Wednesday, November 30, 2005
"Well I'm actually sad for Marc Garneau to see a guy who's flown so high and now is gonna crash into the ground into this election by not winning, and by be by being beaten by a very good Member of Parliament called Meili Faille. I think it's pretty sad, it's a sad career ending for Marc Garneau who was a good astronaut. Unfortunately for him he decided to crash with the Liberal party Quebec in this election, and I think he'll come to regret that."Setting aside the extreme overconfidence in this statement, I don't find his use of the term "Crash into the ground." to be funny or appropriate at all. I'm a huge fan of the space program and was watching the day Columbia broke up and was watching the day Discovery lifted off and landed safely, preying the whole time that crew crew would be safe.
-Richard Marceau on CBC Newsworld's Politics with Don Newman
Video Clip (Requires Real Player)
Marc Garneau has said here that he knew all the victims of Columbia very well, except for Ilan Ramon whom he had only said hello to once.
I understand Richard Marceau doesn't like the Liberals, and that's fine, I have no problem with that; and I imagine he didn't mean to be as insensitive as he sounded. but he needs to be a little more careful about what he says in this campaign. I for one was very offended by it.
I'm speaking of course of wacco fringe parties trying to get included in the debates.
Every election in either Canada or the United States, you see all the "protest voters" start whining about their fringe party dejour not being allowed in the debates and this election is no exception. I've just come from a message board I frequent in which a "gentelman" is organizing a pathetic campaign to try to get users to write a letter to all five networks about this "injustice."
How about they at least get official party status before they are allowed to participate in a national debate? Or at least at least elect one MP! Otherwise all the other parties will want in as well and we'd have a debacle of epic proportions on our hand. Every wackjob and lunatic across the country would start their own political party (It's really not that hard) just so they could get in to the debates.
People will complain that it makes it too hard to get elected in any significant numbers. It's supposed to be hard, getting official party status should not be an easy thing to accomplish.
I for one don't even think they should be getting funding from Elections Canada, I think only the main four parties should, but that's not my call.
I was watching Anderson Cooper 360 last night and his top story was about the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. It seems that about 200 victims that have been recovered still have not been identified more than 3 months after the storm hit New Orleans.
That is outrageous! Them oney is there for the DNA tests to be done, they just haven't been done.
This isn't me being partisan either (For Once -Ed.). Democratic Governor Blanco was asked about it weeks ago by Anderson Cooper and didn'tk now anything about it. If I were the Governor and I were asked that question I would have:
a) found out about it.
b) once I found out about it fixed it.
c) made it a point to come back on the show and report that I had fixed it.
I hope the Democrats don't re-nominate her when her term expires.
And thank God for it. As I've said before I would like to see a change to the electoral system in Canada, but every PR system I've heard has major flaws, that could make things even worse than they currently are.
In the end the only ones who truly deeply support PR are the fringe parties who stand to gain from it such as the NDP, the Greens, etc.
Tuesday, November 29, 2005
As I've been saying for months now, the Conservatives would be just as bad as the Liberals.
All governments are corrupt, I don't like it any more than you do but that's the way it is. So in absence of that issue people should vote for the best party out there, the Liberal Party.
Links to these videos will be accessible in the news scroller at the top of the posts. Real Player is required to play these videos, however it is free.
Real Player can be downloaded Here.
Saturday, November 26, 2005
Liberal majority ahead?
Former PQ premier supporting Liberal candidate
Ignatieff to seek seat in Etobicoke
Why star recruits are in short supply in Ottawa
Political capital spent wisely
Canada's election will turn on trust
PM, premiers work out deal on aboriginal health care
Liberals plan 20-year strategy for Canadian aerospace
Feds to talk to U.S. about CIA planes
Tories woo convicted stalker to run against NDP's Layton. (Apologies, this is the only link I could find to this story.)
Friday, November 25, 2005
James’ argument is that the government should change because it has been in power for too long, and that breeds arrogance and corruption. I have to agree with him on that, but I think the solution is different. Instead of handing the keys of 24 Sussex Drive over to he who can not be named (Classic Harry Potter Quote. –Ed.) and watching the mass carnage that would ensue what I would like to see is the Liberals win a slight minority. I, and many others, have a feeling that if this were to happen, Prime Minister Martin would be out faster than you can say: Chicken? Sandwich? BOOMSHAKKALAKKA! Were you ever placed in to a situation where that would be an appropriate thing to say of course. (I can’t think of one either. –Ed.)
After Martin is given the unceremonious boot we could find a new leader, perhaps my dream choice Frank McKenna, or even Brian Tobin. After that the new Prime Minister whoever it may be would clean out the old and bring a fresh new start for the party like Prime Minister Martin failed to do. The Chrétien loyalists could return to help the party again and we would have new vision. Then we drop the writ and win 307 seats with that nasal sounding troll Monte Solberg as the lone opposition member so I can tune in to Question Period every day to see his head explode as he’s surrounded by Liberals. (Ok, that last part probably wouldn’t happen, but the man can dream. –Ed.)
All I’m saying James is that most leaders don’t get more than 2 kicks at the can before the knives come out. Harper is the exception only because he’s led different parties.
I also disagree with your assessment that the Conservatives couldn’t get any of their horrible agenda done. As we’ve unfortunately seen with Dan McTeague and Pat O’Brien there are members of the Liberal party who seem to lean more toward the Conservatives than the Liberals. If the Conservatives got enough seats to combine with them for 155 we’re all in for a real bad day.
In any event James I hope this doesn’t mean you're not voting Liberal. :D
CBC: Martin, Layton ask Harper to retract 'organized crime' comment.
Ms. McGrath alleges that Mr. Brison made an off-color remark to her after she complained she’d not been granted a third term in her patronage post. She says she raised the matter with the minister after he came to her table to say hello. He left the table, but returned to say it was Fisheries Minister Geoff Regan’s fault, not his. After she said she didn’t buy his version, Mr. Brison left the table but returned a third time. Ms. McGrath told him she won’t be working for him in the next election, expected to be triggered next week by the defeat of the minority government. "He got very agitated, got mad and he looked at me and he said, ‘I’ve got something to tell you. I’ll be the MP for a very, very long time, and you can kiss my ass.’"
Now, of course Conservatives will use this as more ammunition on the “Culture of Entitlement” front, and let them. As I’ve said before I feel Canadians are sick of the Sponsorship issue being front and center, and want to talk about real issues. However it seems to me Minister Brison, an MP who equals only Prime Minister Martin and Deputy Prime Minister Anne McClelland on the Conservatives Liberal hate-o-meter, was standing up against the very culture they are harping on. Not that we’ll receive any credit for it from them, smear campaigns have a nasty habit of ignoring the facts.
Thursday, November 24, 2005
Main Entry: ar•ro•gance
: a feeling or an impression of superiority manifested in an overbearing manner or presumptuous claims.
Harper: "Mr. Speaker, a new government will get on with the real inquiry."
Harper: "Mr. Speaker, fortunately we soon will not have to listen to answers like that for a long, long time."
MacKay: "Mr. Speaker, we can kiss off that promise."
Harper: "Mr. Speaker, I am glad the Prime Minister is getting used to asking questions."
Harper: "Mr. Speaker, the answer to all those questions is that we will clean up the mess the government created over the last 12 years."
Solberg: "That took a little nerve, Mr. Speaker."
Harper: "Mr. Speaker, I guess that is a no."
Harper: "Mr. Speaker, what I know is that a party that broke every single law in Quebec has no credibility saying it will enforce the law."
(Every Single Law? You know there is a law in Quebec that says margarine must be a different color from butter. -Ed.)
Hill: "knowing how fast the Liberals move, we can expect them to dither on that for awhile."
MacKay: "That flim-flam salesman would not know the truth if it hit him in the head."
Harper: "hopefully before that relief is delivered in 2010 there will be a new government."
Harper: "the only person in Saskatchewan who believes that is the finance minister."
MacKay: "that is another non-answer from one of the turncoat, twin towers of virtue." (Brison/Stronach)
MacKay: "fancy that: that member (Brison) talking about party loyalty."
Wednesday, November 23, 2005
People are totally and mind-bogglingly sick of hearing about the Sponsorship scandal.
If you watch politics like I do, you’d know that since the scandal broke the Conservatives have talked about little else. They’ve been milking the sponsorship cow for so long they weren’t even called the Conservative Party when they started! And I think the tit’s about to run dry. If I had a dollar for every time Stephen Harper has said each of the words “Scandal, Gomery, Mismanagement, Waste, Corrupt, Cronyism, Boondoggle, and Entitlement” I’d have enough money to literally buy
This goes double for people who don’t follow politics actively like I do, because the only place they ever hear about it is on the front page of their local paper or on the six o’clock news, the last time they would have heard Harper talk about anything other than the sponsorship scandal would be February of 2003! That’s thirty-four months ago.
Now, I’ve heard that the Conservatives are actually planning to campaign on something other than the Sponsorship scandal this time. The problem with that is that it is already too late. When you talk about something non-stop for thirty-four months people tend to remember that and tune out anything else you have to say.
So, is there any hope for the Conservatives? Of course! This is politics, literally anything can happen, but if they win the election it will be because the Liberals lost it. This race is the Liberal’s to lose.
If Conservative leader Stephen Harper were a true economic conservative, the last thing he would be promising Canadians is to cut the hated Goods and Services Tax...
...as any conservative thinker knows, because the GST hits spending, but not savings, it tends to discourage the former and encourage the latter. By favoring saving or money put into investments, the GST thus tends to promote wealth creation, at least from an academic perspective. And because wealth creation stands at the pinnacle of conservative ideology...
So why would a conservative ideologue like Harper be thinking about an election promise to cut the GST? Surely he would not scrap his long-held views about what is best for Canadians just because Prime Minister Paul Martin has promised them $30 billion in personal and corporate income tax cuts ... Surely Harper would not be proposing this tax cut, which runs so counter to conservative thinking, in a callous bid to win votes? There must be another explanation. And once Harper tells us what it is, we will report back to you.
This is exactly what I was thinking when they announced this 2% cut to the GST. I have no problem with them offering it, what I have a problem with is them saying the Liberal's Economic Update is nothing but a campaign document and then literally days later come out with an outlandish campaign promise of their own just to try to top it. Nothing makes someone look more foolish than hypocrisy.
Here is the Google Translated English Version For those of you like me who unfortunatly aren't bi-lingual yet.
Here is the French Version
This man is a disgrace to the Liberal party. First he votes against Same Sex Marriage and now he wants to ban free speech; why doesn’t he just join the Conservative Party and end this charade? Better yet why doesn’t Paul Martin boot his sorry ass out of Caucus? That way we can get a real Liberal to run in his riding. One that actually, oh I don’t know supports the Liberal ideology? This is one of the reasons I’m not a big fan of Prime Minister Martin, he doesn’t stand up for the values of the party. But if ever he was going to do so, now would be the time, right before an election. Take them up on a big stage in front of thousands of members of the party and tell these bigoted “Liberal” MPs “Sorry boys, your services will no longer be required.” Then one of those giant hooks comes out and yanks them off the stage.
Now let me be clear here just so as to provide you haters out there with as little ammunition as possible. (That would be assuming their arguments usually make sense to begin with. –Ed.) I’m not saying I have a problem with him speaking his mind, I’m saying I have a problem with what is in his mind to begin with. Seriously, Prime Minister Martin should propose a strait up trade with Harper: All his MPs that voted for SSM in exchange for all our MPs that voted against it. I’m sure everyone would be much happier in their new roles.
All I’m saying is if he has these feelings Why is he a Liberal? That’d be like me joining the Conservative party, getting elected as an MP and then telling them “Oh, by the way, I’m pro SSM, against unnecessary tax cuts, for debt reduction, and for the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.” Harper’s head would explode; and after all the kings horses and all the kings men managed to put it together again he’d scream at me: “Why The Hell did you join this party then?” The only answer I’d be able to come up with would be when I play Capture the Flag in Quake 3 I always choose the Blue team over the Red. Maybe McTeague has watched too much American television and he mistakenly thinks the Red party is the party of intolerance here in
Tuesday, November 22, 2005
I have to laugh when I hear some of my Conservative friends say the main reason they want their party to take power is so they can clean up
Let it be clear, the Conservatives do want to clean up
Now others have said this, far more eloquently than I. But Conservative supports still cling to the fantasy.
When you hear people say stuff like “all politicians are crooks” or “Harper is just as bad as Martin”, drop the following Anonalogue-Approved Science ™ on them:
“This is more an indictment of your inability to discern right from wrong than anything else.
A small child could understand that the magnitude of Liberal corruption - stealing public money to cheat in federal elections, twice - is so much greater than what reasonably could be expected from a Stephen Harper government featuring the Accountability Act as the foundation of his platform that it is simply absurd to suggest in any way that all parties and all politicians are equally bad.When you say all parties or all politicians are equally bad, you are effectively saying “I lack the morality to differentiate between widely varying degrees of honour and corruption. I literally can’t tell right from wrong. Mike Harcourt is the same as Hitler. Lorne Calvert is the same as Caligula”
To say this statement is Science, whether it be Anonalogue-Approved or not is an insult to Scientists everywhere. I would classify it more in the fiction section. For example:
“A small child could understand that the magnitude of Liberal corruption.”
I would argue that a small child would also be able to view the past and to learn from it. Unfortunately history has shown that absolute power corrupts. To believe that a Conservative government would be any different than any other government in the history of the country is to believe a child-like fairy tale.
“Stealing public money to cheat in federal elections, twice - is so much greater than what reasonably could be expected from a Stephen Harper government featuring the Accountability Act as the foundation of his platform.”
The Conservatives have constantly complained that the Liberals frequently broke promises from their red book platforms. Why is it so hard for them to believe that their heroes are capable of the same thing? “Oh but they’re Conservatives, they don’t lie.” You say. Really? They lied to the Canadian people about the nature of a bogus Confidence motion in the spring. They lied when they said they wanted to make Parliament work, as evidenced by the fact they joined with the Bloc to shut it down early several days in a row. They lied when they said the government must be brought down at the earliest opportunity. And they lied when they said the Government no longer has the moral authority to govern. I even caught them in a lie earlier in the year!
"When you say all parties or all politicians are equally bad, you are effectively saying “I lack the morality to differentiate between widely varying degrees of honour and corruption. I literally can’t tell right from wrong. Mike Harcourt is the same as Hitler. Lorne Calvert is the same as Caligula”
This is a clever diversion from the argument Liberal supporters make. You see here he invokes Hitler to shock you in to not paying attention to what he actually said. He claims that we are saying that all politicians are the same, when that is not what we are saying at all. Anyone who does say that is obviously wrong as pointed out in the above statement. No, what we are saying is that the Conservatives are no better than the Liberals when it comes to the issue of Corruption. This has been proven time and time again in the history of our country, one party is corrupt so the other party says “We’ll clean it up!” And they do, they clean up the old corruption and replace it with their own.
So, in the absence of the corruption issue, Canadians should vote for the party that most closely represents the values they hold. To vote on the basis of corruption would just be repeating the mistakes of past voters.
Sunday, November 20, 2005
Here's the "masterpiece" With my own commentary added for sanity's sake.
Grits can’t buy love.
Finance Minister Ralph Goodale will put on his Santa suit tomorrow in a bid to distract voters’ attention from the scandals plaguing his Liberal Party. (Just as Stephen Harper has brought out this B.S. ethics package to fool voters in to thinking he has some.) Goodale is expected to open up a bag of tax cuts and new spending promises in what his party is selling as a “prosperity plan.” (Yeah, I can't see how fiscal responsibility could possibly breed prosperity.) The usually routine “fiscal and economic update” is taking on the tones of a children’s Christmas party. (You got that right, I could barely stand Solberg and Ambrose screeching like children when they didn't get their way.) The finance department has even planned a full lock-up to give the media and opposition MPs a chance to absorb Goodale’s update before it’s released to the public. That’s normally reserved for full-blown budgets. (Isn't it strage how months ago Goodale said this document was going to be more than your average economic update but no one on the right seems to remember that?) The Conservatives are plotting to shut down Goodale’s show tomorrow on a technicality, but even if they succeed, it’s only a matter of time before the Liberals trot out the goodies. (Yeah, I must admit that was a great move by the Conservatives, draw tons of attention to something they wanted to hide from the public. That's right up there with the P.R. coup of the century: O.J.'s vow to find the real killers.)
Plagued by the Gomery Report scandals and in imminent danger of being scuttled by the opposition parties, they desperately need to buy some affection. (Imminent danger? you make it sound like they'd lose a debate on policy!) The trouble is, recent events have shown Canadians pay a steep price when the Grits decide to start shelling out the cash. (They sure do, they get 8 strait balanced budgets, massive debt reduction which saves us tons of money on intrest payments, the most prosperous period in Canadian history! Why I'm shocked they haven't lynched the Liberals by now.) Goodale’s Santa suit is beginning to look frayed and grimy. (Much like Monte Solberg's hair) As with those Santas with bad breath who hand out flyers in parking lots, Canadians know, despite the illusion, he’s not there to give, but to sell. (Exactly, and there is nothing Conservatives hate more than poor people working to feed their families.) The Liberals, facing unprecedented wrath in the aftermath of one of the worst scandals in the nation’s history, (Correction, THE most overblown scandal in Canadian, no make that WORLD history.) are desperate to take our minds off the events that have driven public confidence in the government to a new low. (Um, you do know they rebounded in the polls, right?) How sad they would believe Canadians aren’t smart enough to see through their bag of cheap financial tricks. (I know eh? I mean offering tax cuts is the Conservative's cheap bag of dirty tricks, how dare they steal the Conservative's dirty tricks. Now of course the Liberal's tax cuts are actually responsible and fiscally prudent, but still!) Under the minority Martin regime, (Regime? What do you guys think this is, Alberta?) taxes have shot up faster than incomes as the Liberals dole out money in a thinly disguised attempt to buy needed voter support. (I honestly got nothin on this one, seriously how could I defend a party that only inherited a truly massive debt from their predecessors?) Despite Martin’s (Well deserved) self-congratulatory stance as a deficit dragon slayer, the Liberals have wandered far from the path of fiscal responsibility. (Which explains why we still have balanced budgets.) Canada has enjoyed relative prosperity the last couple of years, (Couple? Try eight) but the Liberals have been frittering the benefits away. (Well that's definatly true, we all know insanely rich people haven't been seeing the same benfits they had under the previous Conservative government.) “The Martin government has spent most of the fiscal dividend on policies and programs designed to redistribute money as opposed to fostering economic growth,” says a report by the economic (Right wing) think tank Global Insight. Sound familiar? That was the tactic the Liberals used when they poured a ransom into Quebec in a bid to buy that province’s loyalty after the 1995 referendum. (Yeah! That money was supposed to be used to buy Alberta's loyalties!) Instead, millions were wasted or stolen, creating enough anger in that province to bring Canada to the brink of yet another unity crisis. (Which is impossible currently as there won't be another election in Quebec until 2007, possibly 2008) The Liberals may think we’re gullible, (Well, they think Conservatives are.) but the last thing Canadians want to see is this dubious gang planning to waste billions more of our tax dollars. (Which is why the Conservatives will never again govern.) Goodale is also apparently planning to unveil some new tax cuts — which are long overdue — but we’ll believe it after we’ve read the fine print. (Here's what the fine print says: BELIEVE IT.)
What Canada desperately needs now are some serious reforms that will prevent another AdScam and give Canadians a greater say in how this country is run. (I agree, which is what the 2nd Gomery report is for, oh wait I forgot you don't care about that at all, you just want power. Oops, man do I feel sheepish.) Martin went into the prime minister’s office promising to fix the democratic deficit, but his lack of action has destroyed his credibility. (Once agin these guys are right on the mark, because everyone knows how co-operative the Official Opposition has been.) Even now, in the face of a confidence-destroying scandal, (Once again I inform you there are polls that were commissioned after Gomery's report, you know in case you care.) the Grit gang resorts to its worn, old strategy of buying votes rather than addressing the serious concerns that have shaken our nation to its foundation. (Yeah! That's the Conservative's strategy! HOW DARE THEY STEAL OUR STRATEGY!?!?! MY JUDGEMENT IS SO CLOUDED WITH RAGE I'D ACTUALLY TALK TO A GAY PERSON RIGHT NOW!!!) Goodale should put away the Santa garb. (Yeah, you're right, Props are for Stockwell Day.) Instead of tired ruses, what we really need for Christmas is a chance to go to the polls to tell this government what we really think about it. (That Being: We know you've had some problems, but since you are the ones that actually called the Gomery comission we know you are on track to fix them, so here you go, here are our votes.) Our nation is desperate for legislation that will end corruption and patronage and bring us long overdue democratic reform. (Damn right on the Democratic reform statement, we need to make it so that all electoral votes, um I mean seats are in Alberta from now on!) No matter how it’s dressed up, Canadians know Liberal largesse is nothing but an illusion. (The only thing that is an illusion is the notion that the Conservatives actually care about anyone but Alberta.) We’ve seen how costly it can be — in terms of both lost economic opportunity (Do you guys think about anything other than money? No? Ok.) and shattered faith in our political institutions. (My faith is so shattered, you have no idea. We finally have a chance to wipe the idiocy that is Conservatism off the political landscape of Canada FOREVER and Sheila Fraser ruins it.) We must not be fooled (Like we were in 1988) again.
Who writes this Garbage anyway, Monte Solberg himself? Why do they even bother with Journalists out there? Just let the Conservative MPs write the editorials. It would cut out the middle man, and we all know how interested Right wingers are at downsizing.
Friday, November 18, 2005
Protesting without a permit.
To properly describe my reaction upon discovering you need a permit to protest in the United States I'd like to borrow a line from my favorite television show: The West Wing. (Slightly altered to conform to the present situation.)
Ahem, "What plaid flannel-wearing, cheese-eating, yahoo of a milkman president signed that idiot bill into federal law?"
Since when do you have to have a permit to protest in the United States, or any civilized country for that matter? Isn't the whole point of protesting to "rise up against the establishment?" Doesn't having to stop to get a permit ruin the spontaneity of the protest?
I think Americans should organize a protest of whatever body passed that law, not obtaining a permit beforehand of course, and rise up against their evil overlords and slay them!. Well, ok that's too far but you get my point.
Now, the punishment according to CNN is only a fine of $50, but the point is the law itself is idiotic, especially in situations where you are protesting the government.
Imagine if those noble Merchants in Massachusetts had to get a permit before staging the Boston Tea Party, or if the African-American protestors had to obtain a permit to protest segregation. Don't you think they'd have been hauled off to jail before they got the chance to protest?
Of course, this makes about as much sense as everything else the government is doing in the U.S. these days.
Thursday, November 17, 2005
On top of the regular political forum I've created seperate sections for supporters of each party so that you may discuss your chosen party with other supporters.
Liberal For Life Forums
But a reason to worry is that this isn't always the case with voters. Take the 2004 Presidential Election as proof of this. The Bush Administration, horrible on National Security, Horrible on the Economy, Horrible on social policies, yet they get re-elected. Meanwhile the party that actually makes sense, the Democrats, get turfed out of every single branch of government in the land. Yes these voters are a strange bunch. Which is why we as Liberals need to do everything we can to get the word out, to make sure that Canadians know who sent them to the polls in the middle of winter.
Wednesday, November 16, 2005
I sincerely hope they vote no.
I am about as adamantly against Proportional Representation as you could possibly be. I loathe it. The reason? I hate minority governments. All you have to do is look at the one we have now to see why. Instability, constant election speculation, nothing getting done. Oh and the NDP, the party with 18 seats has half of the power. Does anyone else find that unnerving?
But if that isn't enough to convince you, perhaps this is:
These are the parties that, if Proportional Representation was in play, would have just missed getting 1 seat in the last election because they didn't run in all ridings, and a projection of where they would have finished if they had done so.
Progressive Canadian - 4
Christian Heritage - 4
Marijuana - 3
Libertarian - 1
Canadian Action - 1
[sarcasm]Now I don't know about you, but I defiantly love the idea of the Marijuana Party holding the balance of power in the highest legislature in the land.[/sarcasm]
Proportional Representation is a good idea, that is wrong for the way our legislature works. If there was a system out there that gave each party an amount of influence that was proportional to the amount of vote they got, I would support it. But a system like this gives far too much power to fringe parties, which you may like if you are a member/support of said parties, but not so much if you aren't.
If anyone has a system that would work better than this please feel free to comment on it and if I like it I'll post it in a future article.
Tuesday, November 15, 2005
The Economic Update delivered by Ralph Goodale Monday evening was very impressive, and shows just how intelligent and innovative the current Government of Canada is. There can be no denying that this Government has engineered the greatest period of financial stability and prosperity this country has ever seen. Navigating the shark infested waters of high energy prices, a tanking U.S. dollar coupled with a strengthening loonie, and provincial governments that can never get enough federal money, the Liberals have proven themselves to be the best party for the fiscal job.
Of the many highlights in Minister Goodale’s speech today, some of the more interesting were revelations of the current situation, as opposed to the future projections that tend to steal the show. Canada’s Gross Domestic Product was up %3.2 last quarter, an increase from the %2.1 it leapt in the 2 quarters previous. Net exports are also up, which is astounding considering the aforementioned surge of strength in the Canadian dollar against its U.S. counterpart. Also since 2002 1 million new jobs, most of them full time, have been created. And the Liberal government has run off 8 strait balanced budgets in a row, more than any other time in Canadian history.
But, of course, the real reason this speech is delivered is to update Parliament on the future course of the government’s fiscal policies; and here, once again, the Liberals have shined. The media, and the opposition parties have tried to paint this as being about nothing but tax cuts; and granted there were substantial tax cuts in there, but the key is: where the tax cuts go? Proper care must be taken to make sure that our money, your money goes in to the correct place, and every single penny is squeezed out of it, or else it will simply be wasted. The announcement focused on four key areas:
- - Creating opportunity for all Canadians.
- - Building an innovative economy.
- - Making Canada a center of global commerce and networks.
- - Creating the best possible environment for investment in Canada.
In Summary, after years of fiscal belt tightening and sacrifices by the Canadian people we are now reaping these dividends, we are in a position where we can afford to invest in our country without going in to deficit. This is the kind of sound fiscal management we need to continue the prosperity we have worked so hard for the last 12 years to obtain. Yet we are prepared for the bumps in the road that come at the most unexpected times. We have many challenges to face, high energy prices, the baby boomer generation retiring in record numbers, and many more we can’t yet imagine. But with the Liberals investing back in to Canada while at the same time keeping an economic security blanket for rainy days we are in great shape now and under a continued Liberal government will be for years to come.
Monday, November 14, 2005
Update: It appears this is because the Liberals have refused to move the opposition days around to suit the opposition's "master plan" of having the NDP put forward their motion to have the election called in January.
Sunday, November 13, 2005
There is one small problem with that, that I didn't realize until I was reminded of it on a board I frequent:
December 20th is a Tuesday.
As far as I know Federal elections in Canada have to be called on Mondays, also they have to last at least 36 days. 36 days from Tuesday, even if you include Tuesday itself, is December 20th. So the election would have to fall on the following Monday. But the following Monday is December 26th, Boxing Day, a statutory holiday. Now I have no idea what they do in this case, but I can see three possibilities.
1: They hold it on the 26th,
2: They hold it on the 27th, (Unlikely or else they'd just do it on the 20th)
3: They wait until January 2nd.
Any of these three scenarios would interfere with Christmas, which with the opposition forcing the election, would be just fine with me.
In any event one thing is certain: Picking December 15th as the first opposition day was another brilliant Parliamentary move by the Liberals.