You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Canadian Politics’ tag.
Fighting the Russians in the Arctic WTG Steve!
Newsflash(?): Many of Steven Harper’s Policies are based on ideology and not fact.
Wow, way to go Libs. You finally caught a whiff of the conservative miasma that has engulfed our country. Where do you stake your claim? Draw your line in the sand? Where do you make your stand and bellicosely shout “You shall not pass!” The systemic underfunding of women’s groups? The overspending glut and fake lake of the G8 summit spending? Not funding abortions in the third world? Nope.
How about the Long form Census and the Long Firearms Registry. It is on these two ‘important’ issues our principled opposition has brought the noise.
“The Harper government has adopted a deliberate strategy of hiding information from Canadians in order to advance a right-wing social and justice agenda, Liberals charge.
Liberal MP John McCallum pointed Thursday to two recent examples to prove the point: The government’s decision to scrap the mandatory long-form census and its refusal to release a favourable report on the effectiveness of the long-gun registry.
He called the approach “a triumph of ignorance over knowledge, a triumph of ideology over science.”
Those of us who follow our enlightened government have be aware of this small fact for quite awhile. During the election(s) Harper has often been accused of having a ‘hidden-agenda’. I would argue that in has never been hidden from the public, as one can ascertain his policy motives and goals quite easily.
Keeping Canada safe from Unicorns, Dragons and Fairy-Folk too!
The “Tough on Crime” agenda is classical social conservative hogwash and prime example of what Harper and his conservatives are about. Consider, we need more prisons for unreported crimes because our crime rate is falling. it seems that little mistakes like this are not really worth the Oppositions time.
Now what McCallum says is true, but why the onslaught on these particular issues?
“McCallum said the decision to turn the compulsory long-form census into a voluntary survey is “one of the most visible examples of one of the most fundamental shortcomings” of the Harper government.
He said it’s aimed at robbing federal, provincial and municipal governments of the reliable data they need to deliver progressive social programs. It would skew “the picture of what Canada really looks like” because low-income and minority Canadians will be less likely to fill out a voluntary form.”
Makes sense to me. We need to know about our population to best meet its needs.
“McCallum also cited the government’s refusal to release the annual RCMP evaluation of the gun registry’s effectiveness as another example of Harper’s penchant for stifling facts.
Opposition parties maintain the government has been sitting on the report for six months and wants to keep it hidden until after a crucial September vote on Tory backbencher Candice Hoeppner’s private member’s bill to scrap the controversial registry.
According to the CBC, the report concludes the registry is cost-effective, efficient and “an important tool for law enforcement.”
“Clearly the Conservatives want to prevent parliamentarians and Canadians from seeing important information about the cost and effectiveness of the long-gun registry before an important vote,” McCallum said.”
Now again, sitting on bad news is not strictly a conservative phenomena, but the long gun registry has been a contentious issue during election time and that is about it. We are getting much drama for issues that seem to be a low priority for many Canadians.
There is plenty of fodder to roast Harper and his conservatives with, why is the opposition focused on these relatively low key issues? I’m hoping it is part of a bigger strategy that builds on a few small examples and then works it way up the ladder of importance. I’d like to be right about this, but I have my doubts.
Our parliament is back in action after being out of business while supposedly our conservative turd-nuggets “calibrated” their economic plans to “save” the Canadian Economy. What do we get? A large horse and pony show about possibly changing the national anthem and more tax cuts for business and the banking industry.
We are cutting taxes on the financial sector. Don't complain...have some yummy ice-cream to make all those thoughts of fairness go away. Silly Public.
We stopped the business of government so we can get yet another typically conservative budget? Some putrid highlights:
- The finance minister promised many times that this budget would not include any significant tax cuts, but he just couldn’t help himself. No Harper budget is complete without a major tax cut for business, even after business leaders say we now need tax increases.
- The major new business tax cut this year is a complete elimination of tariffs on manufacturing inputs and machinery and equipment. This move aims to make Canada’s manufacturing sector into a free trade zone, consistent with their aggressive new free trade plans and will cost the federal government an estimated $1.3 billion over five years.
- Further planned cuts to corporate income taxes will drive the federal corporate tax rate down to 15% down by almost half from the from 29.12% rate in 2000. These cuts so far have cost more than $100 billion and further cuts will cost the government an additional $20 billion in lower revenues during the next five years.
- The Harper government is continuing with these further cuts even though the steep cuts so far have had little positive impact in increasing investment or productivity
Well isn’t that just fraking grand. The opposition, rather than condemning this albatross of a budget, will quietly vote to pass this budget. Will the Afghan detainee torture scandal resurface? Will Harper and his merry band of neo-conservative business courtiers continue to sell ordinary Canadians down the river?
I hope the we get some real direction from our opposition soon. I’m getting tired and quite cranky over the mendacious conservative rule we are toiling under.
Peter Goldring certainly does not typify the entire conservative party of Canada. Just most of it. Unaware of historical nuance, blindly obedient to power and happy in his role as one of Harper’s many courtiers. Am I wrong? Well let us see how Mr.Goldring frames a sensitive historical period of Canadian History. The CBC writes:
“In the newsletter, titled The Truth About Louis Riel, Goldring calls the former Métis leader a “villain” who has blood on his hands from leading the Northwest and Red River rebellions.
Goldring said Riel doesn’t deserve a statue on Parliament Hill and that such a tribute would condone his “civil disobedience.”
Well, take that. I am surprised he did not call Riel a terrorist. Then, instead of hanging him, we would just detain him indefinitely without rights or recourse.
“Winnipeg Liberal MP Anita Neville said the Conservative party should apologize to the Métis for what she calls a 
“smear campaign” against the founder of Manitoba.
Although he was hanged as a traitor, Riel is regarded as a folk hero by many for his defence of Métis rights and culture.”
Of course, alternative narratives and the aforementioned concept of nuance escape Mr.Goldring as does such unnecessary ideas like oh say, ‘diplomacy’.
It should be interesting to see how this plays out as Goldring seems to be fond of taking ‘conservative positions’ on controversial issues.
I am glad to see the Tories neck and neck with the Liberals in the polls. Perhaps our haughty PM can shelf his pride and start listening to what Canadians have to say. I doubt he is even concerned with the poll to be honest though. He needed time to stack the senate (the one which he has tried so very hard to make elected) in his favour so he can more easily push through his parties’ legislative agenda.
The ECOS poll results from from January 27th, 2010 to February 2nd, 2010.
I am not a big fan of Stephen Harper and his merry band of reactionary pundits which he calls a government. His
Kittens: Great for Breakfast.
proroguing of parliament is another bitch-slapping of democracy and the Canadian People.
We need a voting system that better represents the people of Canada. I am proud to be part of the riding that went to the NDP in the last federal election. It was a close battle with the incumbent conservative (tough on crime, currently facing drug charges) was beaten by Linda Duncan. We are the tiny crack in what has been fortress tory Alberta for much too long. Go to Fair Vote Canada and sign up and let us turf this antiquated and thoroughly anti-democratic First Past the Post system of representation.
Fair Vote Canada has a great FAQ. I snipped the first two topics off their page. Read the rest here.
Myths About Fair Voting and Proportional Representation
Rather than defend the glaring problems with Canada’s winner-take-all voting system, critics usually spend more time trying to frighten people about change. Let’s look at some of common myths they promote, compared to the facts.
Myth 1: There are trade-offs between good democracy and good government.
The Facts: In his landmark study, Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Democracies (1999), internationally-renowned political scientist Arend Lijphart assessed and compared the performance of majoritarian democracies (associated with winner-take-all voting systems) and consensus democracies (associated with proportional representation systems).
He concluded: “the overall performance record of the consensus democracies is clearly superior to that of the majoritarian democracies” and “the good news is that, contrary to the conventional wisdom, there is no trade-off at all between governing effectiveness and high-quality democracy – and hence no difficult decisions to be made on giving priority to one or the other objective.”
Fair Vote Canada has prepared an 8-page summary of Dr. Lijphart’s key findings.
Myth 2: Proportional representation means coalition governments and that’s bad because it requires deal-making.
The Facts: Governments formed under any voting system are coalitions of different groups who negotiate and make deals. That’s the way democracy works.
In Canada, the two largest “big tent” parties are coalitions of factions which are generally hidden from public view except during leadership races. These internal factions compete with one another and then negotiate and compromise on the party platform and policies.
The primary difference between this and the formation of multi-party coalition governments under fair voting systems are: 1) transparency – coalition negotiations among parties are generally more visible to the public and the compromises are publicly known; and 2) majority rule – under fair voting systems, the resulting coalition or governing group represents a true majority of voters.
bleatmop
Mystro
Dead Wild Roses 
Your opinions…