thestar.com/article/209966
Will Dion apologize to Mr. Hillier?
Martin approved a detainee policy
Cabinet correspondence; Negotiations for transfer agreement with Afghans
Andrew Mayeda and mike Blanchfield, CanWest News Service, with files from James Cowan, National Post
Published: Thursday, May 03, 2007
OTTAWA – Former prime minister Paul Martin gave approval almost two years ago for then defence minister Bill Graham to negotiate a detainee transfer agreement with the Afghanistan government, say documents obtained by CanWest News Service.
The revelation, contained in Cabinet correspondence and Defence Department briefing notes, comes as the Harper government continues to face heavy criticism over its conduct of the Afghanistan mission and allegations that detainees were abused after being transferred to Afghan authorities.
The documents show that Mr. Martin, who has yet to speak publicly on the controversy, was briefed on the agreement more than six months before it was signed.
Email to a friend
Printer friendly
Font: ****In a May 27, 2005, letter from Mr. Graham to Mr. Martin, the then prime minister was told that Canada planned to negotiate an agreement with the Afghan government that spelled out “explicit undertakings” on how the detainees would be treated.
The same day as the letter, Mr. Graham “authorized the Canadian Forces to seek arrangements with relevant authorities on the transfer of detainees,” according to a Defence Department briefing note. “The Prime Minister concurred with this approach on 10 June 2005,” states the note.
The documents appear to debunk a growing narrative in Ottawa that General Rick Hillier, the Chief of the Defence Staff, acted on his own and without proper government supervision when he signed the controversial detainee deal on behalf of the Canadian government in Kabul on Dec. 18, 2005.
Garth, MPs address themselves with “honorable member”, after watching the QP, I no longer think that MPs should use the term “honorable member”. There is nothing honorable about MP’s behaviour in the house that I can see.
I would suggest all MPs refrain from using the term “honorable”. Using it would just make the whole thing more ridiculous.
Mel,
Is that story about Al Gore’s electricity bill still going around? Look at the source CNN? hardly what you would call good journalism. Al Gore installed solar panels in his home some time ago. Did you hear that story? And how about you? The U.S. government will do everything it can to discredit the guy. Gore has been nominated for a Nobel Prize – do you think George will get nominated for anything? Besides how many of us “walk the talk”? what are you doing to reduce your environmental footprint?
The House of Commons is a joke – a bunch of buffoons. No wonder intelligent people don’t go into politics. I don’t blame Belinda Stronach for leaving. The Conservative Party especially would never attract women. They are too smart! You can’t get anything done.
Garth,
I have a question for you. Why is it that MP’s can conduct themselves in Committee with the decorum we, as Canadians, expect of our elected officials, but they act like three year olds at recess in QP?
Right now Myron Thompson (C) is actually acting like he ahs a brain debating the Age of Consent Bill. Now, if even he can speak with some intelligence, why not all the others?
Regarding the Age of Consent Bill, I agree we need to be very careful how the law is written. Thompson is on about parents wanting to maintain control, and as a parent, I can fully understand his point, yet, there are parents who drive their children away with abuse both physical/sexual and psychological.
He, of course, will drag in anything he deems supportive of his far right Conservative position. Regardless, he at least does it with decorum, which is how debate is to be conducted.
Script for today’s Question Period Puppet show:
Govt.:”Let the doors be opened.”
Citizen: “I wish!”
Leader of Opp.: “Mr Speaker, today we have learned that the Canadian Government has signed a New Afghan Prisoner Exchange Deal which will give Canadians greater access to our prisoners. I’m confused, didn’t our Minister of Homeland Security assure us that we have always had full access?”
PM: (Rises majesticly from his throne. Buttons his jacket. Checks his left cufflink. Checks his right cufflink.
(His hair is purrfect, professionally coiffed.) Waves both arms with palms up in a benedictatorial motion and says: “Mr. Speaker, as I must say again, “Why won’t the Liberal Leader dissasociate himself with Elizabeth May?” (Rona nods)
Leader of Opp.: “Why, for once, can’t the P.M. answer the question?”
P.M.: “Why does the opposition always believe the terrorists instead of our Troops. Our Troops are pissed off about what’s going on back home.” (Rona nods).
Citizen: I’m pissed off about what’s going on back home. I lost my retirement savings in Income Trusts, had to get a job, got laid off immediately, and now can’t afford the gas to look for work.
Iggy: “What about the question of gas?”
Peter van: “Speaking of gas, Why won’t Garth just resign?”
Govt. “Order, order. Me must have order to hear the question of the passage of gas.”
“Order. order….”
And so it goes, day after day, as one by one our companies are bought away.
They also conveniently forget to mention that Gore is on the “green plan” for his heating bills.
Amazing what is left out eh?
Every dollar he raises from him movie/documentary goes to environmental issues.
Enough already with trying to trash.
Watching that clip from QP sent my blood pressure sky-rocketing. For heaven’s sake; first you had to change your question so as not to play into their hands and then PVL repeated the same old lie he has over and over again about your so-called crossing the floor etc. etc. ad nauseum. YOU DID NOT CROSS THE FLOOR, YOU WERE TURFED OUT.
Is there no rule that obliges parliamentarians to answer the question that has been posed rather than launching into the same old diatribe of their own? The MPs represent us, Canadians, and should answer the questions put to them on our behalf.
If I hear your alleged floor crossing accusation again I shall surely self-combust. It matters not what question you ask, they simply refer back to the lie about you crossing the floor. They look absolutely idiotic. PVL is a troll.
SLG, Did you mean Helen Thomas, the respected US journalist rather than Helen Hunt, the American actress?
Just curious if you had a link available. I did a search and found nada. I would be very interested in reading that.
Hi everyone, before I begin my comment, here’s a quote from this blog:
“Hi Garth,
I’m no expert, but it seems to me the Liberals have stepped in it a bit with this one. It looks like your team is promoting low fuel costs, which can only be construed by discerning Canadians as being anti-environmentally friendly.
There are still many skeptical Canadians out there when it comes to the CPC. So, I believe that the Libs have to, at every avenue, seperate themselves from the CPC by promoting environmental solutions and policy that are directed at being environmentally-friendly, that perpetuate conservation and that incite research, investment and development in alternative energy sources. That means that when it comes to energy prices, you either say nothing or you provide Canadians with alternatives. To do otherwise, to fight to lower fuel prices while stating that the CPC environmental policy is lacking is confusing. And anyway, Canadians are already confused as to why your team has not come out stronger against the CPC’s environment plan.
M. Dion has to be decisive and convincing in his messaging that Kyoto is the way to go. Consider how Mr. Harper managed to dupe so many for so long into believing that he is competent and compassionate. Being decisive and staying “on message†pays huge dividends.
Respectfully,
-R
Jacking up gas prices is hardly a long-term envitronmental solution, and yet penalizes families who today have no option but to drive long distances to work, live in areas without efficient public transit, or inhabit the 95% of Canada that is not urban. Canada’s government is erring in artificially raising gas prices through tax, especially when little of that money is finding its way into transit infrastructure or the pursuit of green energy alternatives. — Garth
By Rob W on 05.03.07 9:15 am
I think both Rob and Garth have made good points, and it reflects what i’ve been saying as a Canadian citizen and a Newfoundlander for months now: any environmental ethic/ action plan that fails to deal with social inequalities is a failed plan.
Basically, this is why past Liberal environmental plans have failed: so ya, read the book “Heat: How to Stop the Planet from Burning”!
They should have an overhead camera in the house during QP.That way we could identify all those interupters.
Most of the time we end up seeing the same faces.Diane Finley,Rona Ambrose.People are going to start getting the idea these two are just sitting there DOING NOTHING.
Is there any reason for Helena Guergis?
KPK, I’m not sure I would consider that VanSun article as ‘balanced’.
For one thing, Barbara Yaffe is an avowed Conservative supporter.
Secondly, she never mentions the real issue – the ever-changing stories by Harper, Day, O’Connor & MacKay as well as the lies. That’s the issue. Our government has been caught out lying to the Canadian people.
mel on 05.03.07 12:58 am
Perhaps his utility bills are higher due to the amount of people who live in his house. Does anyone know how many people are resident, and how many visitors, events hosted, attendants Al Gore accommodates and secret service agents and computer infrastructure utilized. This may give a better picture as to his electricity consumption versus the average US household.
she never mentions the real issue
So all that weeping, wailing and caterwauling about torture, murder and human rights was just so much theatrics, eh? We figured as much.
This video pretty much completes the after picture of Harper’s government on his position on attacking seniors’ retirement savings, versus his before posture that he had of NOT attacking seniors’ retirement savings and income.
Pyotr Petrobitch on 05.03.07 6:40 am
Flaherty et al would have Canadians’ believe that these people don’t know what they are talking about… yeah right!
Ever since the “Horses asses with Hats” (Reform/Alliance) crowd have been allowed to perform on the public stage, Parliament has disintegrated exponentially .
It is born of their frustration and inability to write legislation that will pass the SCOC challenges -bullet proof law.
Now that Alberta is in, or at least nominally ,Canada does not want to be remade in their ‘ Red Neck image ‘
Canada is far more comfortable with PM’s from Quebec and Ontario who are much more in tune with the ‘real’ Canada .
PPSH is a Svengali type dictator who cares nothing for Canadian history or our historical stance on world affairs .
We have alienated one of our largest trading partners ,China, by lecturing them on human rights .
Peter MacKay came away from China empty handed simply because the Chinese do not want to be dictated to .
Meanwhile in Canada, Canada’s spy agency reports that half of its counter-espionage efforts target spies from the Chinese mainland.
Another irritant is the Canadian parliament’s decision last November to give honorary citizenship to the Dalai Lama, Tibet’s spiritual leader who has been in exile since China’s invasion, which resulted in President Hu Jintao cancelling talks with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper at the Pacific Economic Co-operation summit in Hanoi.
In response to the snub, Mr Harper said that whilst Canada wants to promote trade relations, “I don’t think Canadians want us to sell our important Canadian values.â€
What values are those Harpo ?
Yours ?
Until there is an election and some actual adults are elected to Parliament the QP shall remain dysfunctional .
Now that they are tanking in the polls it is going to take a lot of intestinal fortitude ( Guts ) for the opposition to bring these clowns to heel .
Until they do we will bear witness to the slow disintegration of a once great and powerful nation .
What I learned from the government channel today:
If you’re fulfilled and you know it, crack a smile.
Crack a smile!
I’ll be keeping a lookout happy Members today.
“I want a piece of that, he says. “Brrrrrrrrrrahahahahahahahaha
Nice try as usual Garth.By the looks and sounds of it,no one will ever get a staight answer to any question from any member of this so called new government.I wish Shane Doan was our Captain in Parliamment.Keep at it Garth-it’s nice to be kept honestly informed.
Well, Comedy Hour is on again. Rick Dykstra just proved what a total ass he really is…as usual! I do NOT want total imbeciles like him writing laws that affect me…period!
Seriously Eric, this is how I work. Anyone, you or anyone else who makes a comment that is truthful and unbiased, and that carries the obvious any thinking person can readily see, I will generally acknowledge and support their statement. – BILL-MUSKOKA
Yeah, I agree.
But you have to admit that JACKIE CHAN’S LEFT HAND is a mental case. No one talks and thinks like that (here is a great chance to prove that you are not partisan).
But you have to admit that JACKIE CHAN’S LEFT HAND is a mental case. No one talks and thinks like that (here is a great chance to prove that you are not partisan).
By ERIC FOREMAN on 05.03.07 2:08 pm
ROTFLMAO
“Gore has been nominated for a Nobel Prize – do you think George will get nominated for anything?” By Elizabeth on 05.03.07 12:26 pm
George has been nominated for a Nobel Peace prize in 2004. He and Tony Blair were both nominated for the same year they declared war on Iraq. Odd I certainly think so.
she never mentions the real issue
So all that weeping, wailing and caterwauling about torture, murder and human rights was just so much theatrics, eh? We figured as much.
- By Lawrence Garvin
So, I have to assume from yoru response that you’re just fine and tickety-boo with being lied to and mislead.
You know the old adage about getting the governments we deserve.
If you find lying, obfuscation, refusing to answer direct questiosn with a direct answer, as well as incompetence acceptable, that is exactly what you get.
Enjoy it for now, they’ll be gone soon and will be a distant bad memory before too long.
And before the usual Kool-aid drinkers knee-jerk, I am not a Liberal.
“Dismissive NONSENSE, more than adequately answered by Garth’s comment.
If you’re suggesting oil co CEO’s can’t walk and chew gum at the same time and address macro concerns, I wonder where you got your education.”
By Pyotr Petrobitch on 05.03.07 9:47 am
HMM let’s see the point of no return is in 15 years. Can Oil CEOs walk and chew gum at the same time? Sure. Can they make their companies carbon neutral in 15 years? Ah no. I expect oil and gas stocks to drop dramatically as governments are forced to take drastic action.
“I wonder where you got your education.â€
By Pyotr Petrobitch on 05.03.07 9:47 am
P.S. filling in for Jackie today?
And before the usual Kool-aid drinkers knee-jerk, I am not a Liberal.
By Frank Frink on 05.03.07 2:23 pm
Doesn’t matter Frank the comment was lucid and well thought out .
And before the usual Kool-aid drinkers knee-jerk, I am not a Liberal. – FRANK FRINK
Funny, you sound like one.
Bill M
How is wanting to raise the age of consent a far right issue? I’m sure there are a lot of left wingers who don’t want their 14 year old daughter to be the target of a 21 year old predator. Why does the fact that a small percentage of parents who physically/sexually abuse their children change the fact that someone should have sexual access to a 14 year old child? Deal with the abuser, absolutely, and extremely harshly, but, can you give me one good example why a 20 year old should be able to legally have sex with a 14 year old? And if you can’t, give me a good reason to vote against it. There is a close in age exemption, so I’m not sure why this isn’t a no-brainer.
Kerry
Eric Foreman,
But you have to admit that JACKIE CHAN’S LEFT HAND is a mental case.
No Eric I do not have to admit anything. I may choose to agree, I may choose to disagree, but am not compelled to agree just to get along. I believe I said that rather clearly in my prior comment to you.
Your opinion of JCLH is your own. I may or may not share it. If I feel JCLH can benefit from a comment from me to him I will choose what that comment will be and if it will be made!
Have a nice afternoon!
GAWD! I cannot take any more of QP. I just want to walk in there and smack the crap out of the CPC MP’s who LIE, LIE, LIE!,where is my Emoeror costume from Star Wars…I feel a tingling sensation building in my fingers that needs to be aimed and used!
And then turn around and tell Iggy what I think of him as well!
And to all the ‘I am so proud’ MP jackasses that think they are worthy of representing Canadians I say this…’You may be proud, but remember pride goes before a fall…and yours is coming real soon!
Kerry:
Young adults are confused as is,raging hormones and all , stigmatizing sex may well damage them further by cutting off their access to needed information regarding STD’s and birth control .
The sooner they have the information required the sooner they can make an intelligent decision regarding their choices .
A fourteen year old given this information is much less likely to end up in trouble(pregnant)
“GAWD! I cannot take any more of QP”
By Bill-Muskoka on 05.03.07 2:42 pm
here’s a thought…turn the tv off and stop whining about it on this blog! Not one person has put a gun to your head and forced you to watch it.
And to all the ‘I am so proud’ MP jackasses that think they are worthy of representing Canadians I say this…’You may be proud, but remember pride goes before a fall…and yours is coming real soon!
By Bill-Muskoka on 05.03.07 2:42 pm
I agree .Even though I am a mental case.
ERIC: Jackie’s last post is dead on.
I think like that. I really do believe that the Cons and the alliance before them are bible-thumping morons who mistake resolve for reason. They NEVER answer questions in QP. They talk a good game about accountability and transparency but yet they’re the most opaque and unaccountable gov’t I’ve seen in my life. They don’t let O’Connor answer his own questions and instead let Helena G., O’Connor’s junior (only a SoS) field his questions. Rhetoric, evasion and denial are their tools.
They compound these tactics with incompetence with arrogance, patting one another on the back for it. Rona Ambrose was an absolute failure as an environment minister and her successor, Baird, is the same but with more bluster. They continually accuse the Liberals of being friends to big business but the Cons could never conceive of an environmental plan that would actually create new environmetal sector jobs if it cost a single oil patch job.
They treat Canadian citizens like rednecks treat the deaf and think that simply yelling louder with increase the communication bandwidth.
Even the way they refer to us. I don’t think I’ve ever heard Harper and Co. refer to Canadians as citizens. We are always consumers and tax payers.
Daycares don’t have a high profit margin so it’s no wonder they’ve created ZERO child care spaces in the past 16 months (In Toronto, parents will happily take a bullet or give a kidney for a space in a good day care and pay anywhere from $1000 to $1800 for a quality place).
They spend money like drunken sailors but like drunks they spend it in all the wrong places. A muppet could have written a better budget than Flaherty. $4 Billion for C-17s (when clearly an assault ship is entirely better suited and costs half as much to build and equip), money out of literacy… Let’s just stop there
MONEY OUT OF LITERACY!!!
Any gov’t that has a surplus and does this is immediately morally and intellectually bankrupt. If you’ve got a choice between a tax cut and improving literacy you ALWAYS go with literacy and education because the latter will take care of the former and the reverse disables your entire society.
… but am not compelled to agree just to get along. – BILL-MUSKOKA
I never said that you should. Calm down, big guy.
The Language We Use
Considering the atmosphere regarding Freedom of Expression from the current “Regime”, I would suggest a moderation of language, “going forward”. After all, it’s “the right thing to do”, “whatever it takes”.
I have to assume from yoru response that you’re just fine and tickety-boo with being lied to and mislead.
All this guessing and assuming is leading you folks astray. I think the Conservatvives looked like damn fools over the past two weeks but they still look like more sincere fools than any of the attackers from the opposition. The Conservatives are not good at “communications” (this is one of the things I liked about them in the past). But they still handled the actual issue with far more competence than any of you will give them credit for… Instead you’ll just say it was all about bad communications all along.
I just watched QP and it was exactly as I expected it to be… “AHA! The fact that you’ve fixed it, means there was something wrong all along.” Call that a win for the opposition if you like… I think most people will call it what it is; petulant whining. Where are the celebrations that Taliban fighters – once and for all – are safe from the torture due to Canadian neglect?
Where are the mea culpas from the people who actually signed the original agreement and then claimed that there was none? Where are the apologies to Hillier for all the false allegations against him?
Pshaw! All that is irrelevant. We want to talk about how McKay and Harper and O’Connor were tripping over each others feet like a bunch of Keystone Kops.
I know, I know, you’re not a Liberal. You just enjoy the same kind of loud surface shit-disturbing over actual substance, the same way that they do… I think that’s where the confusion comes into it.
Kerry B,
How is wanting to raise the age of consent a far right issue?
Basically it is not, as I clearly said in my prior comment. I suggest you re-read it slowly and absorb what it says.
As to the basics of the Bill I totally support it. As to MP Thompson going off on the far right about parent’s rights, an morality, etc., I stand against such overt control without strict clarity.
I have supported the basis of the bill since I first heard of it BTW.
There was actually some good dicsussion this morning on the subject, including all sides. it is a very difficult issue because of where the age line should be relaisitcally drawn.
I agree that a twenty year old should not be dating a 14 year old. In fact I believe that a 17 year old is about the limit. I say this knowing the science behind childhood development, and if you study Piaget’s work in the area, you will find how the adolescent mind matures between the onset of puberty and maturity.
As to sex education, I am 100% for it, and not merely the clinical, but talking about the psychological reasons for sexual feelings, and how to handle them properly. No religious morality is required IMHO. In fact, the main reason we have so many problems in this area is because of religon and its verbotten approach to natural humanity.
Teens will almost always do the very thing they are told not to. It is human nature. Give them the reasons, not a guilt trip or fear factor, to make sound decisions, and let us all stop pretending they do not have sexual feelings, sexuality, and are quite capable of doing what they want, regardless of parents and laws. Make it work for them, not against reality. The days of Queen Victoria are long over, and were a sham to begin with. Study the Toubadours and you will find the Royal bedrooms were a seething hotbed of lust.
In fact, we should probably consider having free and confidential counselling clinics where teens can go and discuss their feelings safely, and without all the dysfunctional crap too many parents hand out. Look at history and you find parents have caused more damage in many cases than the kids created.
Sex is not bad…it is natural. STD’s, AIDS, and pregnancy is what is bad because they simply cannot comprehend the dire consequences for themselves and the ensuing children.
The majority of teen pregnancies are the result of lack of knowledge, or a dyfunctional home, wherein girls want to gain a sense of power, control, revenge, or just simply do not have the knowledge of how human reproductity functions.
The teens today are far more worldly than when I was a teen, or even as MP Thompson admitted when he was 14. yes, I remember those days. There were some that were like the Vulcan PonFor. That has not changed. What has changed is the level of openness from when he and I were teens. It was a hush hush subject, and we all did it, but we just didn’t talk about it.
The reality is that societal attitudes, laws, and yes, the welfare system, have produced an epidemic compared to what he and I knew. There are girls today who want to get pregnant diliberately to punish theri parents, or to play mother (they are simply not capable of caring for nor supporting a child), and there are even those who see the welfare system as their only hope, or simply want a free ride. Have a baby…get a ride.
As to predators. Send the SOB’s to me…I have the cure right here…a very sharp boning knife! We could employ numerous semi-blind Mohels to deal with them…’Ooops! today’s special…Half off!’
But even there we must be highly cautious because of the aforementioned factors of teen girls. They no longer even look 14. Some are 12 and look 18. Placing all the blame on the male is not the answer either. A twenty something may think an 18 year old, or a girl who says she is, or certainly looks to be, and decieves him is the real victim. A thirty year old that goes for a teen girl is without excuse. A porn predator deserves instant justice by whoever catches the SOB. The drug dealing pimps deserve the harshest treatment. I will not even mention the punishments I have for them.
Whatever is decided I simply hope all the aspects are addressed and properly included in the law to make sure that there is victim protection male or female. As to the plethora of Catholic Priests, or other ministers they should have no immunity whatsoever, and the Church should be held liable for their actions legally and monetarily.
Teachers should also be excluded from excuse. This is not a small problem, it is a major problem, and we all pay for it thorugh either welfare, or incarceration via our taxes. It goes on from generation to generation as well. Dysfunctionality, like FES, is a plague society must treat and deal with like we would any epidemic.
If a girl is found guilty of deception and willfull lieing she should not be spared the full consequence of the law. No more double standard. No more ‘He got me pregnant’ because unless rape occurred the girl made a freewill choice to participate, and only she has the ability to know her state of fertility. A false allegation of rape should bring the maximum sentence for the accuser as well.
Work the solution is my motto!
Those are my more detailed thoughts on the subject. Hope that answers your question?
NEWS FLASH !!!! : Petrobitch/Chan one and the same .
” I have Proof ” says Shadow .
I would like to advise those that don’t know, that “two pack†Scott Reid posts here under one of the two nom de plumes, either Jackie Chan’s left hand or Pyotr Petrobitch,or both, because both of these luddites sound like “two pack†Scott Reid, spitting out nothing but venom. Scott Reid could do with a good dose of Immodium and some beer and popcorn. In addition there is also liberal MP’s posting here as well. All are trying to prop up Mr Turner’s site.
Here’s your hat.What’s your hurry ?
ROTFLMAO
In a stunning mind-meld experiment Pyoter Petrobitch and Jack Chan had their brains fused together .
Combined IQ exceeds 290 .
“These guys are off all the charts ” one of the scientists in charge of the project said .
“Brilliant is too small a word to describe their achievements ” another spokesman said .
JCLH,
I agree .Even though I am a mental case.
Your foot…your mouth! LMAO!
Hey, we all have our moments of excursion into the Twilight Zone. In later age one cal call them a Senior Moment. Good of excuse as any I think…sometimes…if I remember to.
The whole prisoner issue has been handled incompetently from the beginning. It is about time that someone was forced to deal with the issue.
Hillier should never have been the one to sign the agreement with regard to prisoners. That should have been the responsibility of foreign affairs. Both Liberal and Conservative governments are responsible in this case for poor leadership. Remember that originally the prisoners were being turned over to the U.S. which was also an misstep according to international law.
Hillier has politicized his position by assuming the role of a politician but the political leadership have allowed him to do it and are just as liable. The entire Afghanistan mission has been mislandled from the beginning.
JCLH
A 14 yr olds access to information is completely different than making it illegal for a 20 yr old to have sex with them.
Adam,
here’s a thought…turn the tv off and stop whining about it on this blog! Not one person has put a gun to your head and forced you to watch it.
I would, but I have this Afghan standing beside me with a stolen 9mm Glock M-17, and darn, I called the Red Cross, the Red Cresent, and even the Canadian Embassy. I got music on hold…I think they were playing the Requiem?
Will your remote maybe reach my TV here in the Muskoka? Please come and rescue me from this torture. My eyelids are propped open and one more glimpse of Peter Van Loan and I will start confessing to whatever they demand. HELP!
Please call Helena Guerges and tell her I need some soothing right away.
JCLH,
In a stunning mind-meld experiment Pyoter Petrobitch and Jack Chan had their brains fused together .
Combined IQ exceeds 290 .
“These guys are off all the charts †one of the scientists in charge of the project said .
“Brilliant is too small a word to describe their achievements †another spokesman said .
Oh Boy Jackie, you triggered my Monty Python Satire lobe with that pronouncment…Please forgive the following the Devil made me do it!
But where did that fly go that was buzzing around in the lab?
ROFLMAO uncontrollably!!!
Well, I am sure the world will continue on…maybe?
I will be away until Saturday unless I can tap into the WiFi with my laptop. Sometimes they work…sometimes not…about like most MP’s, eh?
Not so. In essence you are criminalizng sexual behaviour .
It would be illegal for clinics et cetera to hand out information to anyone under the age of sixteen .
The majority of the world it is fourteen to have sex with consent .
The law has been on the books for over one hundred years and I don’t see an epidemic of twenty somethings having sex with fourteen year olds .
More important is the question of child sexualization by the media .
“MISGUIDED AND DAMAGING PROPOSAL”
When will HARPOON finally see his elfin FINANCE MINISTER is out of control?
Buffoons and sots in action.
http://www.globeinvestor.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070503.wmanulifestaff0503/GIStory/
Mr. Flatermee…this 85 year old lady is smarter than you think!
It is the hurt seniors that will dismantle the CPC!
Go Garth! Go CAITI !
http://caiti-online.blogspot.com/
“Help me. Help me ”
I hope that answers your question Bill .
Oooops! An open window .
VOTE ABC!
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/newfoundland-labrador/story/2007/05/03/williams-harper.html
Gas price increases GST or Carbon tax.
The first should go or be reduced. Why, because it goes straight into general revenue and is a straight money grab.
Correct me if I’m wrong (I know someone will) but a carbon tax does not go into general revenues, but into a separate pot to be used for green projects.
I’ll pay more for gas if the latter is the case, but not through GST or other levies that go to general revenue.
Stunning Lawrenec, simply stunning. You must put down teh kool-aid.
Your wroet:
“Where are the mea culpas from the people who actually signed the original agreement and then claimed that there was none? Where are the apologies to Hillier for all the false allegations against him?”
Well, that woudl be Hillier himself who signed the original agreement. So, why don’t you berate him for the mea culpa.
And what false allegations against him? He signed the deal.
But, hey. While you toss insults at me like thsi one,
You just enjoy the same kind of loud surface shit-disturbing over actual substance, the same way that they do… I think that’s where the confusion comes into it.”
Hmmm… seems I’m able to stick to the facts and substance. Can’t say I’ve seen you do the same. You’re a CON apologist as far as I can see. You find their tactics acceptable.
You see, Lawrence, the fact is Harper & Co. ARE the government. When Dion & Co. become the government and should they display the same sort of tactics I’ll hodl their feet to the fire.
Another proactive cuation – do not reply by saying well, Chretien lied about this and Martin did that. Chretien and Martin aren’t even in parliament anymore let alone residing at 24 Sussex. And whatever the previosu two Liberal PMs may or may not have done it doesn’t excuse Harper & Co. one bit.
Bite me!
JCLH/aka Jackie The Fly,
“Help me. Help me â€
Eh? I hear a buzzy high pitched voice and it sounds like “Help me. Help me â€.
Hmm…Strange! Oh, where is my fly swatter…they are already out?
To be continued Saturday. (What is life expectancy of a fly? Hehehehe)
Marc,
Blair & Bush were nominated for Noble Peace prize – well history will have it’s say. Most Brits and most Americans don’t support that war. Harper did & when Peter Mansbridge mentioned it in an interview he said “oh, I meant we should support the troops”. Canada would be a different country today if we had participated in that illegal invasion. Thank goodness Chretien was in power then and not Harper. Today, thousands of people in Israel are marching to remove Olmert for invading Lebanon. Harper felt it was a “measured response” – seems Israel doesn’t feel the same way. They destroyed 45 bridges on the first day!
I am disgusted with QP – bunch of jokers! I wrote Harper today and said to stick with issues instead of playing games. Go to the Conservative website and it looks like a Liberal website with pictures of the opposition. No information there about serious issues that government needs to deal with. What an immature bunch of “yahoo!” I’m disgusted!
“Chretien and Martin aren’t even in parliament anymore…”
By Frank Frink on 05.03.07 5:08 pm
Hate to break it to you, but Paul Martin is still a sitting MP.
Lawrence Garvin,
Why should anybody apologize to Hillier?
I read with interest today how Hillier relayed that soldiers in Kandahar were ’sick’ of all the attention being paid to detainee torture.
In light of Somalia, he should understand that public support for the mission is contingent on NO REPEAT of that scandal.
Given that some of our men and women in PPCLI are rotating over there, we owe it to them to ensure that they’re not all tainted by the actions of a few, plus a half dozen morally corrupt officers.
The question of detainees is central and pertinent to public support for the war.
I’m pro-armed forces, which is why I’m pro-human rights. (I remember first hand the effect that Somalia had)
I really can have it both ways. Support our troops by supporting human rights and gaining the moral high ground.
I think the Conservatives, and increasingly Hillier, and really screwing this up by labeling those who support Human Rights (which includes Taleban) as traitors is really counter-productive to the long term success of the mission.
Dear Bill Muskoka— would you care to share your feelings about Iggy. You mention wanting to tell him what you think of him. I can’t understand how such a brilliant man needs to read from his notes in both languages? I know that Stephane refers to his notes when asking questions in English but seldom when using French. Would love to hear your opinion of this man.
Garth, where does MPTV get its house of commons video feed from? I looked at cpac, but their site seems to indicate strong copyright terms that prohibit modification and redistribution.
Is there a digital feed we can get our hands on that is in the public domain? I’m trying to make something cool, but I just can’t find the data.
From the House of Commons. — Garth
Well, that woudl be Hillier himself who signed the original agreement.
Under the direction, and with the full consent of Defence Minister Bill Graham and Prime Minister Paul Martin. Those are the Liberal politicians who zipped their lips and sat on their hands while the current Liberal government threw all kinds of reckless allegations about how the Conservatives were allowing the construction of a new chamber of horrors in Afghanistan. The opposition made the choice to make political hay out of this matter and the onus was on them to get their damn facts straight. Not to “forget” what happened. Hillier signed the agreement – literally – but it was a Liberal agreement and they denied knowledge of it in order to smear the soldiers overseas. That’s despicable in my opinion.
And what false allegations against him?
The slander that he was acting on his own imitative and had “pushed aside” Foreign Affairs officials to act outside his legal authority. You know, those ones that “anonymous” officials have been making through the Globe & Mail.
…seems I’m able to stick to the facts and substance. Can’t say I’ve seen you do the same. Maybe if you stop assuming and guessing and actually start checking your facts you’ll get a little further…
Chretien and Martin aren’t even in parliament anymore That blank slate shit only works on the Etch a Sketch. The Liberals have been attacking the Conservatives for 2 weeks about the detainee procedures that they implemented and promptly forgot about. The Cons looked stupid because they tried to look smarter than they are… It happens to everyone who tries to fake it… hint, hint.
BTW, any cliché that has been repeated in excess of 4,000,000 times tends to lose it’s effectiveness. Phrases like “drinking the Kool-Aid” and “bite me” passed their best-before date around 1998. Maybe ask the neighbourhood kids for some new material.
I think the Conservatives, and increasingly Hillier, and really screwing this up by labeling those who support Human Rights (which includes Taleban) as traitors is really counter-productive to the long term success of the mission.
If you are offended by that type of torqued rhetoric then… just don’t do it. To my knowledge, no-one has labelled anyone as a traitor. It seems to me that Harper and his communications people are being irresponsible with some of the innuendos but I understand his objections and I object along with him.
Why do the same people who insist quite strenuously that we CAN NOT impose Canadian-style democracy on Afghanistan still insist – even more strongly – that we MUST impose the Canadian standard of human rights upon them? The political pressure we put on our soldiers is crushing. We demand that they act as guests in the country, win hearts and minds, respect the customs and traditions of the tribal society, fight, protect, rebuild, suffer and die. We also want them to model the perfect Western Sheriff; wise, gentle, firm but fair, mentoring their deputies in the ways of an advanced civic society while dodging IEDs and rocket-launched greades. AND they have to be able to switch back and forth – seamlessly – in all circumstances, regardless of personal peril, pain, grief or panic. Oh & one more thing! … we’ll have their politicians at home call them accomplices (at least) to torture and murder. Not out of any personal malice, of course, but merely because it might be good for a couple of points in the polls.
I think that’s what Harper is getting at when he complains that the opposition sounds a little hollow when they claim to “support the troops.”
Ronin eyes Central Nova seat Post a comment print this article
Post a comment
The News
PUGWASH RIVER – A former River John resident says he plans to run as an independent in Central Nova in the next federal election.
Sebastian Ronan has not yet filed nomination papers and plans to spend the summer collecting the required 100 signatures. But Ronan, who now lives in Pugwash River, Cumberland County, says the Elizabeth May-Stephane Dion pact prompted him to jump into politics.
“The May-Dion pact, separate from Green and Liberal philosophies, is a political act,” Ronan said. “As such, it can be contested at the electoral level. For those Liberal voters who are opposed to having their freedom of political expression denied and who will not vote Green, Conservative or NDP, I am offering the electoral option for a more constructive protest vote than merely staying home on election night.”
Ronan, a member of the provincial Green Party and a former Green when he resided in British Columbia, said he resigned from the party because he disagreed with the idea of a national Green Party.
Although he now resides outside of the riding, Ronan said he has strong ties to the area.
“It’s where my in-laws live, my friends and family are there,” he said. “I established my business, Abel’s Canes, there. It’s where I’ve lived as a Nova Scotian for years.”
Jackie,
What are you talking about? Most of the world may have a legal age of 14 (if you include places like Thailand), but most of the civilized world the age of consent is at least 16. (And in much of the less civilized world, sex outside of marriage is forbidden).
And Canada has not had an age of consent of 14 for the last 100 years. I will find it, but that law I believe changed under the watchful eyes of a previous liberal government.
Ed the Hun
Jackie,
Some examples:
Canadian criminal law provided qualified protection from sexual exploitation for females over 14. For example, the seduction of a girl over 12 and under 16 “of previously chaste character” was made an offence in 1886. The offence was retained in the 1892 Criminal Code, in respect of girls between 14 and 16, and remained in force until 1920, when the offence was changed to prohibit “sexual intercourse.” After 1920, the question of who was more to “blame” became an issue that could lead to acquittal but the offence remained in force until 1988.
In addition to those offences reviewed above, the “seduction” of a female under 18 “under promise of marriage” was made an offence in Canada in 1886 and amended in 1887 to apply to females under 21. In 1920, the offence of “seduction” (without reference to promise of marriage) was made applicable to girls “of previously chaste character” between 16 and 18.
Ed the Hun
Bill,
To protect a child’s physical, emotional and even sexual well-being is a ‘far-right’ attitude?
Well if so then place me out there. And before I go, let me ask you lefties what your defence is for not wanting to protect your kids.
Ed the Hun
Let’s see Mr. Garvin, the Liberals through Hillier signed the deal roughly six weeks before they lost power and during an election campaign. That they signed off on a poor deal I have no problems acknowledging and they deserve their fair share of blame for that aspect. HOWEVER, it was the Harper CPC government that actually has been implementing it since it was signed for the past 15 months now, as opposed to the roughly 6 weeks from the Libs signing to Harper coming to power. Yet you would have people believe there is at least equal culpability/responsibility here for the failures of this deal to properly protect our soldiers from Geneva violations, if not mostly on the Libbys. It is this that reveals you to be a CPC shill/partisan as others have named you.
It was the responsibility of the Harper government when it came to power to review all active arrangements and deals the government was currently engaged in, it is a part of that thing we have a history of practicing in this nation from birth, responsible government. They certainly had no problems reviewing and cancelling other Liberal initiated deals and programs, yet they left this one intact and indeed actively defended it as being everything necessary for Geneva compliance and that there was no problem throughout last year when questions were raised in the House about this deal and the status of detainees as required under Geneva almost literally from the first day of Harper’s opening Parliament as PM.
This means they (Harper/CPC) took full ownership of how it was being implemented and whether it complied with all necessary Geneva conventions, and saying it was a Liberal deal cuts no ice here. Indeed, it is particularly lame because it means the Harper CPC trusted the Liberals to write this without being concerned they did a good job, this after they had spent literally every waking day since the birth of the CPC denouncing the Libs as incompetent, corrupt, and dangerous, especially to folks like our military. Yet they were fine with this deal until it became a political firestorm they simply could not ignore anymore.
Then when the firestorm started their stories changed each day for over a week in the House and out, conflicting with each other stories at that coming from the Ministers of Defence, Foreign Affairs, Public Safety and the PM himself. This Harper government has spent the past fortnight smearing every Canadian that is concerned about this as anti-military, and worse, unpatriotic. When you fall back on the patriotism card as your main line of defence then you are showing just how weak your position truly is, as well as showing how truly despicable you are in doing so, especially on an issue of such fundamental importance to Canadians as their honour and respecting of the Laws of War like Geneva, among other important international agreements the CPC seems to find themselves indifferent to. Nay worse, that they feel that since they did not sign it they can disregard it, which is *NOT* how we have operated our government in the past of either Lib or PCPC bent.
That you would have people believe that your position is based on a reasonable reading of the facts, that this government ahs only a communications problems here, and that anyone that comes down hard on this government for not only bungling the communications but the entire file itself and potentially exposing our fellow citizens in uniform to being charged with violating the Geneva conventions down the road for following the CPC government’s policy/orders is truly mind-boggling in it’s chutzpah. Not to mention as I said before revealing that you are clearly a CPC partisan, because only a CPC partisan could look at this issue and how this government has handled it since they came to power to this day and still think at most it is a communications problem.
BTW, what happened to the policy that the prior Libs had to notify the Minister of Defence whenever a significant/major human rights violation allegation was made against the military? This was put in place as the Somalia fiasco and from all accounts it was in place for the last Lib Defence Minister, yet O’Connor claims it wasn’t he or the CPC that cancelled it. This despite a paper trail of these reports available to media via access to information that stop once the CPC came to power. Yes, this sort of concern for human rights really didn’t matter to this government, again shown by their actions as opposed to their words, and yet you defend them and claim the Libbys were far worse.
Male Bovine Excrement they were. They never stained the honour of our soldiers the way Harper has with all of this, because if nothing else it was not until Harper’s time that credible allegations of torture of these detainees came out to the public, and regardless of what the Libs might have know it was clear that once this CPC *DID* know they chose to ignore it by claiming these had no basis at all, that they had not received specific allegations, then they released a heavily blacked out document supposedly confirming that to only have the unredacted version come out and the deletions were of the specific credible allegations by our own government (hardly merely Taliban claims as the CPC also have been chanting the past fortnight btw so don’t bother replying with that smear either please). Then they claimed to take such allegations seriously and were investigating, yet continued to maintain the deal was enough, then claimed to have a new deal in place yet the next day say it is not finalized/formalized, and finally we have a new deal supposedly that corrects the problems in the previous deal that the government said last week was fine and had no such problems needing fixing as it was and yet still despite all this lack of clarity refused to suspend transfers until this was all sorted out thereby all but guaranteeing that any transferee during this period may have a winnable case against our military for violating the Geneva Conventions. I can think of no comparable case prior to this from any government in my lifetime. That makes them worse than the Libbys, no contest.
I would close by pointing out that the vast majority of Canadians by their voting preferences are social progressives. Progressives believe strongly in things like human rights and international law being respected. This is also consistent with the history of this nation under Liberal and PCPC governments until Harper’s CPC. The honour of our military in never acting in a dishonourable war matters to us, which is also one of the reasons the Somalia affair caused such an uproar in this nation when it happened, it was the closest comparison to our Abu Ghraib and the way we reacted to it was emphatic (probably an overreaction, but then that only underscores my point about how such is seen in the wider public). So slamming anyone worrying about human rights and Geneva violations as unpatriotic, unCanadian, and anti-military is quite possibly going to have a much worse negative backlash than you and you CPC leaders appear to be considering likely/possible.
It is this inability to understand that we are concerned for the humanity and welfare of our soldiers as well as their legal protection that makes this issue so serious regarding Harper and the CPC and those supporting them in this, and the fact that only the CPC is not treating this with the gravitas/seriousness it warrants and instead is playing partisan politics over it will seriously undercut the premise that it is the CPC and Harper that respect the military. The stain being placed on the honour of the military by this government’s actions by not stopping turning over detainees once it became clear (especially publicly) that the risk of torture (the obligation is that when there is a reasonable basis for such concern that one does not hand over, that is the Geneva aspect involved here which seems to be so poorly understood by the Harper CPC) was real for those turned over from when this went public (at a minimum) despite our arrangements means that every prisoner turned over until we have ironclad protections against such worries/concerns leaves open those soldiers following their turnover orders at risk. Do not think that most military folks don’t get this, they get this far better than the CPC clearly does, but then they are trained to know what the Geneva Conventions call for and why, something O’Connor seems to have forgotten from his basic training.
Oh yes, don’t try the lies from the Taliban being believed crap, if that argument held any merit then why only lie about what happened to them in Afghani hands unless you want to say they are lying when they say the Canadians treated them properly in every respect. This is the gaping hole in the logic of that argument Harper and the CPC and their defenders have been using for the last fortnight, and it shows just how uncritical the thought processes of those advancing/claiming this truly are.
Scotian,
Jesus – what a marathon. Learn to come to a point a little quicker.
Yet you would have people believe there is at least equal culpability/responsibility here for the failures of this deal to properly protect our soldiers from Geneva violations, if not mostly on the Libbys. It is this that reveals you to be a CPC shill/partisan as others have named you.
No. That’s not what I said (and it didn’t take me that long to not say it, either.) I said the Conservatives looked like goddamn idiots over the past two weeks and I congratulate them on finally getting their shit together enough to fix this. I also said that the OPPOSITION was completely unhelpful and made the mission that much worse for the soldiers by their excessive political rhetoric.
—
… I skipped everything in the middle and went to the end…
Oh yes, don’t try the lies from the Taliban being believed crap, if that argument held any merit then why only lie about what happened to them in Afghani hands unless you want to say they are lying when they say the Canadians treated them properly in every respect. This is the gaping hole in the logic of that argument Harper and the CPC and their defenders have been using for the last fortnight, and it shows just how uncritical the thought processes of those advancing/claiming this truly are.
Since I made no such argument I guess you just felt like throwing that in…
Jesus, I’m glad I skipped the middle part, you are wrestling with phantoms here (and you seem to be losing ground against them too.) You really make quite a long-winded argument against what I didn’t say. I’m not even going to ask you what you thought of what I did say. Who the hell has the time to read all that?
This is a dialogue, not a lecture.
From the House of Commons. — Garth
Any advice for bloggers who want same-day access to this video? I’m trying to put together a way to let bloggers cite a video comment/question exchange from qp by timespan, member or tag.
It’s a bit of a Web 2.0 experiment in new media and government and I’d just snarf it from cpac, but canada doesnt have a political fair use exemption.
Ideas?
Call me and I’ll hook you up with a technie. — Garth
Wrong on all counts again Hun .
Never mind one of these days you’ll get something right .
The Criminal Code does not now criminalize consensual sexual activity with or between persons 14 or over, unless it takes place in a relationship of trust or dependency, in which case sexual activity with persons over 14 but under 18 can constitute an offence, notwithstanding their consent. Even consensual activity with those under 14 but over 12 may not be an offence if the accused is under 16 and less than two years older than the complainant. The exception, of course, is anal intercourse, to which unmarried persons under 18 cannot legally consent, although both the Ontario Court of Appeal(3) and the Quebec Court of Appeal(4) have struck down the relevant section of the Criminal Code.
And further to this that I argued earlier:
Perhaps the strongest policy argument against raising the age of consent from 14 to 16 is that it would place unprecedented limits on the sexual freedom of young persons. Hence, proponents of such a change may be challenged to provide empirical evidence demonstrating that adolescents under 16 are being sexually exploited or, alternatively, that the incidence of pregnancy or sexually transmitted diseases among that age group calls for an expansion of the existing prohibitions. It must be noted that simply raising the age of consent to 16 would criminalize sexual activity between adolescents that is now legal. Because the modern sexual assault provisions of the Criminal Code no longer depend upon proof of intercourse, such an amendment could allow a 16-year-old to be prosecuted for virtually any sexual contact with a 15-year-old boyfriend or girlfriend.
“..Why don’t you just cut the crap and …” E.F.
(Irate T., I can’t seem to find my blow torch at the moment- help me out will ya?)
Foreman, why don’t you just run the cut, finish crapping and get lost- you stink!
The Income Trust issue ain’t over till the skinny lady sings “Writ drop, now run along and have an election”
Too bad you prefer snappy sound byte to context and analysis. You should have read the middle that you skipped too. I think you’ll find that Scotian has covered all bases and loopholes in the thorough manner of his that I’ve observed since he’s started posting here.
Good work Scotian – yet again.
“Too bad you prefer snappy sound byte to context and analysis. You should have read the middle that you skipped too. I think you’ll find that Scotian has covered all bases and loopholes in the thorough manner of his that I’ve observed since he’s started posting here.
Good work Scotian – yet again.”
By Dube on 05.03.07 10:48 pm
Thank you. I know I tend to be long winded, but part of that is to cover the various bases and dodges that can be taken so as to force actually either addressing the substance or else showing one cannot/will not. This is after all a very old tried and true method of debate and discourse/writing, but then I guess such thinking is too conservative for the faux Conservatives we have these days. As I said to Mr. Garvin, it is amusing that the only times in five years of online commentary the only complaints about length come from Conservatives; no one else ever has a problem with it, even fellow progressives that disagree with me and debate/disagree with me in thoughtful discourse. I think that speaks volumes as to which side tends to prefer real debate/discourse and which side prefers the emptiness of the echo chamber resonating with simplistic binary stereotypes and bumper sticker rhetoric/slogans instead of substance.
Mr. Garvin:
If you are going to comment on what someone has written, if one is at all intellectually honest they read the whole thing so that they understand the context all is written in, especially if they are going to take issue with it. By your own admission you did not do this, yet you feel you are in a position to make a meaningful critique of my writing and the thinking it illustrates. This is what is known as being pretentious, dishonest and basically someone uninterested in real debate but rather acting as some sort of shill, in your case it is clear it is as a CPC/Harper shill. However, the overall pattern is one that fits for all shills no matter whose/what service they are shilling in, and that is what betrays you yet again.
I also find it most amusing to see Harper defenders being critical about the length of my writing. It is odd, but only those that disagree with my POV have this problem, I have never received any complaints about length from those that do not fundamentally disagree with my POV, including those with whom I do have some disagreements with but in a respectful manner. It is only those uninterested in honest debate that use this rather petulant argument to try and dismiss me as a credible voice. One other common element appears to hold true as well, these folks also never are able to actually substantially refute what I actually say, the best they can do is refute that which they think/claim I said but that I actually did not, as you did regarding the Taliban liars argument of the CPC being falsely attributed to you when I clearly did no such thing.
Yet again by this you show yourself for what you truly are, for rather than try to actually refute what I am saying you are instead trying to dismiss, since it is far easier to dismiss than refute, especially when the facts are not on your side as is the case in this matter. Refutation also requires both command of the facts and the ability to critically examine them and be able to apply them in their proper contexts, something impossible to do when you only read selected bits instead of everything in original form/context. When you are reduced to attacking the form and not the substance you yet again reveal the hollowness of your arguments and the position you are in. This is the approach of one out to discredit regardless of the merits (or lack, it is not a considered element either way) of what they are trying to discredit, also the mark of a shill and also worse, a propagandist (although I am not making that claim against you, simply that it is also a sign/mark for them as well, I added this since you clearly have trouble telling these things unless they are spelled out given the way you misrepresented me already).
Speaking of which, I don’t recall ever saying you made the argument regarding the Taliban detainees being trained to lie, but it *IS* something that the Harper government has been claiming repeatedly as have many of its defenders. What I did do was tell you not to try to come back with it and provided the reasoning as to why, not that you already had. I did not claim what you said I did at all, that was your own projection at work. I have noticed you have a problem with that sort of rewriting the meaning of the words of those you disagree with before, yet another pattern of the intellectually dishonest.
So thank you for providing that much more evidence to support the contention that you are a CPC shill despite all of your protestations to being at all independent in your thinking. You are no better than any party shill/partisan, and because of that should be given limited credence because you will always seek to maximize the benefit to your side and maximize the damages to those you oppose, just like all partisans will. The difference between someone like you and someone like me is that I am not a partisan of any party and never have been. I choose each election where my support is going to go based on the context of that election and those running for both local riding and national leader. I have voted Liberal, NDP, PCPC, although I have never voted Reform/CA/CPC because I fundamentally oppose that Americanized vision for Canada.
I am though a dedicated opponent of Harper’s and this version of the CPC run by his coterie, which is not the same thing at all as being a partisan. I want him defeated, discredited, and his strain of conservativism removed from leadership within the CPC, and hopefully something more like the traditional PCPC will take over making this a party that once again represents true Canadian values and not this rhetorical fairy tale nonsense borrowed from their American GOP brethren and reworked somewhat to try and make it look like it is Canadian when it truly is not. Yet folks like you have constantly assumed/declared I was a Liberal operative, member, supporter, or brainwashed dupe by them. It is this kind of disrespect to contempt of all those not within this political comfort zone that makes the Reform/CA/CPC so dangerous to this country, it is antithetical to the way we have always operated in the past.
It has as QP has underscored severely poisoned the well with the level of hyperpartisanship the culture war politics Harper has embraced for Canadian Conservativism since 2003 (when he announced it in both policy speech and policy paper as LOO/CA leader, so this is not an empty smear no matter how much you want to claim it is) which is also anything but Canadian) requires/demands in order to work. This kind of polarization/radicalization of the populace into us versus them is the sort of thing we have spent our life as a nation trying to avoid and reduce and not to flame and encourage, in no small part because this country does not have the strong central national cultural identity built on myths like our American cousins to hold us together.
No, we are a nation bound together by our common vision for as our motto says peace, order and good government. These articles of faith may not be as sexy as life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, but they are no less important and valuable for human beings, and by following it we have created this great country. We are also a nation shaped by the tensions between two founding cultures as our kernel upon which we have developed into this multicultural society that so many Canadians are so proud of, which is also why our dynamics are particularly susceptible do damage from this intensity of polarization within our political environment and this is one of the reasons why I believe no ideologically defined party has ever held national government from wither side of the political spectrum. This is why Harper must stealth/cloak himself as a centrist/moderate more in the PCPC style than the old Calgary School Straussian that he really is that left the Reform party over his views clashing with Manning’s.
This is also something that is very disturbing about Harper that you apparently don’t have a problem with. He dislikes to outright hates Canada (and Canadians that believe in this vision of Canada, those socialist lefties he kept talking about throughout his adult life until the last few years when he *finally* realized the blatantly obvious that this was hurting him too much in the public) as it has evolved into, especially over the last few decades, yet most Canadians profoundly disagree with that POV. This hatred of most Canadians is rampant throughout the CPC, just listen to how they classify all those outside their political sphere of comfort/belief, which since that is roughly 2/3rds of all Canadian voters is not exactly inconsequential and also makes the use of most appropriate. Yet the party that decries the special interests and minorities dictating how this country should be run are actually the real minority politically in this nation and yet they are trying to dictate to us how this nation must be run even when we disagree with it. The irony/hypocrisy in that has always amazed me, along with the inability of those espousing these views to see it.
However, willful blindness is also a mark of the partisan, as well as the sheeplike follower, and your refusal to bother to try to read through my post(s) also indicates your preference to avoid that which you dislike/disagree with. This is also the pattern of someone that prefers to avoid harsh reality/facts, especially when they make that person uncomfortable than it is of those honest with themselves. So forgive me if I find you dismissal of me and my writings and especially my writing style as juvenile, pretentious, dishonest, and generally without anything worthy of serious consideration. It is no wonder you are so dismissed by so many here the way you are, and the only people you are fooling (besides yourself that is) are those already solidly in your camp politically, same as with Harper and the rest of this nation.
So keep it up, for each time you act this way you are almost certainly helping to drive more and more swing voters, especially progressive/centrist ones, away from the CPC. Keep in mind there are far more lurkers on blogs than actual commentators that publish at them, and somehow I doubt they find my work as easy to dismiss as you do. Incidentally, I am well aware of my own wordiness, I have on more than a few occasions mocked it myself. However, I also know that while I am wordy and verbose, I also have substantial commentary, and I will take substance over fluff any day but then I am not a CPCer. I find it truly laughable that on the one hand online CPCers complain that lefties don’t do anything other than smears and insults without substance, yet whenever someone writes in a substantial manner it is dismissed in the manner you did. If that does not show that CPCers are uninterested in any disagreement with their POV no matter what then nothing does.
I really enjoy reading your blog and reports. You’ve brought something completely new to politics; a QP from the public, with a response from an MP who actually cares to answer. Now, I put your question back to you; what do you think will happen to gas prices if Kyoto is implemented as the Liberals and NDP want it? Can Canada afford the economic consequences? I am not a politician and have no party affiliation, just a simple hardworking immigrant who is very concerned about the future of my new country. I wouldn’t want it fouled up like the old. I am getting older and wouldn’t want my children to have to run away from this place in the future. Please, give me an answer!
OV,
You’re doing just fine on your own, without a blow torch. However, chivalry requires a gentleman to defend a damsel in distress.
Eric,
You are a cad sir, for offending OV by doing whatever the heck you did, and are therefor summarily admonished. Let that be a lesson to you.
Be grateful OV didn’t instead, take the leash off Jackie and sic him on you. One of these days he might stop barking and actually bite someone.
Lawrence, you ignorant twit, are you afraid you might learn something? Or are you one of those old farts who are so sure that they have all of the answers they will not even give someone the courtesy of reading what was obviously a well thought out reply. You would rather be flippant and a smart mouth. If you are too busy you could leave.
… I skipped everything in the middle and went to the end…
So now I skip right to the end when I see it’s by you and I move right on to the next comment. You no longer deserve to be read. You have lost that courtesy.
And Scotian, Thank you, once again you have covered it well and completely and the CPC spies will go home to their master shivering because now they now know too.
Jackie,
I got my information from the Department of Justice. I never said shit about what the law is today, but what I indicated was what the law used to be (to contradict your misinformation regarding how the age of consent had been 14 for 100 years). So get your story right! You made the statement, I just showed how it was wrong.
Ed the Hun
Oh and Jackie the proposals I believe would include a clause to prevent prosecution between ‘teenagers’ (so your 15 year old boyfriend example is a throw away). The law is meant to prevent 21 year olds from have sexual relations with a 15 year old.
So there is nothing wrong with my ’story’ except it debunks whatever claims you were making earlier.
Ed the Hun
Too bad you prefer snappy sound byte to context and analysis.
I prefer clarity and precision over sloppy, meandering diatribes. Expecially when those diatribes begin by labelling me as a liar. It doesn’t hurt my feelings, as such, it just tells me that Scotian has nothing substantive to say. But boy he can take a long time to say it, eh?
The Income Trust issue ain’t over till the skinny lady sings “Writ drop, now run along and have an election†– OV
Read my posts, jackass. I never said it’s over. I said we should place priority on some other important issues.
Do you not have any comprehension?
Lord help us, there is a second volume.
If you are going to comment on what someone has written, if one is at all intellectually honest they read the whole thing so that they understand the context all is written in, especially if they are going to take issue with it.
I took issue with the portions that I quoted and I ignored the rest. Exactly as I said. So it’s your intellectual honesty that seems to be in question. I’m not averse to reading long posts – I have read and written some whoppers myself – but I refuse to read poorly constructed screeds, especially these “omnibus” type essays. All are bad, but yours in particular are constructed of run-on sentences so long and convoluted that they would asphyxiate the speaker if read aloud.
Too harsh? Well, what the hell, you called me a liar for having the temerity to hold a different opinion from you (I guess). Not too sporting, that.
Last paragraph again…
So keep it up, for each time you act this way you are almost certainly helping to drive more and more swing voters, especially progressive/centrist ones, away from the CPC.
Why would my impatience with you have any effect – at all – on the fortunes of the CPC or on anyone else? I think you are seriously over-estimating the importance of these discussion.
Keep in mind there are far more lurkers on blogs than actual commentators that publish at them, and somehow I doubt they find my work as easy to dismiss as you do.
Well, no self-esteem issues here. That’s very good. Myself, I think lurkers are pretty rare creatures. Those I have encountered tend to enjoy snappy patter over droning self-involvement. But, like I say, I haven’t met that many. In any case, I don’t write for them – or for the Bushitler/Harperite cabal, even – I write for you Scotian, and for anyone else who wants to talk about stuff.
Incidentally, I am well aware of my own wordiness, I have on more than a few occasions mocked it myself.
Good for you, maybe you should next try to improve it. Here’s a little tip; run-on sentences are disrespectful of the reader. Take time to make your thoughts clear and concise, it really helps.
However, I also know that while I am wordy and verbose, I also have substantial commentary, and I will take substance over fluff any day but then I am not a CPCer.
Yeah, you mentioned that…
I find it truly laughable that on the one hand online CPCers complain that lefties don’t do anything other than smears and insults without substance, yet whenever someone writes in a substantial manner it is dismissed in the manner you did. If that does not show that CPCers are uninterested in any disagreement with their POV no matter what then nothing does.
Well, you just keep railing against those CPCers, Scotian. They sound like nasty folks indeed, and I wish you well in your attempt to crush them under the weight of your words.
…are you one of those old farts who are so sure that they have all of the answers they will not even give someone the courtesy of reading what was obviously a well thought out reply.
“obviously?” I don’t think that’s obvious at all. Clear thinking is reflected in clear writing. You should read this…
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/orwell46.htm
It’s a little long, but it’s a brilliant essay about the power of good writing.
Mr. Garvin:
Pounding on the table again, hmmm? I think you have quote clearly shown yourself for exactly what you are, someone more interested in playing partisan than in actually being intellectually honest and interested in real debate. Just like the party and PM you so clearly support. I am not going to waste my time rebutting you yet again, besides your own words have already condemned you as a dishonest shill/partisan, all I did was show how they did so and you promptly responded in a manner which only underscored this reality as I noted in my third comment in this thread.
Nice try Mr. Garvin to try and reduce this to your standard smear and deception, but it will not work with me, I don’t bite so easily. I provide the reasoning for why I hold a particular POV as well as what that POV is, and those unable to refute the reasoning while claiming the conclusions are wrong/lies only show themselves for the dishonest tools that they are. Yet you appear most comfortable labeling all those that disagree with you as partisan shills and liars, well in this thread we have conclusively shown that this is pure projection of your own traits/faults onto those you cannot refute on substantive and factually honest grounds. Hypocrisy is an ugly thing, and the level at which you practice it in this manner only underscores that reality.
Good day to you sir, you have clearly shown you are not worth taking seriously, which is hilarious given your own demands to be taken seriously. Try extending the courtesies you wish to receive instead of only demanding it while never showing it. It is also called practicing what one preaches, something you clearly have some degree of difficulty with, as does the government/party and leader you so clearly support. Coincidence? Somehow I suspect not.
Hun I could care less . You are quoting from ancient texts .
I have no further interest in this debate.
Scotian harrumphs: “Good day to you sir”
Seeya.
You know what’s really funny? Close to a year ago I went through the exact same exercise with this guy. Only that time, I actually refuted his diatribe, point by point. Back then he didn’t even bother to wish me a “good day” – he just disappeared instead. So I guess his manners are improving at least.
The picture you have used is one that was taken when Harper was in opposition. At least be honest about that please. There is no connection between this picture and anything that may have happened in the House today.
Same guys. Same attitude. — Garth
Um, Garth, can you take in a laptop with a webcam and record these idiots? Just keep the camera trained on them the entire QP. Then post the highlights on MPtv.
I’m serious.
Bill wrote,
“Oh, yes, and let us not forget the shame the opposition paries hold in their gutless silence allowing May hung out to dry!”
You reap the seeds that you sew and May deserved everything she received for her comments. She just blew a good chuck of her credibility for being a serious party leader of a credible party instead a wing nut of a fringe party. Even the Jewish council were comments were deserved.
Jackie,
Fine by me. Just keeping the facts on the table.
Ed the Hun
You’re right. QP is a joke. I’ve always thought so and I’ve always wondered how they’re allowed to continue with such childish behaviour. What if all the Liberal MPs sat quietly and listened while the opposition spoke? What if they started today and continued every day forward with this new idea… that QP is a place for orderly debate and not a free-for-all for shouting down the other side while they’re trying to ask a question. Imagine QP when a Conservate MP stood to ask a question, expect a barage of insults and shouting, only to receive silence and a proper response. Then, when a Liberal MP stood to ask a question but was yelled at and shouted down, wouldn’t that make the opposition look incredibly bad?
I say, lead by example. Be the better man. Rally your Liberal buddies and start a revolution. Change QP for the better by starting with your own actions.
QP is certainly a joke and so is our media.
Yesterday, our illustrious Canadian media blasted and kept repeating the story about Nanoon and the detainees. However, the same day, DND issued a news release to clarify this story. None of them reported it!
See the actual DND news release:
http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/newsroom/view_news_e.asp?id=2273
So it leads me to question their motives:
1. Our main stream media uses rush to judgement to capture headlines, without actually clarifying their sources.
or
2. Our main stream media have a hidden agenda. Could they possible want to drive our government policies? Could they be afraid of “soldiers in our streets”? Could they want to use mediums to bash Conservatives? Could they want to play with peoples emotions, like we are like little lab rats?
or
3. Our main stream media are just plain incompetant. Then, their university degrees were a waste of their money and time!
Van,
I really suggest you re-visit your ESL instructor, and then come back and say something people can understand.
Here are a few clues:
sew-to join materials together by stitching
sow-to plant seeds; a female pig; someone from the Deep South attempting to say ’sour.’
Have a nice May day!
Ed the Huh?,
To protect a child’s physical, emotional and even sexual well-being is a ‘far-right’ attitude?
By Ed the Hun on 05.03.07 7:58 pm
Ed, do you only selectively read comments or are you simply too ignorant to comprehend them?
Billy,
Your comments:
“Regarding the Age of Consent Bill, I agree we need to be very careful how the law is written. Thompson is on about parents wanting to maintain control, and as a parent, I can fully understand his point, yet, there are parents who drive their children away with abuse both physical/sexual and psychological.
He, of course, will drag in anything he deems supportive of his far right Conservative position. Regardless, he at least does it with decorum, which is how debate is to be conducted.”
Now first off, too bad you can’t find it to debate in a similarly constructive manner, like that ‘far-right’ conservative Thompson. But name calling has always been a big part of your arsenal.
You bring into the discussion Thompson’s (and every Conservative (and in this case specifically the Reform/Alliance position) support of the position to raise the age of consent and make reference to his ‘far-right conservative ideals’.
If Thompson is a ‘far-right’ conservative, the drive to raise the age of consent comes from that same ‘far right’ conservative ideals. This has been a policy of Reform/Alliance well before the amalgamation of the right.
So you decide, is Thompson far-right who is supporting a ‘far-right’ policy (which is OPPOSED by the liberals and ndp and bloc) or is the ‘far left’ opposing a bill that is right/central?
You can’t have your cake and eat it too. The left has for many years opposed raising the age of consent.
Ed the Hun