The motion below was filed today with the House of Commons standing committe on Finance, in light of news (more of it coming in the next days, I hear) that the minister of finance has a habit of spending taxpayers’ money freely, even when it breaks the rules.
For example, you and I paid for this speech. It cost $122,000 and Jim Flaherty bought it from a commercial speechwriter without tendering the job, even though that’s illegal. You’d think, with an entire media relations department in Finance, along with the minister’s own communications director, and his personal staff, plus the communications department in the PMO, that they could have written it themselves. Hell, maybe Mr. Flaherty could even have done it on his own government-issued laptop, as he took the VIA train back to Whitby. Just asking. After all, it takes two average families in Canada an entire year to earn $122,000 between them.
In any case, here’s my motion. We vote on it Wednesday.
That the committee hold a hearing on February 25 to investigate the tendering process for contracts in the Department of Finance, in view of the disproportionate share of awarded contracts priced between $24,000 and $24,999 and therefore falling just below the level at which contracts must be subject to competitive tendering, and in view of the $122,000 in untendered contracts awarded to the company of Hugh MacPhie, a former speech-writer for the Mike Harris Ontario government, to which the Finance Minister has admitted that “administrative functions were not followed.” It is recommended that the committee call the Minister of Finance, the President of the Treasury Board, senior officials from the Department of Finance, and Mr. Hugh MacPhie to appear as witnesses before the committee.
111 comments ↓
$122,000 for a f#$kin speech!?
That’s ridiculous!…Never mind that the contract wasn’t processed legally…
Unfortunately the only way you can get milage out of this and a conclusion is to keep the government going long enough
Isn’t it fun watching Stevie run for an election every time his parties incompitance is exposed?
Prime Minister Mini-Me Cans Science Advisor
by Lloyd Alter, Toronto on 02.11.08
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/02/prime_minister_1.php
This picture of Harper is worth the visit!!!
Jim Flaherty admitted right away that the contract should have been tendered. When the previous government with their majorities would be asked about the many, many, many un-tendered contracts they handed out (listening Scott?), they denied, denied, denied. That pile under the rug was so huge, it was the largest piece of furniture in the room. Jim said right away, yes, you are right, that was wrong. The liberals used to contract their speeches, but they always paid in installments, each under the magical $25K. I guess Jim wasn’t deceiving enough to try to hide the costs. He missed the ’sneaky & crafty’ 101 class held by the Liberals.
Jim, “yes, you are right, I was wrong.” How refreshing!
…with the intent of formulating policy recommendations to prevent similar administrative shortfalls in the future.”
You’ll probably want to run some talent over to the Auditor General’s to collect whatever has been done for, shall we say, previous administrations. May as well work ahead of the predictable.
First blush leads me to believe the Accountability(sic) Act needs some tightening up to get those split tenders under control. or not. makes for a lousy read.
Transparent?
Accountable?
Honest?
strike one, strike two, strike three…
It must be hard to be a CPC troll; denial, denial, denial.
These clowns are the worst I have seen.
I hope the motion passes and the Commons Committee gets to work on this issue pronto!
I hope John Baird’s alleged political interference in the Ottawa mayoral race also is investigated – and that the police expand their current investigation to include a review of Baird’s possible involvement.
Governments of all political stripes need to be held accountable for their transgressions. This is not a partisan issue. It is one that strikes at the heart of a well functioning democracy.
Garth – there is now fixed election dates. Harper, as I heard it, may go to the GG to bring the government down. Can this be done legally? I thought a government could request to be brought down under the new rules – only parliament could bring the government down?
How can he have it both ways?
Harper making his own rules as he goes here?
Flaherty didn’t say anything until he was caught. Again, they’ll blame the Liberals – go figure eh?
Hey, the Liberals may have gotten good value for money too – sounds like they did better when you consider the cost of an “8 page” speech – good grief.
Well, well, let’s see how things are looking for qall of us with the financial wizardry of people like Dim Sum Jim running the shows? nOw, obviously Dim SUm Jim is MNOPT responsible for any of the following. He is responsible to have a handle on what thesey mean and to safeguard Canada’s financial future within the scope of his power granted by law. Part of that might be keeping the coffers well stocked so when the Shit Hits The Fan (And Boy, oh Boy, is this gonna be a Gigantic WAD this go around!), the nation will not go into massive debt like the last Conservative PM took us.
We’re juggling record household debt
Canadians are juggling record debt loads averaging $80,000 per household including mortgage debt, says the author of a new report, and he warns job losses would push many families over a fiscal cliff.
“If we do have a recession, we wouldn’t be as badly off as the U.S.,” says Roger Sauvé, a consultant who wrote The Current State of Canadian Family Finances, released yesterday. “But a lot of households couldn’t keep up.”
GM reports largest yearly auto industry loss
GM said it lost US$38.7 billion in 2007. The loss largely was due to a third-quarter charge related to unused tax credits.
Unused Tax Credits? Oh yeah, it’s the government’s fault, not GM’s pissant management ideology.
GM reports largest loss ever, offers buyouts to 74,000 U.S. workers
General Motors Corp. reported the largest annual loss for an automotive company Tuesday and said it is making a new round of buyout offers to U.S. hourly workers as it struggles to turn around its North American business amid a weak economy.
Ah, but will the CEO, CFO, V.P’s and such suffer? Naw! Just the workers. Poor shareholders (who don;t do Jack Squat to actually make a product) must be protected, so the manglement pyramid scheme can continue. While GM struggles? Give me a friggin’ break. How about the people with, rent, car loans (probably payable to GMAC Finance, mortgages and families who rely on that job to make ends meet?
Excluding the tax charge and other special items, GM lost $23 million US, or four cents per share, for the year, compared with a net income of $2.2 billion US in 2006, beating Wall Street’s expectations.
…
GM’s results were also dragged down by its 49 per cent stake in GMAC Financial Services, which lost $2.3 billion US in 2007. GM reported a $1.1-billion US loss attributed to GMAC.
Oh yeah! Poor, poor GM! The poor Corporate Monster!
If Harper has a secret, it’s scary
Consider the possibility that Stephen Harper sees the way he runs the country as the Buckley’s Mixture approach to government: It tastes awful. And it works.
For a majority of Canadians, though, it doesn’t seem to. Work, that is.
Yes, Stephen Harper’s Canada includes Quebec. Unfortunately, based on the evidence (his visceral disdain for premiers’ conferences is another clue), it apparently includes 10 Quebecs.
Each province separate, each independent, each a distinct society, each entirely self-sufficient.
Yes, Unity is the Name, Deception is the game. That way Steve can show Bush his new Bang Bang toys he bought with the money we need for people here, infrastructure HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE…Remember? Cananda, OUR country and HOME?
Good morning, $122,000 for a untentered speech, hmmm how much has the last appointed Senator made Miniter of Bag Money given away in untenderd contracts and has he ever reported to our H of C for discussion? hmmm the PM can invite himself to Senate so it would appear to this taxpayer a Senator/Mister could invite himself to talk to Canadians via the H of C….just a thought.
Leasa, I’m not sure the point of what you are arguing. Two wrongs does not make a right, and until the Canadian public cry outrage and insist an end to such behaviour it will never stop. That goes for both the Liberals (past and future) and the present Conservatives.
Regardless of who you support or who is in power, you and the rest of us should be up in arms that politicians throw our tax dollars out to their friends so freely.
Perhaps there should be a list put forward of activities that cannot be contracted out but must instead be done by reasonably paid government staff. Speech writing would make sense to fall under such an umbrella I would think. Obviously common sense does not come into play with our politicians (Garth excluded of course!), so rules limiting how they can waste our tax dollars need to be added…. especially around the PM and his ministers!
Mr Garth TurnerMP,
This morning I just saw some of the Senate Committe on National Finance from Feb 6, on CPAC.
The ‘Progesive Conservative Senator’.
Senator Lowell Murray, is not at all happy with the way Bill C-41 was passed the house of Commons. Only 11 mintutes. to pass a 1 Billion dallar spending bill.
Jim Flaherty admitted right away that the contract should have been tendered.
By Leasa on 02.12.08 8:27 am
Oh – well if he admitted right away, then it’s OK.
Leasa – I appreciate that you are partisan, and you admit it. However, there are times when things can be non-partisan, and also a correct critism of the government. If it is illegal to award contracts above $25,000 without a tender, then it’s illegal – whether he admits or not right way. If they are awarding contracts between 24 K and 24,999 (just under the limit) – then this is highly suspect, and very bad optics.
Besides, if there are speech writers on staff – then why aren’t they doing their job? What speeches are they writing then? Why do any speeches need to be contracted out? You don’t think $122,000 could be better spent?
Flaherty – $122,000
Mulroney – $275,000
.
.
.
Chretien – $40,000,000 (Sponsorship-Gomery)
Garth .. will you and your Liberal colleagues go after the big money and not the chump change ..??!!!
I wasn’t in Ottawa then, but didn’t we have a big inquiry into that? Did the Gomery Report, which Mr. Harper supported and encouraged, not cost $60 million? — Garth
I was wondering about that. Glad to hear you know that offhand.
link(s)?
Don’t hold your breath. — Garth
Mr Garth TurnerMP,
FYI (6min)
If Americans Knew What We Did to Iran, Would We Still Talk About Using Force?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/if-americans-knew-what-we_b_86035.html
and miss out on the chance to enjoy the fragrant cybersweat of The Machine’s research department? perish the thought.
By Harry S on 02.12.08 9:34 am
Two points Harry,
1. Mr. Harper promised that his government would be squeaky clean. The crap’s starting to stick. I guess he forgot to add the Teflon.
2. And Harry, the investigation by Gomery into the “Liberal-Adscam” was ordered by the Liberal PM Paul Martin.
Will Mr. Harper do the right thing and order an investigation into the tendering practices by incompetant Flaherty and the Department of Finance?
Probably not, because he wants to keep his dirty laundry hidden, especially as an election is looming.
Great idea for some new taxes in Ottawa.
http://www.canada.com/windsorstar/news/editorial/story.html?id=342ddc27-c74d-442b-b504-a4bf0e3b74b5
Mr Garth TurnerMP,
Time To Panic Over Climate Change!
http://stephenleahy.wordpress.com/2008/02/11/time-to-panic-over-climate-change/
Admitting to granting an untendered contract isn’t a way to get off the hook, Leasa, otherwise Chrétien’s team would have admitted to all the waste and gotten off without an inquiry. Plus, I just took at a look at the speech, and it sounds like the minister got ripped off of 122k. I was told by a former civil servant that actual research and recommendation reports go for 50k for 50 pages, eight years ago. Here, it’s 22 pages with lots of white space, and certainly doesn’t present much research! Jim the Leprechaun could have at least bothered charging less than 25k for that PoS (piece of speech)!
Jim Flaherty admitted right away that the contract should have been tendered. When the previous government with their majorities would be asked about the many, many, many un-tendered contracts they handed out (listening Scott?), they denied, denied, denied. That pile under the rug was so huge, it was the largest piece of furniture in the room. Jim said right away, yes, you are right, that was wrong. The liberals used to contract their speeches, but they always paid in installments, each under the magical $25K. I guess Jim wasn’t deceiving enough to try to hide the costs. He missed the ’sneaky & crafty’ 101 class held by the Liberals.
Jim, “yes, you are right, I was wrong.” How refreshing!
You see this is the Con response to everything “Well the Liberals did it” That still soesn’t make it right even if you admit it after the fact, you knew doing it was wrong in the first place, kind of shows the scorn you hold for transparency, doesn’t it. Jean Chretien had it right when the Cons made fun of his mouth. “True I talk out of one side of my mouth, not like the Conservatives to talk out of both sides”
Leasa
By Leasa on 02.12.08 8:27 am
The Gomery Report, which Mr. Harper supported and encouraged, not cost $60 million? — Garth
Absolutely right Garth. This is a big question among the C voters I know and Mr. Harper will have to answer the question come election time which is;
Why have the Conservatives not found the $40M which went to the Liberals for election purposes and which MP`s were elected on the dirty money.
It is by far the largest single failure of the `new government` and it will cost them at the polls as that was the sole purpose many voters supported Mr. Harper. `They didn`t get it done`.
btw how much is the fencing company that gouged tax payers kicking back to the Conservatives.
We need a Liberal majority to bring back some honesty to politics.
(Reposted from the Memo To MP’s Topic)
Don’t you guys have anybody just a little bit smarter in the PMO that issues those talking points? Even an IQ a couple of degrees higher may make more sense than what y’all are being fed now.
By Emilie on 02.12.08 8:34 am
No, they have to share a brain, Harper’s, and we all know that a committee is at least four or more people sharing a brain.
This is in perfect alignment with Mike Harris’ ‘Common Sense Revolution.’ (One ’sense’ which, of course, is little sense at all). Cut back essential services at all costs. Privatize everything (thinking, press conferences, records ala Black Marker they could even make a TV show called ‘Black Marker’, Hey! Black Adder’ worked fine, eh?, etc.)
Man, I am definitely in the wrong business.
Speech writing is far more profitable.
I gotta get me some of those contracts!
Mr Garth TurnerMP,
FYI (15min, February 11, 2008)
Dr. Ron Paul’s Latest Presedental Campaign Update – Calls for March on Washington!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryMliyeIDp4
And now for something completely different!
Good Morning – There is some excellent material out there thanks to it being the U.S. presidential primary season.
*** Hillary Pillaries***
Hillary Clinton, in the race to be the Democratic Party Presidential candidate, is for banning all guns in America. She is considered by those who have dealt with her as more than just a little self-righteous.
At a recent rural elementary school meeting in northern Florida she asked the kids in the audience for total quiet. Then, in the silence, she started to slowly clap her hands, once every few seconds.
Holding the audience in total silence, she said into the microphone, “Every time I clap my hands, a child in America dies from gun violence.”
A young voice with a proud southern accent (probably Johnny) from the front of the crowd pierced the quiet! “Well, stop clappin’, ya stupid woman!”
*** Top Barack Obama Campaign Slogans
Barack to the future!
Because the whole “slow-witted Texan with a safe-sounding name” thing didn’t work out so well.
Face it, America: It’s me or the Ice Woman.
Once you go Barack, you never go back.
Not Hillary Clinton for president.
Your last chance for a black president before the country’s overrun by Mexicans.
He beats Hillary hands down in the bathing suit competition!
Obama: Just pretend he’s Irish.
America: Movin’ on up!
It’s time for a different B.O. in the White House.
Restoring English as the official language of the State of the Union addresses. (My favorite)
You don’t think $122,000 could be better spent?
By Tim N on 02.12.08 9:23 am
Now, that Tim is the best question of the day! The answer is yes.
I can’t remember where or when exactly that I wrote it…but you know what? Nothing will ever change. I can recite an endless list of wasted tax payer’s dollars from the $1000s to the $1,000,000s by every government at every level.
For one brief example, in Ontario we spent I believe is was in the neighbourhood of $160,000,000 to change our logo from the simple trillium to one of three men in a hot tub. (I could be getting the figure mixed up with any number of other brilliant projects, so don’t hold me to it)
Can you show me, in our recent history, say going back only 50 years where there hasn’t been ‘un-tendered contracts’, hiring of friends, wasted or lost money? I’d love to see it and you’d restore my faith in the process.
Let’s face it, all we can do is vote for any party with the least history of scandal and waste. I also believe that party leader’s faces change, but the party itself never does.
So, okay, we go into an election which we don’t need, waste millions of more dollars, say Dion does win. Are you telling me we won’t be having the same discussions about the same things two years from now? If so, I would say that is real magical thinking of an optimist gone wild.
Is what I’m saying an endorsement of the CPC? Is what I’m saying and endorsement of any government or party? Or is what I am saying simply the truth with every democratic government heavy country in this world?
Tim, could you imagine what people like you and I could do with the waste?
Leasa
I think I have also figured out why John McCain has some dissent in the Rethuglican Party?
They heard he manufacturers, offshore in Canuckistan, tonnes of French Fries?
Can’t have those French Fries after 9/11 ya’ll know! They be called ‘Freedumb Fries’ now!
Mr Garth TurnerMP,
For those how still aren’t sure about climate change, and mist this.
You should see ‘How it all ends’. 10min.
http://wonderingmind42.wordpress.com/
I wasn’t in Ottawa then, but didn’t we have a big inquiry into that? Did the Gomery Report, which Mr. Harper supported and encouraged, not cost $60 million? — Garth
………………………………….
I think it was then PM Paul Martin that signed the cheques for the Gomery Inquiry … that he even initiated and named Gomery too.
Didn’t all MPs supported and encouraged the Gomery Inquiry ??
Then remind your buddy, PVL. — Garth
Serious question Garth and I won`t hold you to a definite, your opinion is all I ask.
I`ve been studying government programs. Not the unfunded feel good ones but the ones that were actually funded. The results of programs like the gun registry, adscam and now this million dollar fence are part of the long and amazing list that will soon include Bill C-2 which I`ll get to in a minute.
Cretien said about adscam that `a few millions are missing, it was good for the country` tells me that of the two priority that all programs share, skimming off the top is more important than what the program will do for whichever political party is in power.
C-2 won`t reduce the amount of crime, it won`t even slow it down so I must assume the Conservatives have a lot of friends in building construction looking for work building prisons and court houses.
Other programs attract voters such as the court challenges of which lawyers certainly make a bundle but the main benefit is to the party that runs it.
I`m leaning to the opinion that the majority of programs allow heavy skimming over party benefit.
From your long personal experience does skimming take priority over party benefits when considering a government program?
Serious question? — Garth
Speech writing is far more profitable.
I gotta get me some of those contracts!
By Bill-Muskoka on 02.12.08 10:36 am
You might have a small problem with plagiarism. Your baseball bat speech you gave last year is a KKK trade marked slogan.
Thrw the crook in jail, where he belongs – but not before waterboarding him.
By Leasa on 02.12.08 8:27 am
You should have learned by now that you can’t defend malfeasance by pointing at the Liberals and say, “Well, they did it, too!”
The Conservatives promised to be better than the Liberals, remember?
Other than making an apology and looking like a fool, is there any other penalty? If not, what is going to keep it from happening again? That’s the important question.
Who is to be held accountable for this, Leasa? Or, do you think an apology is enough?
Leasa…Your problem isn;t that you aren’t putting the CPC down…the problem is that you are constantly making excuses for them…I don’t hear you screaming transparency and honesty very often anymore…How will your fearless leader win the next election…He can’t use accountability, transparency, etc…. What is he going to run on ‘leadership”…My my, amazing how fascists are the first to throw away their rights for the “leader”…
Accountable??? Honest??? Transparent???
These words were fit more for Paul Martin, but definitly NOT Harper…
At least the Liberals had the guts to call an investigation into themselves…Harper would NEVER EVER do that…and that Leasa is the cold, hard truth…
Let’s face it, all we can do is vote for any party with the least history of scandal and waste.
By Leasa on 02.12.08 10:49 am
Ah, that would be the Green Party then?
Didn’t all MPs supported and encouraged the Gomery Inquiry ??
Then remind your buddy, PVL. — Garth
I can hear the sputtering from here. LMAO!
Mr Garth TurnerMP,
FYI
Venezuela’s oil minister says country ’ready’ to cut off oil to US
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/international/americas/view.bg?articleid=1073006
The cons kept claiming that it’s OK to break the law if you get good value for money. That’s what they’re saying, out loud, in English and French!!! Laws are not important if you get a good deal. This is what they’re saying. Rules are only for those who don’t have a friend they can trust to do the work, like maybe someone who used to work for Mike Harris.
This is open and transparent? Talk about corrupt. They won’t even acknowledge they’re corrupt.
Mr Garth TurnerMP,
FYI
Russia, China challenge US with proposal to ban space weapons
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Russia_China_bid_to_ban_weapons_0212.html
By got rope? on 02.12.08 10:54 am
Got Rope. I could tell you stuff that would make you vomit. But I won’t because I can’t. Does your very good question apply only to the Federal government? I can say this: let’s say a government funded program of $15 million, the report to the public is that it only cost $200K to administer, but in fact they spent $1.4 million as they spent the interest on the money. How’s that for skimming? All perfectly legal so let the good times roll.
Nuff said. Good question. Leasa
By Leasa on 02.12.08 10:49 am
Absolutely agree.
But, does that mean we should just give up and acknowledge that nothing can be done to stop it? Do we accept a hollow apology when they get caught red-handed, or do we make an example of the perpetrators and throw the book at them?
Leasa, I don’t want to give up striving for a more transparent and accountable government. You may be resigned to failure, but I do not accept that.
Apathy grows year after year, election turnouts go down. Why? All partys are the same, it doesn’t matter who you vote for; they are all looking to feather their own beds.
How do we change it? How do we hold them accountable?
Bill-Muskoka on 02.12.08 10:30 am,
Remember Stephen Harper’s campaign slogan when running for the leadership of the Conservative Party: One Conservative Voice. Those who voted for him accepted that concept and it has been the guiding principle of the party ever since.
By Nelson G on 02.12.08 11:07 am
Hi Nelson, the Liberals had no choice. However, section 5 served them nicely. Paul Martin is not a stupid man.
**************
Bill… Ms. May? No thanks. Thanks for asking though. My point is; even if Ms. May got elected as PM, we’d be having this same discussion in two years after the election. This is the same discussion probably word for word in some cases that is going on in every democratic government-heavy country on this globe.
This is all we do in Canada. We lament over the backyard fence, the latest waste of our tax dollars. It will never change. Ever.
I was told recently at a meeting “as long as **** and I are in this office, this will never happen again.” Point: ‘as long as **** and I are in this office’. Meaning: until we are out. LOL
Leasa
By Bill-Muskoka on 02.12.08 11:07 am
Great answer. The only ones who are qualified, are the ones who have never been elected.
I was going to suggest someone calculate a scandal factor. It wouldn’t be fair if it is based on the aggregate number of scandals because Canada’s Natural Ruling Party forms the government so much of the time.
Perhaps, the statistic we need is the number of scandals divided by the number of years the administration governed.
Leasa, if you have time, would you mind calculating the scandal factors for the Chretien administration, the Mulroney administration, and the Trudeau administration?
We could use that as a benchmark on accountability.
Thanks
From your long personal experience does skimming take priority over party benefits when considering a government program?
Serious question? — Garth
By got rope? on 02.12.08 10:54 am
I`ve been looking a programs that actually benefit the public and I can`t find any including Bill C-2 so there are only two, not three things that are considered. Don`t be offended Garth, your threads are all about power so I`m not asking where you place your priorities, just the general view of the priorities of political parties.
Your pension splitting plan is about as close as anything I`ve seen as far as a benefit to the public goes but then you`ve watched the government create huge numbers of public service jobs which costs more that what is saved by pension income splitting. The balance remains negative, saving some in taxes while spending more tax dollars, a positive for Liberals whereas making the employment situation would be bad for Liberals. Your priority of power and not profit is admirable.
Simple question.
From your long personal experience does skimming take priority over party benefits when considering a government program?
How do we change it? How do we hold them accountable?
By Ed Brooks on 02.12.08 11:15 am
(gosh, I have to get some work done!) LOL. Ed, I was a fighter, I’ve done it all it seems at times. Ed, we live in a time where there is no such thing as ethics, accountability or transparency in any government at any time. It will not happen. This blog will not make it happen. An electon won’t make it happen. I’ve learned this lesson the hard way. I’ve wasted a year and a half of my life working for these very concepts. Try working on a review and bringing important things to light, only to find when the ball finally reaches the bottom to be told you can’t read the findings? ‘Not to be released to the public’. Try it. You won’t like it. Try being told after 1000s of hours of work and research, “yes we were wrong, but we are not accountable”.
They are all the same. The ignorant are truly blessed. Leasa
From your long personal experience does skimming take priority over party benefits when considering a government program?
Serious question? – Garth
By got rope? on 02.12.08 10:54 am
Before you go banning me for raising the specter of power vs profit I`ll remind you your Party wants a carbon trading scheme which is nothing more than a super sized oil for food program.
How’s that for skimming? All perfectly legal so let the good times roll.
Nuff said. Good question. Leasa
By Leasa on 02.12.08 11:13 am
Most Cdns that are conscious 1 minute or longer during any given day know about the incredible amount of corruption that all levels of government and all agencies connected to government swim in. It`s wasn`t the issue I brought up.
Most agencies are all about power, profit remains in the domain of the most powerful such as the justice industry.
The issue or rather the question, are the bulk of funded government programs decided on power or profit? Curious minds want to know our politicians better.
Garth, Are you not at least happy the taxpayers recieved good value for the money spent for the speech? We should all take Jims word for it and not look into it deeper. Unless you think that politicians might not always be completly honest, then by all means look into it.
Do we accept a hollow apology when they get caught red-handed, or do we make an example of the perpetrators and throw the book at them?
Ed Brooks on 02.12.08 11:15 am
lol, dreamer. The unelected court party runs this country on a profit sharing basis. Who`s going to do the throwing?
Hey wait a minute, didn`t you say the next election will turn this country in the right direction. I really do love the entertainment value of this blog.
btw Garth, as the title of your posts implies, just asking.
By Leasa on 02.12.08 10:49 am
By Ed Brooks on 02.12.08 11:15 am
Leasa – That has to be one of the few posts that I almost 100% agree on with you.
But I disagree on “Let’s face it, all we can do is vote for any party with the least history of scandal and waste.”
We CAN kick the lying theiving bastards out. They work for us – the voters. We can hold them accountable to their promises, and boot them from office when they lie and steal from us.
If we re-elect “them”, in this specific case Harper and crew, we condone their actions, and then we only have ourselves to blame. Why did the “past” Liberals get away with the Sponsership scandle, HSDC, Shawinigate, etc… because we kept re-electing them back into office. Well, you know what, no more from this voter.
The parties won’t change until we, as voters and citizens, demand that they do change. And until we start making a stink about it – and voting them out when they screw us over, nothing will change.
Governments of all political stripes need to be held accountable for their transgressions. This is not a partisan issue. It is one that strikes at the heart of a well functioning democracy.
By TS on 02.12.08 8:42 am
And this means a “REAL”, with teeth in it, “Transparency Act”
(What do I mean by “with teeth in it?
Serious penalties for withholding ANY info from the public. (not to include info that would injure our national defense) (With a security committee made up of members from all parties to watch over.)
One that NO government can abridge.
(Maybe added it to the constitution???)
Come on guys, what are you afraid of? The Canadian people?
We could use that as a benchmark on accountability.
Thanks
By Ed Brooks on 02.12.08 11:22 am
That would be possible if we had all the required data.
A friend of mine spent several years looking at revenue (taxes) vs expenditures of the federal government. The undeniable conclusion was that the amount of unaccounted money ran between $20B and $40 B a year, it simply `disappeared`. The mystery of how this much money could simply disappear without so much as leaving one scrap of paper then became the target of the investigation. No one could understand how that much could be skimmed off without a lot of people knowing which apparently no one did.
The only place that much money could be moved without notice by any other than the movers is the Bank of Canada.
Not to worry, the next election will put Canada back on track, but what track I ask?
…The liberals used to contract their speeches, but they always paid in installments, each under the magical $25K.
…
By Leasa on 02.12.08 8:27 am
I was wondering about that. Glad to hear you know that offhand.
link(s)?
Don’t hold your breath. — Garth
By Brian Dondo on 02.12.08 9:36 am
Brian,
Glad to see that you are right on the job. Leasa has been caught flat out lying before. Nothing she says should be taken at face value.
Well done.
Gord
Ed Brooks on 02.12.08 11:15 am,
You also have the case of Wajid Khan, the Liberal MP that Harper delegated to be his advisor on the Middle East and was sent there to provide a public report on the issue. He made the trip but the report has remained a mystery.
Khan then crossed the floor and joined the Conservative government. It was then learned that he was under investigation by Elections Canada and was charged on two counts.
He was then sent packing from caucus and sat as an independent. Eventually the courts only fined him $500 for over-spending his election budget as established by law by $30,000 which was paid for by a third party (his business). They accepted his “ignorance of the law” argument (how many people have been able to get away on that basis in our courts?). He was then welcomed back into the party caucus. I wonder if Khan was still a Liberal would this have been treated as such a minor issue?
Then we have the case of laundering federal money through the constituency accounts so they could overspend on the federal campaign and then try to get reimbursed at the riding level for the laundered money? You have the richest political party in Canada trying to manipulate the system in order to feed at the public trough.
We also have 40 per cent of military contracting being done on an uncompetitive tendering basis. In fact, in at least one case the company that got the contract was involved in formulating the terms for that contract. This concept of writing a contract so that only one company is eligible was done under the Liberals but it appears that the strategy has actually been expanded under the Conservatives.
It is no wonder that Harper wants an election. Remember when Chretien called the election against the advice of many in the caucus and the party? Chretien wanted to have the election over before the Adscam broke. There were rumors before he called that election snap elections, after only three years into his mandate, that there was trouble brewing.
It is amazing how quickly the Harper government is beginning to look like a government that has been in power for at least two terms.
Proposed House Ethics Committee Resolution
To Garth Turner’s motion, I add the following resolution to be dealt with by the House Ethics Committee:
“That this committee as soon as possible resolve to censure, remove from office and submit for prosecution by the appropriate authorities Stephen Harper, Jim Flaherty, Mark Carney and other members of the Conservative Government for injustices and crimes against Canada, its citizens and its institutions, as evidenced by the following actions (amongst others):
1) Lying to Canadians (and especially seniors and retirees) about income trusts, thereby unnecessarily and unconscionably causing, amongst other effects, a $35 billion loss to their savings and putting in jeopardy their financial futures.
2)Aiding and abetting the takeover of sovereign Canadian businesses by wealthy private, foreign or undemocratic state-owned wealth funds at the expense of ordinary, average Canadians and other Canadian companies.
3)Lying to Canadians (and especially those in the Atlantic and Saskatchewan provinces) about the Atlantic Accord and the retention of natural resource revenues.
4)Lying to Canadian aboriginals with respect to the Kelowna Accord.
5)Lying to Canadians and Parliament about Afghan detainees, thereby putting in jeopardy the country and Canadian soldiers with respect to international obligations against torture.
6)Allowing Canadians abroad to be subject to the death penalty, contrary to domestic policy and Canadian values.
7)Attempting to eliminate equal rights for all citizens (such as for aboriginals, women, gays and lesbians), contrary to Canadian values.
8)Attempting to subvert domestic and international agreements on climate change.
9)Disrupting and interfering with Canadian Parliamentary committees and witnesses in an attempt to contaminate, conceal or obscure evidence and testimony.
10)Committing elections financing fraud, as evidenced by the irregularities reported by Elections Canada.”
Remember Stephen Harper’s campaign slogan when running for the leadership of the Conservative Party: One Conservative Voice. Those who voted for him accepted that concept and it has been the guiding principle of the party ever since.
By C. B. Innes on 02.12.08 11:20 am
BINGO!
By Ed Brooks on 02.12.08 11:22 am
Yes, good formula! Let’s add ‘pending and in-process’ scandals to the variables as well/ I think Harper would definitely be the leader he always claims to be.
This government has more scandals in two years than anyone else that comes to mind.
Bill… Ms. May? No thanks. Thanks for asking though. My point is; even if Ms. May got elected as PM, we’d be having this same discussion in two years after the election. This is the same discussion probably word for word in some cases that is going on in every democratic government-heavy country on this globe.
This is all we do in Canada. We lament over the backyard fence, the latest waste of our tax dollars. It will never change. Ever.
By Leasa on 02.12.08 11:21 am
Wow, You should join the Optomist Club with a healthy view like that. LOL
(Even though you are right. It is too much trouble for Canada to have another vision. The last was Tommy Douglas and Healthcare. Since then the only ‘health’ related thing we have had for a vision is the proctology exam of hindsight!)
Yup, Leasa – if I said I robbed a bank, as long as I admitted it, it’s okay.
I’ve started a new file to go with my “Raised Eyebrow” file. It’s entitled “Fed Up!”.
In it already are:
- The massive spending on the two day SPP Summit at Montebello reported yesterday to top $27 Million.
- The cost of the Afghanistan war. How much per day was that again Garth? Now it’s goint to be extended into infinity?
- Today’s report that Royal Dutch Shell is rationing fuel to its Western Canada retail network. When are we going to get an energy policy to protect Canadians?
I read a few paragraphs of that $122,000 speech and started looking frantically for a bucket. I wouldn’t give you two cents for it. But after all, it’s not Flaherty’s money, so why should he care. All of Canada is just a giant cash cow for these guys.
It reminded me of a “generate your own fairy tale” site I saw recently. You put in the key points – goblins, treasure, handsome prince, danger, a quest – press the button, and bingo! an instant story with all the right themes.
Wanna bet those “speech writers” used something pretty similar to generate that meaningless drivel?
Jonathan Winters in his commercial role as the “Man from Glad” springs to mind:
“We men in gar-BAGE are always at your disposal.”
Leasa,
What is it about the word “hypocrisy” that you don’t understand?
Gord
How do we change it? How do we hold them accountable?
By Ed Brooks on 02.12.08 11:15 am
We could clone Garth 307 times? Otherwise, as long as they are escorted around by body guards, they remain out of reach for mano-a-mano reality checks. In the Old Days such people were regularly taken out to lunch and fed a Knuckle Sandwich for being such complete lieing arseholes.
I would strongly support the re-introduction of the Tar & Feather treatment for polluters, and especially corrupt politicians from Alberta.
Most people conduct themselves to avoid consequences. They have removed the natural consequences regular people face daily. That is what they primarily legislate it would seem?
I think most of the Bills in the HoC should be labelled as CMA-n, Not C-n. That would define their purpose of ‘Cover My Arse’ clearly.
On the more serious side, the real answer is for more people to run as Independents, or else get more involved and form a new party. Personally I would very much like to see the Dion group and the Greens join forces. Let Iggy and the American War Mongers join with the NHL (they both have about the same ethics and tactics). Rae could, perhaps, go with Dion, but I am not sure how they actually get along?
I think the CPC (aka CRAP) will split very soon, and the real PC’s will rise again. Harper, if the CPC doesn’t disown him, will ride off into the Alberta sunset, or more appropriately, retire at Bush’s Texass ranch and go hunting with Dick Cheney! Steve should make good use of that flak vest for more than photo-ops, eh?
Obviously, both parties have enough skeletons to start a graveyard. We can tell because they always a
have a ‘bone to pick’ with each other.
To be honest, the core old conservatives are soon going to be dead, and literally buried in the graveyard of the past, which is mostly those 70 and over. Finally, we can talk about war ops without everything being related to the so-called glory of WWII. Who knows, maybe we can then focus on actually learning from history, rather than constantly attempting to re-create, and repeating the same mistakes over, and over?
Ah, that would be the Green Party then?
By Bill-Muskoka on 02.12.08 11:07 am
I believe support for corruption such as the hundreds of millions that was skimmed off the gun registry would qualify and would be a factor considered in the accountability standards.
The chances of May beating McKay in the next election is slim at best but it`s very possible at least one Green will get a seat. This person will then step down to give the leader a seat in the HoC. The result is an unelected MP, this form of democratic corruption has been around for a long time and certainly not defined by anyone as democratic accountability.
Starting out with two big minuses and not even elected yet puts her accountability rating well within the national average of -7
By Jim Trechek on 02.12.08 11:12 am
Jim, what government has EVER acknowledged they are responsible? So what if a few million got stolen, it was in a good cause. In other words, don’t look at that…look at the shinny bobbles in THIS hand. Same old, same old.
There are 22 more Ontarians charged in a child porn ring. What do you want to bet that the majority if not all are out on bail as I write this?
You know, we get so lost in chasing what the government & opposition parties want us to chase that we all forget what really matters.
I’m tired of chasing my tail. L
By got rope? on 02.12.08 12:45 pm
Taking all factors into account I think May will beat MacKay in the next election. We shall see!
Speech writing is far more profitable.
I gotta get me some of those contracts!
By Bill-Muskoka on 02.12.08 10:36 am
Bottom line Bill, if you want the perks the best course of action is to raise funds for one of the main political parties. The more funds you raise the bigger the bone the`ll throw you, just be sure you`re facing the right direction when you catch it.
You know, we get so lost in chasing what the government & opposition parties want us to chase that we all forget what really matters.
I’m tired of chasing my tail. L
By Leasa on 02.12.08 12:48 pm
It`s called circle logic. Politicians tell the bought and paid for through ad dollars what they want the people to chase. The media pumps it till enough of the public tells the government what they want which is what the government wanted all along. lol, full circle, circle logic.
Taking all factors into account I think May will beat MacKay in the next election. We shall see!
By Bill-Muskoka on 02.12.08 1:03 pm
As a realistic that knows who gets elected is meaningless I`m concerned you on hanging on to the illusion that elections matter. You should consider whether this affliction is anymore than passing entertainment value or as some here think, it matters who wins.
Should the latter be the case I recommend you study the corruption vs accountability record of the last ten federal parliaments.
The Conservatives already have a growing record starting with what appears to be hiding the whereabouts of the $40m from adscam.. Paul Martin was elected even after the news broke. I`ll let you take it from there.
How do you know when a politician is lying?
When he opens his mouth.
Watch my lips: get stuffed. — Garth
CRAP Bombs Calgary Home
(Probably had a Liberal sign in their yard, eh?)
Bottom line Bill, if you want the perks the best course of action is to raise funds for one of the main political parties. The more funds you raise the bigger the bone the`ll throw you, just be sure you`re facing the right direction when you catch it.
By got rope? on 02.12.08 1:05 pm
WOOF! WOOF! LOL
Today here there if finally a consensus here that there is no essential difference between the two main parties.
That particular fact has been in evidence since NAFTA, the GST, and recently the SPP and Afghanistan.
You all say that you are tired of it and would like to change it.
I agree. Now, convince me that voting for the NDP would not be a vote to give us at least a chance for change.
(P.S. – I am not an NDP supporter…last election I voted Liberal)
jeeze..I sure mangled that first sentence. No wonder Flaherty doesn’t want me to write the next Budget speech. It should read:
Here today, there is finally a consensus that there is no essential difference between the two main parties.
We could use that as a benchmark on accountability.
Thanks
By Ed Brooks on 02.12.08 11:22 am
Ed, just to clarify, does accountable mean that politicians, government agencies and any organizations holding a block of votes would have to uphold ,including being subjected to, the rule of law?
Wouldn`t that be a different direction for Canada.
As a realistic that knows who gets elected is meaningless I`m concerned you on hanging on to the illusion that elections matter.
By got rope? on 02.12.08 1:36 pm
The alternative , should I stop believing they do matter, is I will don my Marine uniform…
No, scratch that, I will become a Freedom Fighter (the only allegiance is to my ideals and those of my friends), and start eliminating the bastards by other means.
We will be called the Muskadeen!
All Hail Anarchy! Right Rope?
If it is illegal to award contracts above $25,000 without a tender, then it’s illegal – whether he admits or not right way.
If they are awarding contracts between 24 K and 24,999 (just under the limit) – then this is highly suspect, and very bad optics. By Tim.
The Government Contract Regulations (GCR) allow sole source or untendered contracts over 25k are permitted and legal under certain conditions. some of which include health and safety, emergencies, security and if the supllier or contractor is the only supplier.
The GCR’s also permit sole source contracts under $25k. However contract splitting to get under the $25k limit is not permitted.
So it may be very bad optics and so on but awarding sole source contracts for $24999.00 could very well be legal and within the regulations. You must remember that most consultants and contractors are familar with the dollar tresholds and may have submitted their price at 24,999. Leastways that was my experince with MOT as a Regional Contract Superintendent.
The Head Of The CAW Is Calling For Jim Flaherty’s Upcoming Election Defeat.
We Second That Motion…Whitby/Oshawa Times
http://caiti-online-media.blogspot.com/2008/01/head-of-caw-is-calling-for-jim.html
convince me that voting for the NDP would not be a vote to give us at least a chance for change.
(P.S. – I am not an NDP supporter…last election I voted Liberal)
By Pecked to Death by Ducks on 02.12.08 2:12
Yawn, sure. We`ve been talking about credit card debt, personal loans, no saving and Cdns paying their bills with credit cards by re-mortgaging since last summer. The NDP just raised the issue in QP. The`re so far behind the curve on the economy I`m surprised they have even heard of NAFTA, the GST, and recently the SPP and Afghanistan.
The only change this country needs is the revival of the rule of law.
While your at it, ask the little turd for the 18 blacked-out pages of his Finance Departments justification on the Income Trust FIASCO.
By Robert Gibbs on 02.12.08 12:17 pm
11. Manufacturing a crisis at Chalk River Nuclear Reactor and endangering the Canadian people there with nuclear mismanagement; endangering Canadians and others by creating a nuclear isotope shortage.
(p.s., The 30-day Safety Inspection Report from Chalk River is over-due. Perhaps it is out to tender for a speech-writer… ).
Jim Flaherty admitted right away that the contract should have been tendered.
By Leasa on 02.12.08 8:27 am
Oh – well if he admitted right away, then it’s OK.
No one is saying that it is OK. Flaherty also said that this has been corrected.
First of all The minister doesn’t personally issue the contracts. One of the department contract officers with in the department if that department in this case Finance department has been delegated the appropiate contract authority through Tresuary Board’s Government Contract Regulations. Public Works or I think it is called Supply and Services now would be the contracting authority if the department has no such delegation. However, from the way the minister spoke in the house it was in fact one of his department contracting officers who failed to tender the contract. I have no doubt that the responsible person has been chastised to say the least. Firing on the other hand would be almost impossible. The only out for the contract officer would be if it was a ministerial directed contract. Again it has been my experince that the ministers never say “award that contract to so and so” but rarther say “I would like that contract to be awarded to so and so.” This way the minister can claim he didn’t direct the contract and once again the Contract Officer is the one who will get the blame.
convince me that voting for the NDP would not be a vote to give us at least a chance for change.
(P.S. – I am not an NDP supporter…last election I voted Liberal)
By Pecked to Death by Ducks on 02.12.08 2:12
The NDP just demanded a comprehensive manufacturing strategy. The strategy has been in place for several years now, the plan is to restore international investor confidence in Canada.
They should be asking why this strategy has failed instead of pretending (or not) that they don`t know about it.
Behind the curve or in denial?
Just asking
Now, convince me that voting for the NDP would not be a vote to give us at least a chance for change.
(P.S. – I am not an NDP supporter…last election I voted Liberal)
By Pecked to Death by Ducks on 02.12.08 2:12 pm
There was a time I might have considered the NDP but not under the current leadership.
The NDP want to replace the Liberal Party and cement the polarization of the Canadian political scene under the right and left ideological spectrum. To do that they have sought to align themselves with right wing Conservatives on a variety of issues.
In the process, they have abandoned their advocacy for civil society and concentrated on the game of politics. The result is that we have no concept of the direction a Layton led government would take the country other than to take the troops out of Afghanistan, maybe (he did vote with the Conservatives not to end the combat mission in 2009).
Way off topic, but the Liberals walking out on the Message to Senate Vote on C-2 today was a great show!
to Got Rope..sorry to make you yawn
You do make a good point however. The NDP should be concentrating on the larger banking and finance issues. Anything else?
Why do the Canadian financial companies get constant loans from the Bank of Canada at cut rate prices? Where does this money come from? Does it come from the seniors who now get less than inflation rates on their Canada bonds?
These Banks then lend out ten times that money at hugely inflated rates. When they get into trouble, the taxpayer has to bail them out as in England, France and now the German Bank IKB. This paper money merry-go-round is a huge world issue, yet Canadians and their politicans are completely oblivious to it.
we have no concept of the direction a Layton led government would take the country
By C. B. Innes on 02.12.08 3:02 pm
But does it make a difference? What government every went in the direction they were elected on. Herb once said, `elect us now and we`ll fill in the details later`. lol, it was funny but in a disturbing way it made sense.
I think we should just go with a lotto. Put different colored balls in a big jar and pick away. If you draw a pastel pink, your the official opposition for the status of women, hard pink is the minister. Green for the environment, striped for the minister of justice etc. Just do away with federal elections and political parties and grab some balls.
I agree. Now, convince me that voting for the NDP would not be a vote to give us at least a chance for change.
(P.S. – I am not an NDP supporter…last election I voted Liberal)
By Pecked to Death by Ducks on 02.12.08 2:12 pm
As a one time NDP supporter I can put it into a simple case.
The NDP is NOT the peoples party as it was under Tommy Douglas.
It is entirely in the hands of BIG UNION.
Just look at the affiliation of most of the sitting members of that party.
Look at their voting record in this parliament.
Way off topic, but the Liberals walking out on the Message to Senate Vote on C-2 today was a great show!
By Liz on 02.12.08 3:15 pm
HURRAY for REAL LEADERSHIP by Dion!
Call the lieing CRAPer’s bluff, let them have the rope they need. They just threw it over the Gallows.
Exactly how to deal with a Bully..Walk away, ignore the POS, and let him stand there defeated by his own arrogance.
Garth, please tell Stephane DionI am giving him a STANDING OVATION, as well as all the Liberal MP’s who refused to play by Harper’s illegal rules.
Here is the story online:
Motion passes as Grits abstain
The Liberals walked out of the Commons en masse Tuesday rather than vote on a government motion demanding that the Senate pass an omnibus crime bill by March 1.
In their absence, the motion passed easily, 172-27.
Stephane Dion led his caucus out of the chamber before the vote began.
…
Liberal senators bristle at the idea of being told when to pass a bill.
Senator Sharon Carstairs said it’s unlikely the bill will win approval by March 1, despite what she called the government’s “bullying.”
So, who voted against it? And who voted FOR IT! The BLOC to be sure.
Got Rope..sorry to make you yawn
Pecked to Death by Ducks on 02.12.08 3:18 pm
It wasn`t you peck, it was the topic. How to get a change in direction when it ISN`T going to happen. As my daddy used to say a new coat of paint won`t keep a rotten house standing.
Interesting point on the banks though and true.
Just came across this article. Where angels fear to tread fools rush in.
Wish I had a way of tracking the short positions on this company as short is a risk as the tax payers will likely bail them out of trouble. I`d bet morning coffee says the`ve already got a standing agreement with the BoC.
http://ca.news.finance.yahoo.com/s/12022008/2/biz-finance-home-capital-boosts-dividend-sees-problems-canadian-housing.html
Home Capital boosts dividend, sees no problems in Canadian housing market
Tue Feb 12, 12:28 PM
“In a release, the company attributed the gains to higher mortgage activity related to its continued rollout of the commercial mortgage lending operation and the withdrawal of some competitors from the residential mortgage marketplace.”
So, the Liberals lined up all their ducks and walked out on a vote again.
Pecked To Death By Ducks Enterprises can provide you with a full slate of beaked, winged, bilingual ducks to outsource your expensive parliamentarians and provide the same services. dear taxpayer, we will march out at 1/10 the cost! Is your leader laying an egg? Does your Prime Minister need to be goosed into action? We can duck even constitutional votes with impunity and have clear expertise in feathering our nests. Call Pecked To Death By Ducks Enterprises now.
I notice today President Bush denounced the noose used as a racial statement. Couldn`t agree more but as far as my handle goes the hangmans noose has been a symbol of justice for centuries.
get a rope is just another way of saying `no justice, no investment` on a personal level.
Give us justice or get a rope has always been the motto of the Get a Rope Committee and is not to be or should be perceived in any way as a lynching. We have enough criminality by those sworn to uphold the rule of law.
v.
Flaherty’s Harry Potter logic: do as I say, not as I do.
http://caiti-online.blogspot.com/2008/02/flahertys-harry-potter-logic-do-as-i.html
By Bill-Muskoka on 02.12.08 8:56 am
Good post, Bill. I read those news reports this a.m.
It raises further questions, especially pertaining to Garth’s book and the year 2015, when nine million boomers are supposed to hit easy street via retirement.
If those boomers are planning on selling their homes to finance their retirement, who will they sell their homes to? Will the feds. increase immigration levels by the same amount?
In western Canada there is a labour shortage now in varying job markets, but the lumber industry has been particularly hard-hit, first by the high loonie followed by the housing meltdown in the US; the price of re-sale and new homes here (presently) is now so high that many young couples stay in condos — some for life — as homes are now beyond their means.
This is similar to Europe (so far, not the UK), where families generally tend to live in large apartments.
If boomers are not able to sell their homes as there won’t be too many buyers, have to stay in the work force (whether they like it or not to make ends meet), then what if their jobs become outsourced to India, China and the like?
That is when those people realize that now, they have next to nothing, and there’s not much help out there. It’s easy to say, “Well, I have an $75,000/year job, so I’m alright Jack”.
The point is, how much does one save to cover for a rainy day? Although not a Christian now, the parable of the farmer who had seven plentiful years, and squirreled away sufficient for the forthcoming seven year drought is a good example of what people don’t do today. Young people simply expect their families to help them out, with nary a thank you.
What if their parents have next to nothing as well? It does not bode well for the future tidal wave (almost within sight) which, sooner or later, will hit most folk square in the face; those are the ones who have done little, if anything to prepare.
Here today, there is finally a consensus that there is no essential difference between the two main parties.
By Pecked to Death by Ducks on 02.12.08 2:14 pm
Hello, PTDBD. I beg to differ.
As one who has consistently voted Green (both fed. and prov.) for over two decades now, only because Mulroney, Chretien, Martin and harper will never be trustworthy individuals, I view Dion as a leader who is prepared to listen to all points of view, and a much more responsive, centre-based Liberal.
With the present crop of Libs., Canada absolutely cannot afford to let harper in again. His (CRAP’s) economic record speaks for itself — by far and away, harper is the WORST pm we have ever had.
Toss CRAP — and harper — in the landfill when the election is called. We have had more than enough of his ‘divide and conquer’ strategies, and we will gladly change our votes and encourage friends to do so — let Dion and the Libs. hae a fair crack at the whip.
got rope? on 02.12.08 3:45 pm,
If a person takes the time to study and evaluate the wording of party policy and the speeches and printed documents that comes from the leader you can get a good idea of the direction a party would take the country. You cannot tell everything but you can get a good general idea.
The problem is that too few have the time to parse the relevant materials. The general direction that Chretien, Martin, and Harper would take the country is found in their own words written before they became Prime Minister.
To use the current PM as an example it was evident Harper would demand centralized control of his party, that he would not tolerate other voices within the party, and that he would try to take government out of the hands of the public servants and elected representatives and place it in the hands of private sector interests was clear from his own writings.
Those areas in which Harper’s words and his actions seem to contradict were predictable because often he took positions that in practice would create contradictions.
Are we being told off by a higher power?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=513855&in_page_id=1811
Innes on 02.12.08 6:20 pm
“”the speeches and printed documents that comes from the leader you can get a good idea of the direction a party would take the country”"
Have to disagree. Not one wrote how they would support and cater to corruption which is the general direction the country has gone in for decades.
Have you thought about a reality check on what`s going at the street level?
On the other hand if it were true I recall Dion threatening an election right after he took over the Lib leadership. It wasn`t until he realized he wasn`t PM yet and backed down. That tells me he`s a Cretien clone that will pose a PM dictator that thinks the $40M burglery of the national treasury was a good thing.
So what will you get out of a Liberal win, elevated to the Bench?
We have had 2 years on a Conservative government that they say the`ve filled their promises with the 5 points. That`s about a months work. For the other 23 they either defended themselves or focused on shielding everything to save from being attacked.
Give the credit to the Liberals but remember like all the MP`s they were sent by the people to get the work done the people wanted done. One months work out of 24 is another in a string of do nothing governments. I think the whole works of you, past and present are a disgrace and an embarrassment to all hardworking Cdns. No amount of paint will hold your house up.
I refer you to this article when the story first broke; pay close attention to the last sentence that I have highlighted in bold text:
http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5jll5dCktSANI2vlRo6cOrq8kgcGg
It took an Access to Information request for this to come to the light of day, not a proactive action from Flaherty. This to me is exactly what you assert did not occur: deceit. Leasa, you are often pleasant enough on this forum, and on many fronts I enjoy your posts, but if there is one thing that I truly find disagreeable are apologetic circumstances like this where you let your bald partisanship and/or wilful abject blindness prevent you from simply coming out and saying that this is an unqualified wrong. Period.
When that happens, only one word comes to mind: shameless.
Speaking of our nations finances. Garth does this account still exist and how much money has flowed through it over the last decade. This is an account that has been set up to be spent at the Cabinet’s discretion without consent of parliament and not privy to the eyes of the A.G. What can you tell us about this account?
To sell two candus to China in 1996, Chrétien dipped into the Canada Account—a fund used at the discretion of Cabinet—in order to lend $1.5 billion, on never-disclosed terms, to that burgeoning state.
http://www.walrusmagazine.com/articles/2006.09-energy-candu-reactor/
If you want, you can read further from a thread I started on Bourque.
http://www.voy.com/171963/3792.html
Is there anything right about our process? Leasa
What if their parents have next to nothing as well? It does not bode well for the future tidal wave (almost within sight) which, sooner or later, will hit most folk square in the face; those are the ones who have done little, if anything to prepare.
By Charles Oxley on 02.12.08 5:16 pm
That is the majority of people’s situations. There is always the military as a career path, which is just fine with the Globalist War Mongers, as they need a reliable source of cannon fodder.
Exactly what has happened in the U.S. where inner city youth have no other options. You get room and board, and the opportunity to have a career…if you live through it!
I plan on working until I die, maybe we will win the lottery, but I do not see retirement as a viable option.
I had planned to do the Inuit Goodbye on an ice flow, but they are all melting away. I could Super Glue my fridge ice cubes together, but why bother? LOL
I have worked hard all my life, and invested in skills, equipment, and capabilities wisely. Surely the government will find a way to rip that from me as well. They already did once in the U.S. back in 1980-82 when the banks destroyed the world’s economy to cover their pwn arse.
Like the Rebels say ‘Forget HELL!’
Update on GM BTW. They are offering Buy Outs to all 74,000 U.S. employees, but hoping at least 16,000 accept. Then they want to move their manufacturing to Third World countries. May GM’s management die in one of their own POS products.
Buzz Hargrove is right there with his usual rhetoric. I think Buzz will be looking for EI soon too?
By Charles Oxley on 02.12.08 6:33 pm
Love it! Too bad the lightning is not coming out of his hands!!! That would get some people’s attention, eh?
The link pertains somewhat to a story that ran several days ago.
Report then covered a 16-year-old girl, with a four month old baby to look after. All the girl had to eat was dirt, “cookies” made from dry mud.
http://www.livemint.com/2008/02/10135459/As-Asia-food-prices-bite-anal.html
Two links which focus on Pakistan.
The first concerns two scientists at a nuke plant in Pakistan who have gone “missing”, or been abducted; why were they “abducted”, who abducted them and who stands to gain the most from a scrap their?
Second revolves around the US, preparing to invade Pakistan.
Musharraf, like Harper is another dubya lap dog, so the US won’t invade — they will go there under the pretext of security.
Pakistan is quite close to Iran, and dubya doesn’t like Iran. Neither does Israel.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7240414.stm
http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/02/11/is-the-us-getting-ready-to-strike-pakistan/
I agree.
The energy sector out here in Calgary keep telling me that Flaherty doesn’t know what he’s doing. This latest revelation(if I may use the word)is futher proof that this man cannot think for himself.And it cost us 122,000 fresh ones? When you stop to think about it, no one in the CRAP party has any idea what they’re doing. Good grief ,though it is very entertaining and revealing. These morons are gone in the next election and I hope we Canadians bury them for a long long time.