Home › New Nanos Poll - Canadians moving away from all...
New Nanos Poll - Canadians moving away from all party leaders
The latest Nanos Poll indicates that politicians in general may be the first casualties of the Schreiber Affair. The ongoing Nanos Federal Leadership Report Card Tracking indicates that Canadians are moving away from all party leaders into the “none of the above” or “unsure”.
It is quite unprecedented to see movement away from all the leaders. With the Schreiber Affair in the news, it seems a growing number of Canadians, tar all politicians with the same brush.
On a positive note for Prime Minister Stephen Harper, he still holds a major advantage over Stephane Dion on all leadership tracking measures. A look at the detailed tabulations also indicates that
Stephane Dion is performing noticeably worse at this time compared to Paul Martin the night prior to
his losing the 2006 federal election.
What do you think will be the fallout of the Schreiber Affair?
If you have a moment, check out the stat sheet in the support documents on the right. It details changes in perceptions on trust, vision and competence.
Cheers,
NJN
Remember to rate the views of others - to allow us to recognize the opinion leaders in our national conversation.
Individuals with the top ratings make it to Nik’s Leaderboard.
|
Most Read Comments
Highest Rated Comments
I for one am sick of listening to the non-stop frenzy from the Liberals and the ... more
pneilson (Ontario) 03 Dec 08:12
Ah, Nik, Canadian politics ! ! ! An election is like taking a bath, having a c... more
Tom Good (British Columbia) 03 Dec 03:48
From past experience, considering the last two Canadian Prime Ministers, it look... more
kokinosplatanos (British Columbia) 03 Dec 02:37
Hi Blossom It's good to see you back. I see you are still as passionate about t... more
Bernie (Ontario) 07 Dec 08:57
Well, Bernie, we are worlds apart on the circumstantial evidence issue. Anythin... more
Tom Good (British Columbia) 08 Dec 19:48
Just in case you missed the following by Nanos Research: The first annual Nan... more
hollinm (Saskatchewan) 10 Dec 13:12
Comments
kokinosplatanos
From past experience, considering the last two Canadian Prime Ministers, it looks like it's an advantage to start off unpopular, then build from there. Look at Chretien and Harper - both started off well behind in polls such as this one, then ended up with varying levels of success. Paul Martin, starting off higher up in the leadership polls, ended up with a slow and steady decline.
Perhaps we live in an era where Canadians must build trust in their leaders as opposed to having them explode right out of the gate?
Trying to view these numbers as unbiased as possible (plus taking history into account), it looks as though Dion has the advantage for a potential surge. The only way is up for him. Can it get any lower? You never know.
The fact that Dion's party has not been afflicted with similar numbers, and Harper's party isn't particularly soaring, shows that there is a strong potential for a numerical reversal of fortunes for Dion. If the Liberals were polling close-to or below NDP numbers, then that would perhaps be an insurmountable problem.
[updated Mon Dec 03 02:37:44 EST 2007]
03 Dec 02:37
2 replies so far. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
Tom Good
Ah, Nik, Canadian politics ! ! ! An election is like taking a bath, having a clean change of clothes and smelling like violets. Could one say that is a "fresh start"? The only trouble is not keeping up the routine of regular bathing and changing into clean clothes on a daily basis thus the stinkier it gets and the odour is likely to linger. I bet the Schreiber affair has a lot more to reveal. Harper, who has loudly proclaimed the high road in all things political, is likely to find his courted embrace of Mulroney could be likened now to the kiss of death.
But, does Harper have to worry ? Here the electorate has to consider the political alternatives. That is not an exciting prospect so Harper really can hold his ground but I do not think he could gain ground. Now, if the Liberals were led by Ignatieff, I believe Harper would have real cause to worry.
In my riding, the local Liberal Association has remained in suspended animation or is still hiding in a hole since the last election.---Dead???---The local conservative MP is not inclined to accept or tolerate opinions that differ to his in this democratic process. Yes, I think I will move away from the traditional parties in the coming election and look for a better alternative that may honestly address the people's business. But, then, politics not being the most ethical of sports, I am likely in dreamland too ! ! !
[updated Mon Dec 03 03:48:29 EST 2007]
03 Dec 03:48
24 replies so far. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
pneilson
I for one am sick of listening to the non-stop frenzy from the Liberals and the fifth estate over something that may have transpired some 14 years ago between private citizen Karlheinz Schreiber and private citizen Brian Mulroney. No taxpayer dollars were involved and the amount ($300,000) is relatively piddling. This should be one paragraph at the bottom of page 14 of most papers, apart from a tabloid-like fascination with famous people in certain quarters. I can't believe that Parliament is wasting one second on it. With a deficient medicare system, crumbling infrastructure, manufacturing jobs fleeing central Canada for offshore, and a problem with violence, gangs and drugs in our cities, surely we have more important things on which to focus. Nobody that I have met in the past two weeks has raised this as a topic of interest on their own.
If the chattering class must focus on gross failures in leadership, perhaps the media could shift its attention to the millions of actual taxpayer dollars that were misappropriated under the watch of a recent sitting Liberal prime minister and his cast of characters, and focus on recovering all of it on behalf of the taxpayers who were cheated.
[updated Mon Dec 03 08:12:55 EST 2007]
03 Dec 08:12
5 replies so far. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
hollinm
The Schreiber affair is turning into a farce with the Liberals only intent to try and stick scandal to Mr. Harper. Schreiber clearly said he had no contact with Harper or his office. Now the attack is focused on any person, alive or dead, who may have known, worked for and been within 50 feet of Brian Mulroney. It is disgusting and it shows the degree to which politics has continued to decline in its relevency to the Canadian population.
As someone has already said this "scandal" happened 5 prime ministers ago and it is about a private matter between two inidividuals. There will be no real evidence that will clear this thing up in the parliamentary committee because they are not interested in what really happened but to score political points. which may help in the polls. I suspect that the public inquiry will be very narrow in its focus i.e. when did the arrangement for the $300.00 take place and is there anything new in respect to the Liberal government's payment of $2.1 million to cover Mulroney's legal fees.
As for the poll by Nanos I would point out to my Liberal friends that Mr. Harper is still miles ahead of the weak Liberal leader with this polling having been the consistent theme since Dion was elected leader. The Liberals have not been ahead in the polls for two years. That should give Dion and his cadre pause for concern. However, anybody who listens to Dion with his over the top rhetoric knows he is bluffing and really does not have control of the party nor is the party ready for an election. The party knows they are stuck with this turkey until after the next election.
I will acknowlege that the Conservatives are having trouble breaking through in Ontario because they love their socialists programs whether they are effective or not. Because Ontario is the largest province they form the largest segment of any poll and therefore the Conservative numbers are held down. However, Ontario and the Maritimes will not give the Liberals even a minority government.
The vote splits will see 3 or 4 left wing parties vying for the same voters which may allow the Conservatives to come up the middle (even in Ontario). The other issue is leadership. While my Liberal friends keep pointing to the fact that with a slow start Dion will get stronger as time goes by. I am afraid they are misguided. Mr. Dion is not a politician but a professor who thinks like a professor. He lectures but cannot execute. Any politician who thinks he can achieve results by writing letters to anybody and everybody simply does not understand politics. He will need to sell his policies and vision verbally. Without the ability to communicate effectively in the language of the majority he will fail in this regard and Harper will be more convincing.
[updated Mon Dec 03 11:00:39 EST 2007]
03 Dec 11:00
57 replies so far. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
Zena
So, Jean Cretien winning strong majorities all those years when, as the media said, "He is functionally illiterate in both official languages" was due to his sharing and championing of the principles and values of the majority of Canadians - and - that is exactly what Mr. Dion has done, is doing and will continue to do, here at home and all over the world.
[updated Tue Dec 04 19:44:58 EST 2007]
04 Dec 19:44
hollinm
Lets talk realities. Mr. Chretien would never have won those back to back majorities if the Conservative movement had not been fractured. Breaking his GST promise and saying he would tear up the Free Trade Agreement would have been his undoing. By the way, Mr. Chretien won one of those elections with 37% of the popular vote so don't be too high and mighty about this so called champion.
I have a hard time thinking of any major accomplishments of the Chretien years. He was a manager, not a doer. Otherwise we would have had a national daycare program which he said he would do in the Red Book. The aboriginals would no longer be living in squalor. We would not have had the adscam affair where millions of dollars were stolen from Canadian taxpayers with some $40 million still unaccounted for. Gomery sited Mr. Chretien as responsible for the adscam affair and nothing Liberals can say or do will eliminate that indictment from the record of the Chretien government.
You can continue to live in your dream world about Mr. Dion. I think it is wishful thinking on your part. Mr. Dion is a professor, not a politician. He cannot sell his policies or vision because he cannot effectively communicate in the official language of the majority. Writing letters does not in anyway convince Canadians that he is an effective leader. Sitting on his hands in the House of Commons, again today, does not suggest he is a man of conviction. It suggests he is weak and is not prepared to put his confidence in the Canadian people. He knows what will happen.
Running to Bali to badmouth the government, preaching doom and gloom is so gauche and will not inspire Canadians whatsoever. He does not believe he has lost the environment battle. He has. Nobody in their right minds believes that we can make substantial progress on global warming in the world (not Canada), no matter who caused it, without the major players involved. It is plain silly and defies logic. We need a made in Canada policy and in what's in the best interest of our country. Never mind the European Union etc. Trying to meet the Kyoto targets now would destroy the Canadian economy. That's why the Liberals never did it.
You should ask your dear leader how he intends to solve poverty, give broad based personal and corporate tax cuts, meet the Kyoto targets, reintroduce a national daycare program and reintroduce the Kelowna Accord. Where are his plans and how much is it going to cost. Instead of drinking the Liberal kool-aid ask some realistic and hard questions of this weak leader. This is a massive shift to the left and while it may get NDP votes it will not get Conservative votes. That's what he needs to win government.
So I appreciate hearing from you but as you can see there is no room for me to vote for a Liberal government again after 13 years of inaction.
[updated Tue Dec 04 22:50:06 EST 2007]
04 Dec 22:50
Lorne Mccuaig
Liberal hangover... I hear you. The name Oulette was mentioned recently. The name is well known with Montgomery Adscam and now Shreiber. Perhaps this dirty Liberal will drop his 3.2 million dollar liability suit for defamation of his public name after this one and save the taxpayers some wasted money in legal fees.
And while were at it, perhaps one should reconsider Mulroney's 2.1 million dollar lawsuit awarded to him for testimony that wasn't true.
I do, however, disagree with your assessment concerning Ontario. As it stands, Ontario has 105 seats in play and leading convincingly by 9 points. It has been 6 points and growing since the start of the year and if it holds, the Liberals will pick off 70 to 85 seats. If its closer to 80 and they hold in the Atlantic with 20 and take the usual 10 or so in the west, and 3 for 4 in the North... they'll come up with 115 or so seats without counting Quebec.
Are you with me so far? If an election was called today, the Liberals would likely have roughly 115 seats without Quebec. Please keep in mind that the Liberals lead in Ontario by 9 points. Ontario likes their provincial liberals there. Their press is pro liberal there as well, one of the few places in the nation, quite frankly, as Can West is Conservative and Republican. And quite frankly, Harper is bombing in Ontario. And with Schrieber and Mulroney coming up to testify... Harper will begin to lose support in Quebec if the media can't control the spin. The risk is there.
Dion didn't become a leader of the Liberal candidate by accident. He was "the compromise". And if it happens again because the Conservatives blow it somewhere... the Liberals could surprise and take some seats in Quebec. As for now, the future is uncertain... but if the Liberals take 10 seats or more in Quebec (and who they have running will matter significantly), the Liberals are not out of the running to form a minority government.
The greater reality beyond Conservative, NDP or Liberal bias within the predictor of any election outcome is the levels of control the media has and how concentrated they are, who the candidates are running and how they stack up against their rivals... incumbent records and scandal if any, play major roles as is often the case, more theirs to lose than it is to win. And what is the history of the ridings and province and ridings themselves? If one is impartial and looks at them all country wide on a federal level, great! Predict away. But if one does not, pardon the expression, but one is then often seen as coming across as a cheer leading fan or antagonist fan to a political brand or party and not much more.
As it stands, you've got my own predictions... a Liberal minority government with 125 seats, plus or minus ten... if an election were held today and that would be quite premature considering I haven't seen who's running in all 308 ridings with reputations still on the line.
[updated Wed Dec 05 04:59:48 EST 2007]
05 Dec 04:59
hollinm
I don't dispute your analysis. However, you cannot dismiss the realities of a campaign and its impact on the electorate. The focus is on the leader in any campaign. Mr. Dion is inexperienced as this will be his first campaign. He is challenged with the English language and if his message is garbled or ineffective then Canadians will question his leadership abilities. The other issue is vote splitting and Dion will be fighting 2 or 3 other parties for the left vote. That could allow the Conservatives to come up the middle.
Latest polls show the Conservatives ahead in Ontario and there is no way Francophone Quebecers are going to vote for the person they called the "rat" unless something significantly happens. Afghanistan and the environment will not be signifcant issues at the time of the next election. Predicting Ontario is a fools game. Nobody knows because the NDP could be spoilers this time out.
So we can guess all we want and you are entitled to your assessment but it would appear the majority of Canadians are satisfied with the current government. The Liberals have not led in any poll over the past two years with the Conservatives maintaining an 8-10 point lead.
[updated Wed Dec 05 12:15:15 EST 2007]
05 Dec 12:15
Lorne Mccuaig
Actually, holinm, the latest polls from Nik's polling with SES suggests this clip from November 14th polling by SES research which is now officially called Nanos Research.
"Of note, the Tories are up in the province of Quebec and the Liberals are ahead of the Tories by nine points in Ontario."
SES polling revealed a near dead heat on Nov. 14th at 35% Con and 34% Liberal.
You can pull out polls that are bought and paid for by Can West and call it what you like if that suits your own opinion, but the last election revealed a major gap between the numbers reported by Can West and what Canadians did up to and including the day of the election. The same goes for Ontario's election results with Can West calling for a Conservative majority with a 9 point lead into the voting booths that clearly didn't surface.
As for SES which is going through a name change to Nanos research, SES has been consistent throughout. Perhaps its because they are less funded by concentrated media?
So you too, are entitled to your own opinion and you can rely on opinionated media and polling if you like. But I'll rely on Nik's numbers if you don't mind. :-)
Have an awesome day!
[updated Wed Dec 05 15:12:20 EST 2007]
05 Dec 15:12
waynorth
Here's the Ontario rub. I find rants on how stupid the people of Toronto and Ontario are for not jumping on the Harper Conservative bandwagon. How they are less than informed and intelligent becuase they always vote Liberal. It's especially humourous when coming from an Albertan - the ONE province that has had virtual one-party provincial government for nealy SIXTY yeras. And the ONLY province than votes federally en mass for ONE party - Reform/Alliance/Conservative.
Why do you suppose urban Ontario and Toronto in particular have no time for Harper and his boys? Can it be their primary concerns are odds with each other? I think that goes without saying. Eighty percent of Canadians live in urban areas. Ontario has the highest percentage of urbanites in the country with nearly 20% of ALL Canadians live in the GTA and nearby surrrounding areas. Harper and the Conservative have shown complete disregard and distain for the needs of Canada's largest cities. When the currrent federal finance minister (Tony Clement) was an Ontario politician he oversaw the downloading of costly services and programs to municipal governments then closed the provincial cheque book. Today, he (along with Harper) still refuses to revisit and redefine any federal/municipal financing agreements - even as the infrastructures of our major cities' (where 80% of our citizens live!) continue to decay and crumble while federal coffers grow larger.
Or maybe it's the bill to add House of Commons seats Harper is about to introduce. The one where Alberta and B.C. (friendlier Conservative electoral environments) get additional seats to bring their ratio closer to that of every other province (1 MP for every 100,000 people) yet Ontario gets just a few and becomes the ONLY province to have one MP for every 200,000 people.
And those are just two of the current Harper positions that negatively impact the people of Ontario.I don't think it's too hard to figure out why Harper's "vision" aint selling there. I suppose Mr. Harper believes he doesn't need Ontario; that he can build his dreamed of majority by forging common cause with Quebec's Mario Dumont (separation without separating) and the West (primarily Alberta and the bible belt BC interior) with a few other ridings here and there.
After all, Harper isn't intersted in GOVERNING for ALL Canadians, but rather in gaining majority POLITICAL power in order to implement his right wing agenda as outlined by his mentor, strategist and uberCON man, Tom Flanagan. Can he do it by continuing to demean, belittle and generally ignore Ontario's concerns? I guess is no.
[updated Sat Dec 08 01:13:24 EST 2007]
08 Dec 01:13
blossom
Hello hollinm,
Difficult to believe that we are back to where we left off.
Haven't you heard that at Bali, Canada is not well perceived, by all countries of this Planet. We are not seen as innovative, but preventing what has to be done in order to deal with proven effects, and costs of global-warming.
All Countries, and now that Steve's friend was ousted as PM in Australia, his counter-part is acquiescing to the Kyoto Protocol. How can Canada refute what it has already signed to? Sounds like another broken promise from this new gov/t.
15 months, and the US administration will change, and all Countries, sauf Canada, will be part of the Kyoto Protocol. We have no choice, How do you like this weather we are having. No, not hot, but this is the result of La Nina, and if 1% of our temperature is increased we shall already be in trouble. There are parts of the globe that will be inundaded, for instance New York, the UK could become a glazier, and this mix-max weather is proving that this gov/t has got it wrong. It's all hot air.
As l'Hon. Stephane Dion stated, Canada should be a Leader in helping poor, and challenged Countries, and that Canada should present itself on the stage world, as a precursor for the divine cause. Instead, we let hot air PM, and John Baird belittle our Country in front of the world stage at Bali. The future cost of countering what we should be addressing now, will be 20% of the world's GDP? How does that sound?
Fear of others who are different, and wars, fear of innovation, when already, a majority of citizens across the globe have taken this threath seriously. Ford is already creating cars of the future in other Countries. Business understand that if they want profits that they have to innovate, and change with the circumstances that life is not stagnat - seems that our government hasen't yet gotten this message.
M. Dion has a plan to eliminate poverty and his plan is called 30/50. You can read his proposals by subscribing to his weekly email letter. It's worth reading, and cost free.
blos
[updated Thu Dec 06 01:27:49 EST 2007]
06 Dec 01:27
hollinm
blossom...I wondered where you were. I am not going to get into the environment thing with you again because you and I are on "different planets" when it comes to Kyoto. You say "15 months, and the US administration will change, and all Countries, sauf Canada, will be part of the Kyoto Protocol" One small point not all the countries are in Kyoto. You forgot about China, India and I would remind you it was Bill Clinton who turned down Kyoto and Hiliary Clinton says she does not support Kyoto. So where will the U.S. go when Hiliary becomes President (if that happens)/ Of course she has so many positions on so many issues who knows what she will do when it comes to the environment file.
There are two issues here: 1) what will we do in Canada domestically to address envrionment issues? 2) what will we agree to on the international scene in respect to setting global targets?
You know my position. It does not make sense if we are interested in truly stopping global warming in the world for everybody not to be included. We destroy our economy while watching our businesses move to non Kyoto countries i.e. China to reduce their operating costs.
That's my position in a nutshell.
[updated Thu Dec 06 11:05:06 EST 2007]
06 Dec 11:05
Zena
Hollinm you sound like the guy down the block who won't recycle because not everyone in the city is doing it, or dumps his used oil in the garbage because it's just easier and what difference does it make.
If we all take the attitude you and your friends Steve and Baird are taking, nothing will ever be done.
Mr. Dion's plan is based on the simple idea that the polluter pays and requires that Canada's large industrial emitters live within a "carbon budget" with an absolute emmissions cap and will put a price on carbon. It also includes a Green Innovation Investment Fund that will allow businesses to qualify for a green project investment by creating real, verifiable and incremental reductions in the company's carbon pollution.
THAT is a plan to take action (available on the LPC website for those interested in information instead of CPC rhetoric).
[updated Thu Dec 06 18:38:09 EST 2007]
06 Dec 18:38
hollinm
Zena....I hate to remind you that there is no such thing as polluter pays. The only people that will pay is we ordinary hardworking Canadians. Simple as that. Dion imposes a carbon tax on the major emitters and we will see inflation rise, interest rates go up, job losses, bankruptcies, and companies moving their operations to other countries where the environment is not an issue i.e. U.S., China and India.
Once again in case you haven't got it yet. There is no switch to be turned and puff emissions will stop and all companies will be green. The technologies are simply not there and I defy you to tell me they are. Wind power and solar energy are not mature enough. Hybrid cars, not available, carbon sequestration for the oil sands. Not there.
Companies are already moving their manufacturing processes to less expensive jurisdictions even before "carbon taxes". Increase the costs make those companies even more uncompetitive and see what happens. Call me a fearmonger if you like but I worked in business and know how they think.
Instead of thinking in emotional terms think about the costs to Canadian consumers, think about the heartache caused by the loss of jobs. The manufacturing sector is already suffering. Place a carbon tax on the auto and airline industries today and you will know what happens. The North American car industry is hanging on by their finger nails. Introduce more costs and we will see not 3 N.A. automakers but maybe one if we are lucky.
The so called Green Innovation Investment Fund will simply be a slush fund for the government to spend in whatever fashion they want. The company supposedly has access to it for two years and then they lose those funds. This sounds like a bureaucratic nightmare just like the collection of the GST. How much will it cost to administer etc. etc.
If you are as worried about global warming as you suggest then it does not make sense to allow the largest polluters to be excluded from any treaty. Are we serious about reducing global warming or are we only interested in wealth distribution?
Canada does need to take action to reduce its carbon footprint but the government has a responsibility to protect the country and its citizens from acting emotionally and make decisions that are in the best interest of the country as a whole.
Finally I would suggest to you that most Canadians want something to be done about the environment. However, if you say to them to accomplish this you will now pay $5.00 for a litre of gas, you will pay $700.00 a month for your heating costs, you will pay an environment tax on all SUVs, your cost of living will go up 25% annually etc. etc. You know what the answer will be don't you. The enviro zealots will not have the support of the public. So the danger to the environmentalists and people like you who support them is carry the argument too far and you will lose the support of the public.
I get that feeling that we are near the tipping point and Canadians are now beginning to realize that there is no easy answers but I would suggest none of them are prepared to reduce their standard of living to take the drastic action the envirofacists are trying to blackmail the government into doing.
[updated Thu Dec 06 22:45:20 EST 2007]
06 Dec 22:45
LEDA
hollinm
Very good answer, but no matter how much you tell these people the obvious, it will never get through. They have drank the cool-aid and are pleased. Big Gov is going to solve all their problems. Ban all the bad things and keep all the good things. See problems solved ("Now how hard was that!"). They are morons, God help us all if they obtain the reigns of power.
[updated Sun Mar 09 22:10:59 EDT 2008]
09 Mar 22:10
blossom
Hi hollinm, thought that I would surprise you and make a small comeback!
Good question. Sounds as though each Province is going to take those matters into their own hands. Citizens alike. There is much pressure from the European nations to follow suit.
The idea is that we, Canada, give other Countries help in their development, and since we were the worst poluters in the West, that we shall have to take control of our present and future actions. Canadians should be giving the better example, rather than reneging from the problems that we face. Growing economies, which we will have to reckon with eventually, can point to the finger at us, for perhaps causing this problem. Nonetheless, it is up to us to to stop curbing our carbon footprint, before we are faced with the problem of having no other choice, but to do so for being unreasonable.
hollinm, I would like to remind you though, that Canada did sign the Kyoto Protocol. It 's just a matter of political will to make it work. Apparently, it is already too late to do so, however, we could at least try to catch up for failing to do so. It could be presumed a smart move!
This makes sense to me. Kyoto did not work, because we did not make it work!
Until a year ago, it wasen't even on the plate. Onloy this gov/t is still in denial!
Scientists all over the globe are warning that 4 years and we shall have environmental problems, that might be too late to address. It has nothing to do with recking our economy, but to boost it before 'nature' forces' us to do so. Whether it is man-made or enough is not important, the idea is to try to counteract the negative results.
All we are calling for, is a little bit of smart prevention.
No to Hillary Clinton - Don't trust her! I like Bill Richardson, Gov. of N. Mexico, and Barack Obama.
In a nutshell, I like to keep an open-minded approach to everything, as the world changes!
Take care,
[updated Thu Dec 06 20:15:23 EST 2007]
06 Dec 20:15
hollinm
Hi blossom:
Mr. Harper has clearly said that big emitters in Canada will have binding targets. They will start with intensity based targets which will allow for an adjustment period but with full compliance to be in place by 2010 for absolute reductions. That sounds responsible to me rather than Dion's approach to place a carbon tax immediately on all the major emitters.
Who do we think is going to pay the increased costs to these businesses? It won't be those companies. They will pass along the increased costs to their consumers. That means immediate increased costs for all consumers in Canada on virtually every product. It will result in higher inflation, increased interest rates, jobs losses and companies moving to more enviro friendly countries i.e. U.S., China and India. Can you not see this?
Please stop with the emotional rhetoric. Think about the costs. The technologies are not in place today and will not be for the forseeable future. There is no switch to be pulled to change our manufacturing and processing industries today.
I saw a column the other day suggesting that the costs to the world could be $1.8 trillion and it still won't fix the problem of global warming. So we need to not get caught up in the hype but look at this issue rationally.
Once again I am not saying do nothing what I am saying approach this issue with balance and common sense. If we do what is being suggested and we are wrong and our economy collapses who is going to get blamed. Not the Liberals, NDP and the Bloc they will sit on the sidelines and criticize.
If Kyoto was not a success in Canada there is only one party to blame. Whether the environment was on the radar or not recognizing they had an international obligation Chretien and his band of thieves should have done something. Instead they plotted on how to steal money from Canadians.
[updated Thu Dec 06 22:13:55 EST 2007]
06 Dec 22:13
blossom
hollinm, its the same old rhetoric. Re-read Zena; she has it right!
This new gov/t inherited huge surpluces, and is squandering it.
Did you read Thomas L. Friedman's, N.Y. Times, article about America's addiction to oil, from the State of the Union, and read by 'bush', two years ago, and now the report on how Iran had already stopped enriching uranium to make a bomb in 2003? Yet, he still wants to attack Iran! Lies is what we are fed.
After 9/11 the US mandated itself, by instilling "FEAR" and instigated a war in Iraq, that had nothing to do with the attack on the Twin Towers.
Now, this present government is also instilling FEAR that we should not prepare for those results that will come from adopting measures that could help us in the future.
In the next decade we shall not be fighting over oil, but "WATER" for which there is no substitute for all living organisms. Crops...
Now do you get the picture? What you are being fed is a bait...The markets are changing and innovating.
If we were smart, we would encourage new markets, and develop new technologies that would help us during this transition process - instead we are hell-bent on our old ways.
Are our technologies getting smarter than our brains?
Kyoto may not have worked - no surprise - even when confronted with the facts our present Leader is still in denial, and for whom? But if Kyoto ain't broken, why not put it back into action?
J. Chretien was instrumental in developing Alberta, or have you forgotten?
Mr. Chretien answered the Press, but this PM doesn't even answer questions directed at him in Parliament. We have a right to know what this government is up to? Do you know? His agenda is a big secret, but closely linked to the 'bush' administration. That's enough to worry about!
[updated Thu Dec 06 23:20:46 EST 2007]
06 Dec 23:20
LEDA
Kyoto would have the same effect on cooling the climate as pointing a garden hose at the sun (which just might be the cause of ALL our warming, but I digress). Economies would fail, jobs lost and dreams abandoned, and we would still be in the same boat.
And you think that's a good thing.
[updated Sun Mar 09 22:20:30 EDT 2008]
09 Mar 22:20
blossom
Hello Leda,
Since I found your reply in my inbox, I presume that you are addressing me.
Yes, well I am not sure whether you are speaking of Kyoto the "dog", or Kyoto the "Protocol"?
If those who opposed the Industrial revolution at the turn of the war, we would not be having this dilemma.
I like to think that the scientist are most aware, if honest, and not those who are being muzzled, or paid by the 'bush' administration, that we must invest in new technologies before we, and each of us, start feeling the pinch of what will revolutionize the wealth of our resources, and the stresses of not having the affluence that we have grown accustomed to.
Sir Richard Branson has already flown a jet on bio-fuels...He is by no means what you would call poor, but innovative, and very wealthy, and smart.
Entrepreneurs are already revolutionizing our markets, and those who tap in will be the winners.
When we run out of oil, yes, our economies will fall, and we shall be fighting over natural resources. Already, Provinces want to sell water.
By 2020, this planet will be scorched in places where we used to have farming.
They are already heating with cattle waste, which is not new, because it was already being devised on private US cattle ranches, and farms in the 1950's, and can provide electricity, and take care of animal waste.
If we remain in denial, other Countries will have all of the advantages of new developed 'green' markets, and we shall lag behind with our old broken down economies. For instance, China, India. India has developed the "Nano" car, which is like a bug, and sells for $2,500. When this car is fabricated as a hybrid, they will be way ahead of us. Why is Toyota, rather than Ford,
always ahead, and Ford always on the brink of bankruptcy?
It is always those who invent, invest in new solutions who are the winners, and those who don't get it; get left behind!
Fortunately the world is full of entrepreneurs who get it, and understand, and start putting their minds to work. If it wasen't for those creative people, we would always stagnate behind.
If you are fererring to the oil-sand companies, of course, they are in denial, and panic...But we will all foot the bill for this, and they are not threathening, they are promising to get even with us...Wait till gaz prices go up to $1.47 next summer. Why?
As far as I am concerned, climate-change is passe, and time that we all stepped up to the plate!
Frogs are almost instinct, but did you know that in China, they use their venim to cure, for example, pancreas cancer, and other deadly cancers.
The ramifications of continuing on this premise, is that we are going to lose out to those who have an open mind, and find solutions to the dilemmas of the ongoing, devestating changes to our planet.
Water where none was. Schorched eath rather than farming. New viruses because of heat. And cold, where it used to be warm. The pine beetle that destroys all of our trees; it has already passed the BC border... etc...etc...etc...
Did you hear the report today, that the Afghan war is costing $20billion dollars more, than had been predicted, and reported?
We need not agree, but I am going with those who have predictability realiability, and those who are smart, and don't gamble with my space!
Try and look at the brighter side of things, Leda. Unless we start caring, we shall all be in the same boat!
[updated Tue Mar 11 23:19:12 EDT 2008]
11 Mar 23:19
LEDA
You cannot invent or bring new solutions to the table when a socialist carbon tax is extracting financial resources from the economy and social engineers who are responsible for the wealth redistribution don't have a clue or a different agenda. A dollar taxed is at least 50% of it's value in the market place because of red tape and bureaucratic bungling which reduces gov program effectiveness. Any enterprise that is not into smaller lighter faster and more economical should die of natural causes, but interference in the market by gov, enviros and special interests prevent it. Free enterprise if allowed to be free will solve most problems cheaply, efficiently and the most effectively. It's the commies, socialists and control freaks in the enviro movement and gov that slow progress. Really, they don 't want problems solved because they cease to exist.
And no I don'y buy the
"Water where none was. Schorched eath rather than farming. New viruses because of heat. And cold, where it used to be warm. The pine beetle that destroys all of our trees; it has already passed the BC border... etc...etc...etc..."
That's all bullshit - justification of existence re above. The pine beetle will pass, the climate will change as it always has and things will go on. I hope you're wearing a hard hat because in your world the sky is crashing down.
And blossom, I do care, that's why I'm pissed at all this nonsense.
[updated Wed Mar 12 00:06:23 EDT 2008]
12 Mar 00:06
blossom
Slung like a real conservative, Leda.
Happy trails!
[updated Wed Mar 12 03:00:09 EDT 2008]
12 Mar 03:00
Zena
Boy that hit a sore spot didn't it?
Have you brought the same harsh light to the party that you are so strenously supporting?
Mr. Harper dosen't even try to communicate - he issues statements - his Dictator's style is all about "Control".
So what about - Income Trusts. Equalization. Atlantic Accord. Kyoto Protocal (a legal international agreement signed by us). Trying to call recycled and watered down Liberal inniatives an Environmental policy. Afghanistan prisoners. Schrieber. $200 million cut from First Nations child care in the north. Failure to ratify the UN Convention on Indiginous Peoples - which Canada helped draft! Canadian Wheat Board referendum scam. No municipal strategy and on and on.
If we have a strong economy with surpluses now, you know it was because Cretien's government brought in 8, count 'em 8, balanced budgets and put us at the top of the G8! While Jim Flarety has been the "spendingist" Finance Minister ever.
[updated Thu Dec 06 19:56:03 EST 2007]
06 Dec 19:56
hollinm
Zena, Zena, Zena. Obviously your hatred for the Conservative government clouds your mind. I guess it really is the kool-aid given to all those Liberal supporters in this country.
Unlike Paul Martin who never saw a microphone he didn't like this prime minister is busy conducting business. It may not be Liberal business because he is a Conservative. Get it. A Conservative.
Are you seriously suggesting that Mr. Harper is involved in the Mulroney/Schreiber affair. You have got to be joking. Mr. Harper did not like Mr. Mulroney. In fact his dislike for Mulroney and his government policies was the reason that Harper helped form the Reform Party. You don't know what you are talking about. You are obviously reading those Liberal press releases.
The Atlantic Accord is still in place. Whether you believe it or not. If N.S. and Nfld want to keep the Accord they can. However, Harper campaigned on changing equalization to make it a more principled approach. He enhanced it but had a claw back in it so that when have not provinces reach the have province stage they no longer get equalization. Williams wants his cake and eat it too. If Williams position was palatable why didn't the other provinces and territories support him when they had a chance to come up with a new formula. They needn't. That leaves Williams isolated and while he can continue with his over the top rhetoric Canadians see him as greedy and a blowhard.
I acknowledge that Harper broke his promise on income trusts. However, I am not as cynical as you and think he simply got up one morning and decided to piss off investors and seniors and change the policy. He was convinced it was in the best interest of the country.
Please see my other post to you on Kyoto. I won't repeat my comments here.
You in your self righteous zeal can worry about Afghan detainees. I can tell you most Canadians could care less what happens to them. My God they are slaughtering our young men and woman and people like you want to worry about them. How noble! There is an agreement in place. The Canadian soldiers turn them over and it is the democratically elected Afghan government who is responsible for them from there.
If the Liberals were so worried about the plight of Aboriginals why didn't they solve their problems. They had 13 years.
If we have a strong economy today it is because the Liberals made the tough decisons and cut programs and downloaded the expenses onto the provinces. However, I would suggest it was Mr. Mulroney who introduced the GST and the Free Trade Agreement that set the table.
[updated Thu Dec 06 23:09:04 EST 2007]
06 Dec 23:09
Zena
OK hollinm, this is starting to sound an awful lot like Question Period. Let's back this up to some basics.
In order to have a strong democracy, we have to have at least 2 differing views and we certainly have that.
For me, I bought my first membership in any political party, the LPC, after being raised in an NDP household and living with a Conservative provincial government. After looking at these 3 parties, I found that the Liberal principle of equality of opportunity appealed to me more than either the extreme left or right wing partys did.
Mr. Dion was my first choice for Leader because of his couragous defense of federalism during the referendum crisis, the Clarity Act he brought forward and the way he brought so many people together at the 2005 Montreal Climate Change meeting.
Every organization with large numbers of passionate people will have problems but the core principles of the Liberal Party are intact.
So, we agree to disagree and we'll see what the voters have to say about the records in office and the policy ideas put forward.
[updated Fri Dec 07 22:57:58 EST 2007]
07 Dec 22:57
hollinm
So, we agree to disagree and we'll see what the voters have to say about the records in office and the policy ideas put forward.
I agree with this statement.
There is no disagreement that each person needs to look at which party is in line with their own political thinking. However, while I did support Chretien in 1993, his reneging on the GST committment and his campaigning to change the Free Trade Agreement demonstrated to me that the Liberal party could not be trusted. There were many other things in the Red Book which the Liberal party chose to ignore as well i.e. national daycare program. In fact Paul Martin was quoted as saying the Red Book was bullshit and he knew it because he wrote it.
Zena you and I have a different view of what government is there for. I believe in small government, individual responsibility and low taxes. I believe we as individuals should decide what we want to spend our own money on; not the government.
As an example of Liberal values is the gun registry which was a boondoggle of the highest order where almost $2 billion of taxpayer money was wasted with the stated objective of reducing crime never achieved. Big national programs don't work any longer. We are in the 21st century and the country has grown and matured. We don't need big nanny governments any longer.
If the Liberals have such values why was aboriginal poverty not resolved, why was childhood poverty not solved, why was Kyoto not implemented, why was the inequality of women not resolved. These are all so called "Liberal" values. The list could go on but you get my point. The Liberals talk at good game but when it comes to actually getting things done they fail miserably.
However, the clincher for me was the Liberal party with Mr. Chretien as the orchestra leader designed a scheme which resulted in millions of dollars being stolen from Canadian taxpayers. There is no denying he did this because he was found responsible by the Gomery Inquiry.
You are right there will be an ideological discussion between the Libs and Cons. The former want a nanny state where they control everything via the purse strings no matter which level of government is responsibile for the jurisdiction. The Cons want a federal government which focuses on its own responsibilites, doing them well and the provinces being held responsible for their own areas of jurisdiction. That way Canadians will be the judge of which level of government is acting responsibly and can be held accountable by their electors.
I have no doubt Mr. Dion supports federalism. However, I would suggest if he had been effective at convincing Quebecers we would not see the Bloc still holding the majority of seats in Quebec today. It's results that count Zena not rhetoric. I would suggest that Mr. Harper's recognition of the Quebecois forming a nation within a united Canada did more for the unity of this country than all of the letters written by Mr. Dion.
As for the Clarity Act. The Liberals and Mr. Dion want to take credit for it but I would suggest the genesis for the Clarity Act came from the Reform Party with the document written by Stephen Harper.
[updated Sat Dec 08 14:02:36 EST 2007]
08 Dec 14:02
hollinm
Just in case you missed this by Nanos Research:
The first annual Nanos "Mood of Canada" Poll shows 65.8 percent of Canadians believe the country is heading in the right direction, while only 20.2 percent believe Canada is moving in the wrong direction, and 14 percent didn't know.
The survey will be published annually in the year-end double issue of Policy Options. The poll of 1,004 Canadians, conducted November 6 to 8, by telephone is accurate to within a margin of 3.1 percent, 19 times out of 20.
Looking forward from the end of 2007 to the beginning of 2008, when we asked Canadians whether the economy would become stronger or weaker in the next year, there was a striking degree of optimism. By a margin of 2 to 1, Canadians think the economy will get stronger. Half of all Canadians, 49.3 percent, think the economy will get stronger over the next year, while only 19.8 percent believe it will get weaker. One Canadian in four, 24.9 percent, thinks there will be no change.
The Prime Minister and his government get very high marks from Canadians. The Harper government gets a very good rating from 10.1 percent of the voters, and a good one from 29.4 percent. Another 38.1 percent give the government an average report card, while only 9 percent give it poor performance marks, and 9.4 percent rate it as very poor. However, there is a continuing caution for Prime Minister Harper in the voting intention numbers, as measured in other Nanos polls, as well as in those by other public opinion research firms. The Conservatives continue to be unable to cross the threshold of a majority, largely due to a gender gap and the resilience of the Liberal Party brand in Ontario. These are strong reasons for Harper to approach any election scenario with caution.
To sign up for automatic polling updates from Nanos Research or to see the detailed tables visit our website at: www.nanosresearch.com.
Feel free to forward this e-mail. Any references should refer to the research as the "Nanos/Policy Options Mood of Canada Poll".
Cheers,
Nik Nanos, CMRP
President & CEO
NANOS RESEARCH
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[updated Mon Dec 10 13:13:31 EST 2007]
10 Dec 13:13
blossom
I hear you loud and clear, Zena...
Either some are in denial, or asleep...
The US has just injected another $200billion dollars into the US economy, and Canada is contributing $4billion...So is Europe!
The Federal Reserve is printing US monies, and the trillians that the Iraq war is costing the Americans is not even going into the Iraq economy!!! This war was predicated on lies...
Did you hear that footing the bill for the Afghan war/mission has doubled what this gov/t had told us it would cost. The US is bankrupt, and this Canadian gov/t is going to get us into huge deficits!
As for Jim Flaherty, he is fighting his own province's advantages - Does this make any sense?
I hope that Canadians are paying attention because of the US elections...There are rumours that 'bush & cheney" want to annihilate Iran, which would keep 'bush' at the helm.
I am not a conspiracy theorist, but the lies and corruption that exists in Washington is undeniable, and our present gov/t has me worried! They are turning our Country around, and greed and power and hipocracy seems rampant!
It is the ideological zellots and "better than thou" that always cause the spin! They want to rule the world at all costs.
Cheers,
[updated Wed Mar 12 03:20:42 EDT 2008]
12 Mar 03:20
blossom
Hi hollinm,
Somewhere in one of your posts you mention the Outremont riding election? This is the perfect occasion for me to set the record straight, and I have been waiting for this moment!
M. Dion's wisdom at choosing this Outremont riding candidate, Jocelyn Coulombe, was in point of fact, an intelligent move, one that I am sure, and looking back, that the voters of that riding are possibly regretting; their vote for the NDP candidate who is plastering his charms, and weaving all over the place!
Jocelyn Coulombe is a serious,political strategist, journalist, professor in his own right. The real problem that I have was that M. Coulombe was another unkown, who did not shine in the limelight, I grant you, but was a political wizzard! Unfortunately, the Liberal party took it for granted that people knew more about him, and his political savvy. They just forgot to introduce him properly to his riding. In today's real world, even in politics, one needs an agent to represent a good candidate.
It seems that we are always returning to the exterior packaging, and forget to look for content, which is no substitute for real substance!
[updated Sat Dec 08 00:52:15 EST 2007]
08 Dec 00:52
hollinm
blossom I have no reason to disagree with your assement.
However, a sign of a good leader is the ability to pick and choose candidates that will win a riding in an election or by election. While Mr. Coulombe may have all the attributes you asscribe to him the fact is he had no name recognition and was a political neophyte.
Dion knew that Mulcair would be running in Outremont and so knowing this and Mulcair's pedigree it was incumbent upon him and the party to ensure they put up a candidate that at least had a chance of winning the riding. Dion has to accept all the blame because it was his hand picked candidate.
Once again Mr. Dion showed his lack of political skill and this is what is going to cause him all kinds of problems in the next election.
Mr. Harper's visit to River de loupe yesterday shows that he is serious about winning as many ridings as he can in Quebec. Francophone Quebecers are not prepared to vote for the "rat" (Dion) and particuarly when the Liberal party is going to campaign for a federal government that still wants to interfer in provincial jurisdiction (is this still more evidence of Dion's weak leadership abilities)?
[updated Sat Dec 08 14:13:29 EST 2007]
08 Dec 14:13
blossom
And a good day to you also hollinm,
If one is to be taken seriously, one has to get one's mind out of the gutter, and learn not to be too gutteral, woundn't you think, hollinm?
bloss
[updated Sat Dec 08 19:45:42 EST 2007]
08 Dec 19:45
hollinm
Sorry I missed your point.
[updated Sat Dec 08 22:01:26 EST 2007]
08 Dec 22:01
blossom
Hi hollinm,
Well perhaps the Irish in me came out a bit strongly, but you know that I do not like disparaging words about anyone. Your last paragraph reminded me of carricatures that I have deplored in the past, and not of fairplay. Gamesmanship is one thing, but hitting below the belt and with personal remarks is not in my vocabulary.Let us say that this type of anylisis just does not inspire me with food for thought!
However, I shall attempt, to answer that had M. Dion attempted to place a better known candidate, who had been proposed, that this candidate, would have been perceived, by oposing forces, that he was thriving on his father's notoriety. Either way, M. Dion would have been critizised.
Mr. Mulcair's reputation was well known, since he had already been in the Provincial Liberal party. I can tell you, and with much conviction, that the word from many Outremont voters was, ABH! It could only get worse if they vote for the 'bloc' the next time around.
As for mario's dumont's ADQ, he has rubbed the people the wrong way many times, and his leadership qualities and his proposals have been turned on him each time. He is a separatist calling himself a nationalist now. Same difference.
He and Mr. Harper seem to want to cosey-up hoping that this will bring about more votes, and get the majority gov/t that he is craving for. In this province, we never know what to expect, and the numbers and polls change weekly.
What a Country needs is stability. While we are foolishly pondering on non-issues and all kinds of distractions, we are not paying attention to the broader picture, and we should. The Canadian dollar must stabilize, and no one knows what the US market is going to do. The US is deep into debt with China, and the FDA is short of funds, (for the past 20yrs), and it's time we worried about those issues, such as cancer research. Asians do not yet have our high concentration of cancer patients. In 1936 there was a report that was found that we already knew some of the why's, but we did not continue our research to at least, try to eradicate this horrible desease.
I am for a strong Federal gov/t., and with this province we need one. Dumont's idea is to get as many demands as possible from S. Harper, and how long can we continue to keep asking for more. It is the Liberal gov/t who protected us by staying within confederation, and the Liberals who saw to it that Qc did not get its own currency. This would have given them more ground to stand on and separate!
As Bernie suggested, I do not want to discuss the subject of leadership any more with anyone...If you want to talk about policies, I am all ears.
Tell me, if you so choose, what you feel that this government has accomplished during its 18 months in power? For instance:
Afghanistan:
Income Trusts:
Maad:
GLobal-warming:
The wheat board:
Softwood Lumber:
Qc as a Nation:
Darfur, Sudan:
The Pink Book:
Wildlife:
Gun control:
Childcare:
The Economy:
Africa:
Iran:
Security certificates:
and the list goes on and on.
[updated Sun Dec 09 05:33:35 EST 2007]
09 Dec 05:33
hollinm
Perhaps I did not put my quote in the proper context. I was merely repeating what the media and some of the sovereignists were calling M. Dion to emphasize during his time as intergovernmental affairs minister. The point being is that there is no love for M. Dion in the Francophone community and they will probably not vote for the Liberal party in the next election. I can recall seeing a cartoon calling M. Dion the name.
I do agree with you that I have concerns about M. Dumont's agenda but I will count on M. Harper to manage the relationship so that it benefits all of Canada and not just Quebec. However, you can believe that the Liberals did more to keep the country together all you want. I think with their intrusive policies into provincial jurisdiction they have not only angered Quebec but many other provinces.
This is the old line big government, big social programs, control of the purse strings and set the priorites that the federal government wants. To hell with what provincial premiers and their provinces want. We the feds know best. Blossom this is the 21st century the country has matured and grown. We don't need big nanny government.
Whether we like it or not if Quebec is to remain in Canada we need to do something to address their concerns as best we can. Fighting with them and waving red flags is not the answer. However, if we do not want to accommodate Quebec we should be clear and take the position that we want them to leave the federation. Because with Quebec's guaranteed 75 seats they control the agenda because of the number of parties in the House.
You have provided a broad list of issues to talk about. Surely you are not blamely M. Harper for all the evils of the world. Your party had 13 years to solve many of these issues but instead they were busy scheming how to steal money from the taxpayers so they could buy votes in Quebec.
I could go through and discuss each of the topics but that would be a waste of my time and yours. You obviously believe what you want to believe and I will continue to believe what I want to believe.
[updated Sun Dec 09 09:14:59 EST 2007]
09 Dec 09:14
blossom
hello hollinm,
I shall have to cut my answer short since I am sorry that I do not have much time.
I don't think that there is much love lost for anyone in this province from what we have been hearing!
All is fair in Qc, and the Constitution provides for plenty of representation, just and Ontario has the most. No problem!
I thought that I had been calling for an Annual Meeting from this PM - at least they haven't had one since this gov/t is in office - and the Premiers have been calling for a Premiers Conference!
Grow up! Forget the past, and let bygones be bygones. What counts is today.
For instance, what about our necluar reactor, that is not producing Isotopes, and we benefit the rest of the world with 60% of those? What about cancer patients who could be at risk for this neglect that had been pointed-out 17months ago. I do not mean to hit below the belt, but who can we trust?
Don't give up to easily on Qc. There are a lot of lies out here. For instance, 25,000 new immjigrants have learned the English language, rather than, 250,000 who are learning the French language in all of Canada. It is a myth to say that French is going out of style! Those are the latest statistics according to William Johnson! If Qc is a have not province, they have brought it upon themselves - some are willing to starve for their cause!!! Let 'um!!! But I surely do not want to go down with them!
No, I am tired of playing the blaming game, and this goes for all parties! The policiticians are tripping themselves all over, and the resonance is, that we are starting to hear them tripping all over themselves!
Take care,
[updated Tue Dec 11 23:18:23 EST 2007]
11 Dec 23:18
hollinm
Hi blossom:
I think Canada, under Liberal governments, has changed dramatically from its original purpose. i.e. feds carrying out their own responsibilities with the provinces looking after their own areas of jurisdiction without the interference of the federal government.
Under Trudeau this policy began to change (hence big deficits and a huge debt burden) and as I have mentioned to you before it is because of this change that we see that Canada has turned into a socialist country whose citizens expect the government to look after them from cradle to grave.
Hence the current Conservative government who believes in personal accountability and responsibility with lower taxes is endeavouring to go back to basics in what Harper describes as open federalism i.e. provinces looking after their own areas of jurisdiction and the feds doing the same.
This does not mean that there cannot be national programs but those programs need to be trargeted with specific objectives and all provinces agreeing it is a national priority. This thing of provinces being able to opt out but get the funding anyway is crazy. Quebec loves to do this.
The opposition parties are absolutely beside themselves and are therefore doing whatever they can to stop Harper from achieving any success that he can take to the people in the next election. Even if it means passing and/or changing legislation that is not in the best interest of the country (Rodriguez Kyoto bill). All opposition parties are to the left of the government and therefore they believe that big government is the answer to all that ails the country despite the fact recent history shows big national programs no longer work.
[updated Wed Dec 12 10:21:03 EST 2007]
12 Dec 10:21
blossom
Hello hollinm,
I always respect your opinions, and understand your arguments.
For instance, you mention Kyoto...
Yesterday, John Baird was absent from addressing the Assembly in Bali, and to present his conservative plan, and his resilience from addressing a universal croud of environmentalists who were awaiting to hear about Canada's efforts to alter our fossil fuel emissions. Instead he pleaded having another engagement, and personal matters to settle to the Press and Medias. This is happening on the world stage, and the affrontery that a world Leader such as Canada would back down at a global intitiative whereby the rest of the world is awaiting our decision about preventing a global catasprophy, and addressing it, and showing that we are true Leaders, in the spirit of that Noble Prize Winning Liberal PM, Lester B. Pearson, who did put Canada's Leadership on the map.
Since when do Provinces not have innitiatives? Qc, and Ontario, and most probably BC will follow their own theme in order to reach the Kyoto targets in 2012!!! That is taking is responsiblitiy for one's actions, and showing the world that we can be Leaders.
Have I mentioned to you that the US ('bush' administration has already given Islands (West) of Alaska, approximately two years ago, to the Russians? Those are rich oil Islands! Does this make any sense to you?
Pretty soon, we shan;t be fighting about oil, but about a commodity that our specie cannot survive without, and this is essential 'water' resources. Bengladesh is already poor, and under water. Instead of fighting against what those who know is happening on this planet, you should find out what the consequences of not showing Canadian Leadership is in store for us. All of our common good! Look at the big picture, and the not so distant future.
This PM is telling us that all is well in Afghanistan, and that the mission is working, just as 'bush' is saying about Iraq - this year's reports are at its worst. It ain't working! There is no dialogue, and this autocratic PM is not sharing with anyone. This worries me!
The government's job is to protect all citizens. Not just its own interests, and the oil companies! To create intitutions that are necessary and benefit the good of those who need them. I don't really care who was to blame in the past, but right now, there are a lot of issues on the plate, times are changing radically, and I want a government who has the vision to foresee the future.
You can kill the Kyoto Bill, but it's going to come back and haunt you!
Of course the Conservatives want Provinces to look after themselves, unless, of course, by benefitting from certain allocated funds, it might bring him more votes! Do you really believe that Mr. Harper cares about
any cause but his own?
[updated Wed Dec 12 23:24:34 EST 2007]
12 Dec 23:24
hollinm
Good morning blossom....
Your comments relative to John Baird are interesting. You are quick to jump all over him. Just maybe there was something more important at stake i.e. some form of negotiation that needed to be done at that point in time. I don't think anyone can accuse Baird of being politically afraid or running and hiding. I am prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt but people who do not support this government and particularly its climate change plan are quick to look for sinister motives.
Do you think the environmentalist zealots were happy when Baird announced that the major emitters had 6 mos to determine their emissions with targets being set after? Oh I know they didn't go far enough, it will not work and all the rest of the blather.
I cannot believe, despite all the rhetoric, that the world is hanging on to every word Canada utters. We are small fish in a big pond. All the other countries can go ahead and set targets but as the government has said we will not agree to sign on unless all the major emitters agree. Once again blossom there can be no global progress on reducing GHGs without the U.S., China and India doing their part. If the environmentalists are serious then they should be supporting Canada's position.
So Quebec stands up at the conference and says they are going to adopt California emissions standards. First of all California emission standards have not even been adopted by California. Wait till Quebecers find out they cannot buy cars built in the other parts of Norther America because they don't meet Quebec's standards. Do you think the North American auto makers are going to change their standards for Quebec. Not likely. Charest has made another blunder that Quebecers are going to hold against him. I don't know what kind of auto industry you have in Quebec but just watch the fury over time. Likewise with the unfair carbon tax on your oil refinery.
On Afghanistan you memory is selective. Nobody is saying all things are sweetness and light. Remember it is not our fight. We are a small part of the Nato mission and do not make the decisions about what happens on the battle field. That is Nato's responsbility. We are one voice around the table. I go back to my comments of yesterday. What do you want to know? Do you want the Harper government to give you the battle plans, do you want to know how manyTaliban were captured etc. etc. Think about what you are saying.
In your partisan zeal you can make a statement like the government is responsible to protect all citizens. I don't know what you are talking about. Once again you talk about the oil companies. Name one thing Harper has done to protect them. He will put emission standards on them like everyone else and he took away their tax incentives in the last budget. You are reading too many Liberal press releases my friend.
What new institutions would you like to see created? How high are you prepared to see your taxes go up so that you can have feel good national programs/policies which do not work. Do you think a national daycare program is the answer that has no requirement to create daycare spaces (because the provincial gov't won't commit to creating a specific number of spaces) will only look after a few children comparatively speaking and will not improve the lives of children but will stick them in a unionized warehouse environment. Do you want a guaranteed income for all those considered below the notional poverty line? You need to think carefully what you want your national government.
Programs need to be adopted by individual provinces to look after the needs of their own citizens. That way their citizens can hold them accountable for the results.
I have met Mr. Harper and have talked to my local MP. There is no finer man running in parliament today who is honest, born to ordinary hardworking people, who knows what it is to have to earn a living in the real world and who has a vision for the country. Unfortunately for people like you it is not the Liberal vision. Blossom you have read too much of the media hype and of course the Liberal spin.
[updated Thu Dec 13 07:48:55 EST 2007]
13 Dec 07:48
blossom
Hi hollinm,
I haven't noticed the Press and Medias being too kind to the Liberals? Especially not to S. Dion.
Just yesterday, Al Gore, stood on the platform meeting in Bali, and told the world audience, that his Country was the cause for not attacking this changing climate issue, while there are extraordinary changes that could be brought in order to address this problem. This was addressed to the 'bush' administration; not the American citizens! He called it another "Inconvenient Truth"!
As for Jean Charest, he is following the wishes of his constituents.
On this issue, Qc, is smart.
[updated Thu Dec 13 17:49:46 EST 2007]
13 Dec 17:49
hollinm
Only time will tell if Charest is right. However, when the citizens of Quebec cannot buy cars because they do not meet Quebec's new environmental standards we shall see.
Gore is right. If we want to have real reductions globally then all of the major emitters need to be included in any new international agreement. That's exactly the position of the Harper government.
Glad to see you agree blossom. Take care.
[updated Thu Dec 13 20:20:33 EST 2007]
13 Dec 20:20
Bernie
Hi Blossom, I agree with you. It's dispicable the way the US and Canada are acting on this. Canada is taking a big hit on this in the eyes of the rest of the world. Harper is destroying our great reputation.
Also TIME magazine is asking for recommendations as to their annual Man of the Year". I recommended Al Gore, and as a second choice, the Delai Lama
[updated Sat Dec 15 08:42:45 EST 2007]
15 Dec 08:42
hollinm
Hi blossom:
As to your comments on a premiers conference. Why? Just so the premiers can get a photo opportunity and show how big and tough they are. Why anyone would worry about whether there is this photo opportunity is beyond me? Can you remember anything that was accomplished at one of these gabfests. Of course, Paul Martin gave up $40 billion to fix healthcare for a generation. We are seeing how that worked out everyday as wait times escalate and Canadians can't get access to specialists.
I missed your point on the nuclear issue. There is a replacement for Chalk River currently being built and was scheduled for completion by 2005 while the Libs were firmly in power. However, due to construction delays it won't be completed until 2008. What did they do while in power to ensure that if a disruption with isotopes supplies took place in the 50 year old Chalk River plant. The answer to both of us is obvious. Obviously we could not trust the Liberal government to do the right thing.
However, I understand this issue is not one of safety but of new standards for backup systems established by the regulatory agency put into place at the time of the last licence renewal. Knowing that we supply 60% of the world's isotope needs why would the agency order the reactor closed down if it was operating fine. Was this just a bureaucratic agency showing a fit of pique because AECL didn't do it quickly enough. Something doesn't smell right.
Harper did what he had to do and what was in the public interest. Obviously the oppoisiton parties agree with this approach because they passed the legislation.
[updated Wed Dec 12 10:39:29 EST 2007]
12 Dec 10:39
blossom
Hi hollinm,
And yes, all parties met until 11:00PM last night in a very eloquent debate about the issues of security, and what is right for those patients awaiting the benefits of the Isotope distribution around the world.
They at least, called on those responsible for the issue of security, who totally responded to the safety issue, did not take into account about the patients' welfare, and thanks to the opposition cleared the air without taking one man's opinion. Since when is the PM an authority on nuclear safety issues?
It is a good thing that the Grits called attention to the AECL, and now all is in the open, and operating once again.
[updated Wed Dec 12 23:34:31 EST 2007]
12 Dec 23:34
hollinm
Since when does a bureaucrat at the regulatory agency have the right to ignore a government order in council asking her to consider the plight of the innocent people who need the isotopes for their survival. What cold hearted person does this I ask?
I mentioned yesterday this was a pissing contest between two agencies which should not have turned into the crisis it did. There was no safety issue here. It was a matter of who was going to win the battle between the two of them. Neither agency told the government there was an issue until Dec. 5th. Now we will see what happens but I supect there will be changes at both AECL and the Regulatory Agency.
Blossom, I know it is hard for Liberals to understand but Mr. Harper was elected as Prime Minister of Canada in Jan. 2006. He and only he is responsible for all the citizens of Canada. What drives the Liberals crazy is that he made the decision and they had to follow like sheep. You don't fool with Mr. Harper. We elected a leader and we got one. However, you are entitled to support the two professors who are running your party and believe what you want.
[updated Thu Dec 13 08:01:52 EST 2007]
13 Dec 08:01
blossom
Hi hollinm,
I guess that I am not getting my point across - In the "House" the reason that the three opposition parties wanted to wait, was to have those assurances that the nuclear reactor was safe indeed, and that, so far, they only had the PM's word for this.
The PM was even asked since when was he an authority on issues of safety with regards to nuclear reactors?
After an orderly debate in committee that ended quite late that evening, they got reassurances, and went ahead. However, the problems with the agencies came out into the open. That was one issue whereby a point was made, and the second was that they got the assurances that they could proceed without risk.
The PM always wants to act as though he was elected President!
I do not know how you can ignore that there was a safety issue, and that repairs should have been done, when reported, 17 months ago?
It is no longer a big deal, since the Isotopes are being produced again, but Parliament did ensure safety, and that patients around the world get the Isotopes.
[updated Thu Dec 13 18:47:11 EST 2007]
13 Dec 18:47
hollinm
It is a big deal as I told you in my previous post. Two agencies got into a pissing contest and for that some Canadians were denied care they desperately needed.
Is this your idea of what the Liberal party stands for? Where is the compassion? By the way the Liberals did not support the legislation but agreed to allow it to pass. In all of this the only comment came from professor Iggy that the government should allow AECL and the Regulatory Agency time to resolve their differences. No solution proposed at all. Some leadership from the high and mighty Liberal party.
Makes sense with two former professors trying to run the party who have no clue & don't understand what ordinary Canadians worry about in their daily lives. Everything is theory and academic with these two.
If one of your family members was waiting for these badly needed diagnostic tests would you be quite so magnanomous. I don't think so.
Now Pablo Rodriguez gets caught today allowing the CBC to give him questions to ask Mulroney. How sad is that. CBC and Rodriguez have a lot explaining to do.
[updated Thu Dec 13 20:37:26 EST 2007]
13 Dec 20:37
blossom
Hi hollinm,
Cool off! Either I do not explain myself very well, or you miss the point. As to the magnanimity, re-read other posts whereby I have called for better performance from all parties, when it comes to priorities!]
You understand the mechanics about the nuclear reactor safety- S. Harper, in the House, called to get the reactor working immediately...'Iggy" wanted proper assurances, that because 2 pumps had not yet been replaced, and after 17 mths of warning, that the reactors should not be started until all were completely assured that there would not be nuclear waste in the air. I am sure that you understand the gravity of this matter.
All ended well, because all parties met at a late Committee meeting, in order to ensure that that nuclear reactor was safe. Once it was established, the reactors were allowed to promote Isotopes. The medias haven't shown how those who live close to those reactors are worried. The warning was given to the Harper gov/t, about the reactor's dangerous, and precarious state seventeen months ago, but they did not pay heed, thus another crisis.
It was fortunate that "Iggy" brought light to this matter, because the red tape, and beaurocratic agency was doing its work, and had also reported the problems, but did not feel that it was their mandate to concern themselves with the stoppage of Isotope production. Their warning about the two defective pumps were totally ignored by this new government, and for the last 17 months.
I arrived to watch the hearings just as Pablo Rodriguez asked an important question: To Mr. Mulroney: Have you ever spoken, met, or talked on the phone with Maxime Bernier?
To which Mr. Mulroney replied: "I have never made a PRESENTATION to"...I would still like to know the answer to this question. No one asked him about a presentation.
Since the CBC broke the story, I am sure that their questions must be pertinent? Besides this was reported by Jean Lapierre's own inside info. from some staffer. We don't even know who his informants are? Besides, this is not the onus of the committee meeting. What I was able to observe, is that they are not looking for answers, and Mr. Mulroney would love to call off the Public Enquiry, which he had stated he was hoping would happen. We have just heard very superficial questions, and a lot of embroidery, but no serious answers. Even though they have rediculed Mr. Schreiber, and keep malighing his reputation, they are afraid of what could come out of all this. The onus has only been on Mr. Schreiber.
I also noticed, that the Conservatives were very affable towards Mr. Mulroney. Certainly did not want to dishevel him. Had they been questioning a Liberal, we would have seen more fire spitting with their questions. We would probably have seen more attack ads whilst they are dishing out so much monies.
I noted during this farce, that the medias were not reporting on the Bali Conference? Our PM is not doing well on the worldstage with regards to his Leadership capabilities, and yes, John Baird did bow out of confronting a world audience, because all those at Bali are furious with Canada's non-Leadership!
Look at the photo-ops: Harper, Bush, and China!
[updated Fri Dec 14 20:51:12 EST 2007]
14 Dec 20:51
hollinm
Just in case you missed the following by Nanos Research:
The first annual Nanos "Mood of Canada" Poll shows 65.8 percent of Canadians believe the country is heading in the right direction, while only 20.2 percent believe Canada is moving in the wrong direction, and 14 percent didn't know.
The survey will be published annually in the year-end double issue of Policy Options. The poll of 1,004 Canadians, conducted November 6 to 8, by telephone is accurate to within a margin of 3.1 percent, 19 times out of 20.
Looking forward from the end of 2007 to the beginning of 2008, when we asked Canadians whether the economy would become stronger or weaker in the next year, there was a striking degree of optimism. By a margin of 2 to 1, Canadians think the economy will get stronger. Half of all Canadians, 49.3 percent, think the economy will get stronger over the next year, while only 19.8 percent believe it will get weaker. One Canadian in four, 24.9 percent, thinks there will be no change.
The Prime Minister and his government get very high marks from Canadians. The Harper government gets a very good rating from 10.1 percent of the voters, and a good one from 29.4 percent. Another 38.1 percent give the government an average report card, while only 9 percent give it poor performance marks, and 9.4 percent rate it as very poor. However, there is a continuing caution for Prime Minister Harper in the voting intention numbers, as measured in other Nanos polls, as well as in those by other public opinion research firms. The Conservatives continue to be unable to cross the threshold of a majority, largely due to a gender gap and the resilience of the Liberal Party brand in Ontario. These are strong reasons for Harper to approach any election scenario with caution.
To sign up for automatic polling updates from Nanos Research or to see the detailed tables visit our website at: www.nanosresearch.com.
Feel free to forward this e-mail. Any references should refer to the research as the "Nanos/Policy Options Mood of Canada Poll".
Cheers,
Nik Nanos, CMRP
President & CEO
NANOS RESEARCH
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[updated Mon Dec 10 13:12:09 EST 2007]
10 Dec 13:12
blossom
hollinm,
Thanks for the update, but perhpas not all Canadians are watching that closely!
Certainly, if they stabilize the dollar. The bad news is that no one knows how the US economy is going to sustain next year, and this affects us also! Good reading!
The Americans are financing Iraq, and the 'bush' administration wants to finance Iran - i.e. if het could get his way.
So far, the Canadian gov/t doesn't seem to have heard Norine MacDonald, of the Senlis Council, on how bad things are in the South of Afghanistan...She is also calling for a surge...Unless this gov/t changes its course of action, we might be financing this war for the next 30 yrs. - at least!
That's food for thought also.
[updated Tue Dec 11 23:35:12 EST 2007]
11 Dec 23:35
hollinm
The Senlis Council is saying nothing new. What do we think the government has been saying?. We need more countries to join the battle and particularly in Kandahar province. Pulling out does not help the situation. That's for cowards. The Liberals committed us and we have an obligation to Nato and the international community.
No worry Dion and his pals on the left will make sure we pull out by 2009. That will end the Canadian committment in Afghanistan and all will be sweetness and light for the lefties in this country.
Of course then there will be Darfur and the Sudan. Will Dion and Layton call for troops to be sent there? After all the plight of the Africans is much more important than those terrible Afghans who have been fighting for 30 years.
Will we send troops to Darfur and what happens when they start killing our soldiers there? How do we get out then? Will Dion and Layton stand on their soap boxes and say how terrible it is that we went there in the first place?
It is disgusting to watch Dion, Layton and Duceppe preaching their high and mighty rhetoric when they have no answers themselves other than the simple answer pull out.
No problem abandoning the British and Dutch troops who we are fighting with in Kandahar province.
I am not in favour of War blossom but having committed ourselves, probably for all the wrong reasons, we are stuck whether we like it or not.
However, Harper has thrown the decision to parliament and we will see if the opposition parties are prepared to walk their talk.
[updated Wed Dec 12 10:55:54 EST 2007]
12 Dec 10:55
blossom
Hi hollinm.
I think you are missing the point.
Darfur is in Sudan. Chad next door.
1- Block the airways whereby the janjaweed deliver arms, and use them against their victims. It is the Sudanese gov/t that is corrupt and killing its own people.
2- Send helicopters so that aid can be distributed to those victims, children and mothers who are being butchered to death. All boy baby victims are slaughtered before their mothers. This is a genocide. The women are raped! The men are dismembered! It's a bloodbath, and it has been ongoing for 4 yrs!
3- Get the Chinese to also alter the course in Khartoom. This is a rich oil Country. The Chinese depend on their oil, therefore, not a beacon for human rights. Iran has the oil, for which the Americans are so dependent upon. How many of us are aware of all of the Iranian owned oil gaz stations that are in the US? The name escapes me right now.
4- The Conservatives have sent a few military arms, and monies, but the victims in tents are not getting this aid, because a lot of the aides are themselves threathened and killed.
Afghanistan: Wrong rhetoric:
We need more NATO allies. Less military.
The poppy crop is being destroyed by American forces; this does not help their cause. The Afghans do not distinguish an American from a Canadian. They just see soldiers fighting, and everybody is getting killed, including innocent people. We are the introdeurs until the Afghans start seeing real results.
Norine MacDonald is calling for more security from, and for the Afghans. More training for the Afghans to defend themselves. That they have honest policemen. This takes ages to train those people, and is very costly. The Kharzai gov/t who sympathizes with the West, needs more help. The warloards have to be delt with, and become responsible with the poppy crop.
She is calling for us to help them develop their poppy crop in inder to distrubute and renew the supply of morphine, codeine, and other much needed supplies of drugs around the world. I am not talking about illegal drugs! I am talking about turning their poppy crop into a pharmaceutical industry that would give the Afghans work, and hope, and dignity for their contribution with the rest of the world, and that would enhance their own personal lives. Democracy is best spread by the benefits that societies receive. Give them computers, money to buy food, and send them food supplies. Help them build institutions whereby they can get a life.First, start by feeding them, and teaching them, and medicines...
see about their welfare. How about computers?
Who do you think is profiting from the war in Iraq and Afghanistan?
It's some of the alledged Entrepreneurs, and the Erick Prince's who exploit those in wars. The arms dealers.
Pakistan has to be brought in to secure the borders. Iran should also be brought in to help, rather than China and Iran arming the taliban. At least there are rumours to that effect.
The Afghans need medicines, food, and security. Until this is established, it will be another disaster. We seem to be following the same mistakes made in Iraq, and this is unbelieveable. Al quada has to be found because their numbers are growing. The cells keep growing, but hide amongst themselves.
Last night, I heard an American soldier who was in Iraq, and he said that no one can imagine what hell it is to be out there. I believe that saving Afghanistan is a good goal, but Iraq was predicated on a lie, and had nothing to do with humanitarian goals, other than getting a stronghold on one of the richest oil reserve.
This is the message that I am trying to pass on to you - should we still be fighting for oil, or do we want to fight for water in the future?
All of this goes above political partisanship. M. Dion is right to ask for a long-awaited debate on this issue, and to try to restore a roadmap so that Soldiers/Heroes of all Countries might prevail. M. Dion is suggesting a roadmap so that the Afghans can see the light some day! Unless we change this coarse, Norine MacDonald is saying that we shall not prevail. It will only get worse!
The NDP and 'bloc' are irresponsible!
[updated Thu Dec 13 00:18:52 EST 2007]
13 Dec 00:18
hollinm
Mr. Dion wants a debate does he? He will get one in the fullness of time I suspect. However, I would remind you blossom that there was no debate in the House when we sent the military to Afghanistan and certainly no debate when we changed the mission to Kandahar. I guess its alright because it was a Liberal government that did it eh?
We are sending money to the region and I think we have sent helicopters. However you appear to be much more informed about that conflict.
Instead of trying to be an armchair quarter back I am prepared to give the government the latitude to do what it sees fit. We cannot be peacekeepers to the world blossom.
Please don't discuss Iraq in your comments to me. It is not our war and I could care less what George Bush says or does. I know you like to talk about it because it allows you to vent about George Bush and indirectly slag Harper because he holds some of the same positions as George Bush. What will the Liberals say when Bush leaves the White House. Oh, Harper is a lapdog to Hiliary. P..l..e..a..s..e
[updated Thu Dec 13 08:13:06 EST 2007]
13 Dec 08:13
sns36
Who wins, who loses, from the Schreiber-Mulroney affair?
The quick answer is that it is too early to tell. It looks, however, that this story has legs. But the legs are leading us back into our past. What I find most interesting is Schreiber's story that goes back to close to the start of the relationship, the German money that was used to help win the PC leadership for Mulroney. It was a relatively small amount of money, probably quasi-legal in the political ambience of that era, but disturbing at the very least. And it reminds us of the significance of "zombie" voters at conventions, lined up from constituencies that produced minimal results for the party in question. This was a familiar reality to those who were closely involved with politics in the 1960s through the 1980s.
I mention this because it is possibly indicative of who will gain by the time the next election is held. Whether Prime Minister Harper, or the current breed of Conservaives, wish it or not, even if Brian Mulroney comes out ahead of the unsavory Karl-Heinz Schreiber and his German backers (such as the Thyssens, who in the 1920s and 1930s were represented, in the U.S., by Prescott Bush, George W's. grandfather, and in 1932 organized the Ruhr industrialists who bailed out Adolph Hitler's Nazis so they could finance a faltering election campaign), he is likely to recede into relative obscurity as "yesterday's man."
This enhances the notion that the issues and perceptions going ahead to the second decade of the 21st century are clearly distinguishable from the legacy issues of the 1968-1993 period (in Canada as a whole) and the framework issues, relative to Quebec's dynamics and Canadian federalism from 1961-2005 (from Lesage's Quiet Revolution, through the Trudeau-Levesque era, and continuing on to the referenda and ending with the Gomery Commission and the rise of third forces in Quebec).
In the first instance, if he can maintain his distance as a Teflon Prime Minister, it is possible that the first winner (relatively speaking) will be Prime Minister Harper, if he is rid of the influence of former Prime Minister Mulroney. Subsequently, the shift from the old environment to the new one may also help one or more of the successor leaders (the epigoni) of the opposition parties. If that is the case, the election era beginning 2012/2013 might be truly interesting and exciting.
A postscript which is somewhat off topic, but relates to other themes posted to Nik Nanos's recent findings is a speculation on the future of the Green party and its leader Elizabeth May. The emergence of this party and its signature issue reminds me of the pre-CCF (antecedent of the NDP) group of socialist MPs of the 1920s, the "Ginger Group," lead by J. S. Woodsworth. Though eventually it spawned a line of political party politics on the Left, its major significance was to make a whole broad areas of social issues politically thinkable, reflected both in the brief "New Deal" phase of the Conservatives in the 1930s (but too little, too late, except for the creation of the CBC) and the wholesale adaptability by the more successful Liberals. My suspicion is that, in the next decade, all the parties will be echoing an earlier statement ("we are all socialists now"), by articulating the view that "we are all environmentalists now." The challenge to the voters will be to distinguish between "what is the real turtle soup, and what is only the mock."
[updated Thu Dec 13 12:20:06 EST 2007]
13 Dec 12:20
hollinm
I have no issue to the points raised. They are good ones.
While Mulroney will never win over his detractors I believe there is nothing illegal here regardless of the appearance as such. Did he delay paying his taxes. You bet! Is Canada Revenue Agency happy. Apparently so!
Was there a violation of the ethics code. Maybe! However, given the track that the committee is following and its partisanship that will need to be addressed by an independent body.
They can bring 100 witnesses in front of the committee it will still turn out to be he said/he said. Schreiber said there are no records and that Mulroney did nothing illegal. He did not accept kickbacks or bribes from the sale of Airbus to Air Canada. The RCMP exonerated Mulroney. What makes these MPs think they have the capacity to open up the investigation again.
The opposition are desperately trying to convict Mulroney for bad judgement. They are losing that battle. They are desperately trying to connect the activities of Mulroney to the Harper government. That is failing. Since when is it a crime for one prime minister to talk to another former prime minister.
You raise the issue of the environment. There are two issues. What are we doing domestically to cut GHG thus doing our part? The other is what are we prepared to sign onto internationally in the form of targets etc? The government, in my opinion, has a balanced approach. Put targets on our biggest emitters and work GHGs down over time. However, if the environmental movement is truly interested in seeing global warming decrease/stop it is hypocritical and even dangerous to allow the U.S., China and India to be excluded from world binding targets. It is a recipe for disaster because there will be no change in world emissions.
I don't know about you but the Liberals and the NDP are absolutely terrified that Harper will get a majority government in the next election and so they are prepared to say and do anything for partisan advantage.
[updated Thu Dec 13 20:14:30 EST 2007]
13 Dec 20:14
sns36
I basically agree with you in the main. But I wasn't really saying anything about environmental policy, only suggesting that in a political transition Elizabeth May and the Greens may be more of a transient phenomenon political phenomenon than many people think. In the long run, if they are successful at the margins, they will be like the 1920s "Ginger Group" at best. Everybody is going to have one form or another of an environmental policy and part of the political competition will be what policy finds favor in the total context of Canadian politics and public opinion. Anything that is worthwhile in the Green Party platform will be stolen away by the big kids on the block, whoever they turn out to be.
[updated Thu Dec 13 21:08:18 EST 2007]
13 Dec 21:08
hollinm
I agree with you. Thanks for your comments.
[updated Thu Dec 13 22:31:02 EST 2007]
13 Dec 22:31
Zena
Hollinm
According to Mr. Mulroney, he accepted cash for which no invoice was issued - and for which he gave no receipt - and which he placed in a safety deposit box - and which cash he "integrated" into his other accounts over time. In any other context this would be called what?
[updated Fri Dec 14 13:01:50 EST 2007]
14 Dec 13:01
hollinm
One thing it is not is illegal. Bad judgement, suspicious? You bet! Do we believe that this is the full story? Probably not!
However, the Liberals are not interested in Mulroney. They are after the Conservative brand because they know if things continue the way they are going the Liberals will be wiped out in Quebec other than a few ridings in Montreal. They will be a GTA party along with a few seats in the big cities in Canada. That is not a minority government, let alone a majority.
Unless something significant can be proven in court is revealed this should be the end of this thing. If I were Harper I would simply confine any inquiry to issues, if any, which brought disrepute on the office of the Prime Minister. Airbus is dead and it is simply he said/he said which will do nothing to get to the bottom of the issues.
They have been unsuccessful in tying Mr. Harper to Mulroney effectively.
However, I must say blossom, I was surprised and really disgusted with the lengths to which the Liberals would go by allowing Pablo Rodriguez to ask questions proposed by the CBC. This is not an accusation but fact confirmed by a Liberal researcher. It confirms that the Liberals have not learned their lesson yet. It is power for the sake of power and bedamned with what they have to do to get it. Blossom, this should give you pause. The Liberal party and yellow journalism practiced by the CBC. How sad!
You cannot be proud of some of the questions asked in the committee yesterday. Asking the former PM to show the size of the envelopes, the spectrum auction. Whatever, Mr. Mulroney is he was a former PM of our country who had significant accomplishments. There is no need to humiliate him any further than he has already been. Are the Liberals not satisfied that his integrity and reputation has been destroyed with the people of Canada? How much further in this partisan witchhunt are they prepared to go?
[updated Fri Dec 14 14:42:25 EST 2007]
14 Dec 14:42
blossom
Hello hollinm,
I don't know if I should thank you for dragging me into this conversation, but remember how Mr. Harper has a natural disdain of the Liberal party.
As soon as he heard the alledged accusations, he unequivocally distanced himself, and all of his party members, from one of his own, to whom there is no denial, that he had consulted. How do you explain this?
[updated Sun Dec 16 02:30:05 EST 2007]
16 Dec 02:30
hollinm
Hi blossom:
Sorry for not answering sooner but my computer crashed and the motherboard needs to be replaced. That's what I get for all the hot comments made on this board :-). I have now bought a new laptop because I felt disconnected from all my friends on this board.
I would remind you that Mr. Harper left the PC party and helped form the Reform Party because of Mr. Mulroney's leadership and the fact he was courting soft nationalists & pretending the PCs were Liberal lite. They had no relationship until he was elected Prime Minister. While he probably did talk to Mulroney since being elected Prime Minister it is still not a crime to associate with someone who can provide advice and assistance in forming a government etc.
However, given the events that have transpired with the Liberals now accusing the government of allowing Mulroney to lobby Bernier about the spectrum decision Harper made the right call. The sleazy Liberals will do anything to throw mud on the Harper government so it is best there is no opportunity for the criticism.
I hope you had a great Christmas and I wish you the best in 2008.
[updated Thu Dec 27 22:18:04 EST 2007]
27 Dec 22:18
blossom
Season's Greetings hollinm,
I have also been away, and just finished posting whence your post appeared.
So happy for your new laptop; they are great, however, careful with the language; they can be quite touchy! I am especially touched that you are alluding to friends on this board, and am simply delighted to be within this group.
I agree that Mr. Harper nurtured many groups, and it is typical that he left most behind. I also agree that Mr. Harper will go at all lengths to court any party, or anyone, that will help him escalate; even the adq. He has this reputation of dismissing all, whenever he has finished with them also!
I wonder who is the most sleazy? Who has been throwing the mud since he is in power, and who has been the most Priminesterial bully since in power.
I shall wish you, and all of our Friends, the best in this New Year 2008, and I have a feeling that we shall have a lot to disagree about, because I believe that 2008 is going to be a defining year.
hollinm, don't pound too hard on that new computer of yours, and make it last out the year! -:)
Merry Christmas to you, and to yours also!
[updated Sat Dec 29 02:26:19 EST 2007]
29 Dec 02:26
westerner (suspended)
Many people are sick and tired of Shreiber already and we have only experienced one Ethics Committee meeting! There will be several weeks of this followed by very long sessions in the formal inquiry. The electorate wiill be so weary of this entire farce that people will be looking for a political party to hang with it. Chasing a very old story about $300,000 exchanged between two private citizens will wear very thin indeed. Hold on to your wallet, it is going to cost millions.
[updated Mon Dec 03 18:40:13 EST 2007]
03 Dec 18:40
No replies yet. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
The trick for Harper is to convert his personal ranking into party ratings which he hasn't been able to accomplish thus far.
Dion on the other hand appears to spinning his wheels in then the mud. His many years as a professor and being an academic most of his life is not doing him any favours and may even be a factor in his lack of popularity and leadership perceptions. He will be replaced if the Liberals do not win the next election which doesn't appear likely thus far.
The electorate seems to be satisfied with a minority government and the Conservatives have manged to retain power in a minority situation longer then most previous minority governments because of a very weak and fractured opposition who don't seem to even agree on the time of day. Harper may be able to continue if the parties remain split as they have been. The Liberals are saying they will bring down the government likely in February but they can not do it without the hep of the other opposition parties.
[updated Wed Dec 05 04:42:52 EST 2007]
05 Dec 04:42
8 replies so far. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
blossom
Hello Nik.
I have a somewhat different perspective on this one.
Mr. Schreiber is no fool. He has been someone's patsy, and is using all he can to stay in this Country, rather than being deported to Germany to stand trial. He has opened a can of worms, and because political parties thought they would score points, thought that they would benefit from this. I don't think so. I think that some are digging their own hole! Mr. Schreiber is a Judge, in his own right. If the ranking MP's cannot understand fully what he is acknowledging, then they can perhaps get him an interpretter? Mr. Schreiber knows full well what he is about. Perhaps, he just doesn't want to go too far? Perhaps he is trying to be a little discriminating as to whom he really wants to bring down with him? Who knows?
Furthermore, please correct me if I am wrong, but isen't there a law that states that one cannot be tried for the same offence twice?
Let's not be too naive. Everybody knew he was an arms dealer, and how do we imagine business is conducted in any Country. Deals are made, and some get richer!
It all started because, perhaps, the medias could not get their 'election', so they focussed on a possible scandal. The Press should certainly know more about this recount, because they followed this closely at the time Mr. Mulroney went before the Commission. What I still do not understand is why this gov/t was so quick to step back from associating with this person, who has been advising them?
The vitrial that exists in our Parliament House is extremely damaging to all parties, and does not ensure voter appreciation, and participation; soon we may all want to tune-out!
Need I mention the meaness expressed by some NDP party member to one of it's opposing party members, just yesterday. Since when do we accuse before even entertaining and confronting with a proper discussion? We are becoming so righteous that the presumption of innocence is often forgotten.
Why aren't questions being answered daily in the House? Haven't we got the right to those answers in the House, rather than raking personal attacks on all.
The Journal de Mtl's headline yesterday was abominable...Not even worth repeating, but most discrediting to a man whom I have always perceived as honest, and trustworthy . We seem to be thriving on scandals. Do they really sell? And to whom?
Answsers as to why M. Masse was fired would be far more revealing about our present government. That the Accountability Act was remediated would be another point of approval for voters.
That M. Dion, honourable as always, who deemed that the Schreiber/Mulroney affair, was not, as he proudly stated in the medias, "a gift to his party", or for anybody, for that matter, does not get as much attention. Of course one cannot perceive M. Dion as a scandalmonger; but does that make him less interesting? Less intelligent?
M. Dion was more than short-changed since he has been Opposition Leader, because he has been attacked on all fronts, and personally, on minor, and very low key issues, that seem to have kept audiences distracted from the real issues that we should be really concerned about, and about the answers to which we have a right to know, but are not getting from this present government.
When are we Canadians going to lift our ideals above condemnation, to aspirations for the betterment of all Canadians and their lot. I guess we do not have any serious problems, because we seem to want to waster our time cherry-picking, and creating scandals, that we might be stuck to pay for. In the meantime, the real issues will stay on the back-burner!
What about what is happening in Afghanistan?
Hope that we wisen up for our own good, and the good of this Country. Hope that we at least give decent people a chance to show us their mettle! Not to do so, could put us at a great disadvantage.
As for S. Harper, I would think that he must have benefitted from the millions that he poured into ad scams against M. Dion; Shouldn't those dollars have been better spent repairing our infrastructures, pot holes, health-care, Education, etc...etc...etc...?
Cheers Nik, and congratulations with your new poll! Keep-up the good work.
blos
[updated Thu Dec 06 21:32:03 EST 2007]
06 Dec 21:32
5 replies so far. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
degres
It is a fact that if you sling mud, you will get mud on you.
The most interesting thing about this poll is the other parties are taking the biggest hit.
[updated Thu Dec 13 02:54:14 EST 2007]
13 Dec 02:54
No replies yet. Join this conversationHide this conversation.
It is of no surprise to me that the party leaders are all losing support. There isn't one of them that is a "Stand Up" guy. The past decade has seen the quality of those leading this country to continue to diminish. We need leaders who stand up for a belief and not just for looking out for their political survival or the well being of special interests and to make their decisions for the right reasons.
Regards,
[updated Fri Jan 04 16:15:20 EST 2008]
04 Jan 16:15
No replies yet. Join this conversationHide this conversation.