Another Election ?
- Thread starter ice_dog
- Start date
The current scandal will blow over in a few weeks/months. Really, I couldn't care less about the so-called scandal in Quebec. I bet 9 out of 10 Canadians couldn't even begin to explain exactly what the scandal is about; all everybody hears is "Liberals" and "scandal" and the hate-on begins.
If there's another election, it might just be the first time that I wouldn't vote. I just can't be bothered after having an election not even a year ago.
If there's another election, it might just be the first time that I wouldn't vote. I just can't be bothered after having an election not even a year ago.
We haven't (yet) heard the whole story as the Gomery Commission is still in biz. But thus far, it actually seems to me that no one in government was involved. A lot of high-placed people in the Liberal Party were in, but no MPs.
'Tis a sad day though when a few unscrupulous individuals choose a course of action which can topple a government. The reputation of Canada on the international scene will suffer if and when the government falls. With it, our standing as an upright, safe country to do business with and in will be somewhat sullied for a while. The Federalist cause will similarly be weakened at a time which it should be getting ever stronger. But perhaps the worst thing is that the man who is best suited to lead the country, will no longer be in charge. I am not claiming for a second that Paul Martin is the best Prime Minister we've seen, but as the head of state, as the highest representative of Canada, I'm much more comfortable having Paul Martin out there on the international stage than I would be with Stephen Harper.
'Tis a sad day though when a few unscrupulous individuals choose a course of action which can topple a government. The reputation of Canada on the international scene will suffer if and when the government falls. With it, our standing as an upright, safe country to do business with and in will be somewhat sullied for a while. The Federalist cause will similarly be weakened at a time which it should be getting ever stronger. But perhaps the worst thing is that the man who is best suited to lead the country, will no longer be in charge. I am not claiming for a second that Paul Martin is the best Prime Minister we've seen, but as the head of state, as the highest representative of Canada, I'm much more comfortable having Paul Martin out there on the international stage than I would be with Stephen Harper.
I don't buy "Mr Dithers" story that he didn't knew about the scandal.
If he didn't knew than he is incompetent. Any decent accountant in any decent company knows what happens to his money.Even if he didn't knew the details, he should have the answer by his finger tips.
This incompetency does not look good on a resume for PM.
If he knew....than he is a crook.
IMO he knew and decided to turn a blind eye, just like the rest of them. Part of the strategy is to drag the issue out until most people lose interest and memories have faded.
What really makes me mad is the arrogance of some of those involved. For those of you who have any insight in to the business world know very well, that any private or public company officers, would have been held accountable a long time ago.
Personally I feel like being slapped in the face, by their lack of resolve in this matter.
That's my rant for the day.
If he didn't knew than he is incompetent. Any decent accountant in any decent company knows what happens to his money.Even if he didn't knew the details, he should have the answer by his finger tips.
This incompetency does not look good on a resume for PM.
If he knew....than he is a crook.
IMO he knew and decided to turn a blind eye, just like the rest of them. Part of the strategy is to drag the issue out until most people lose interest and memories have faded.
What really makes me mad is the arrogance of some of those involved. For those of you who have any insight in to the business world know very well, that any private or public company officers, would have been held accountable a long time ago.
Personally I feel like being slapped in the face, by their lack of resolve in this matter.
That's my rant for the day.
Well how else could you run anything more complicated than a tea party? You don't immediately fire the Chair of the school board because a couple of teacher's used their school's Science Lab fund to finance a dirty weekend in the Falls, do you?Don said:
The reason auditors exist is because the guys who sign the cheques cannot possibly know everything about where the money winds up. There are two test points for management: one at the system set up time—how good a system is it? I believe it was Mulroney who set up the sponsorship program and Chrétien that 'improved' it. Given the animosity between him and Martin, its unlikely there was much collusion there.
The other test point is at breakdown—how good is crisis response? I'd have to say not half bad. There is less mud-slinging and name-calling than I'd expect if it had been PM Harper who appointed Gomery and fired Ouellette and others. Frankly, I can live without that, what I want is facts, and they are coming out.
Rushing into action on half the facts is seldom smart. If Harper wants to show himself wise, he'll find a way to keep pummelling the Liberals without forcing an election.
If anything, it's been the PR from the Liberals that's been lacking. They're doing a miserable job of it.
I was incorrect to say Mulroney set up the program; what he set up was the PMO national unity fund that paid for the program.someone said:
It's not in an attept to whitewash crooked Liberals that I try to recall that Brian (what was that adjective that used to appear with his name?) had his own share of party-hacks accused, convicted and/or forced out.
Easy access to our money and a "Winning isn't everything, it is the only thing" ethic are a combo that invites corruption.
Here's a couple of the less partisan links from the 6,000 odd a "sponsorship program mulroney" search on Gooogle turned up:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/groupaction/martin_testimony.html
and
http://www.bcrevolution.ca/federal_scan.htm
xarir said:
Yikes! Over the past few days I was wondering why the people of Ontario continued to support the Liberal party...Now I know why.
Keep in mind that Paul Martin resigned from the Liberal Party and came back to try and reform the party.
He resigned and came back as publicly stated, to reform the party and correct the misdeeds.
No he should not be hung for Cretiens misdeeds. To my mind, he shoud have spoken outright about his concerns over spending long before now.
It doesn't matter whether he knew or did not know...he did take the right steps to find out WHO did know with the Gomery enquiry.
The question before voters is now quite simply; Do you feel Stephen Harper is Prime Miinister material? While support for the Liberal party ie: "Martin is slipping daily in the polls" it is important to consider the other question asked "Would you vote for a Harper governent?"
The polls show it to be less than a tie in favor of the Liberal in the last poll i read.
I'm not tied to any party but it is important to know that the polling companies are directly related to the political parties, ie: ownership.
The Liberal and Tory Parties will always quote certain results and deny others. Media also quote only certain polls.
It's the medias way of telling you their "editorial position" without taking a stance early in a political story.
How a question is asked will also produce the required result. That is the most important aspect of any poll. What was exactly the question asked.
The Gomery enquiry should be allowed to finish and Canada should vote, if needed, on it's findings.
I do not believe we need a media based election. Since the advertising dollars for a summer election would boost all media company profits, they have everything to gain by urging Canadians to go to a summer (june) election.
My 2 cents
He resigned and came back as publicly stated, to reform the party and correct the misdeeds.
No he should not be hung for Cretiens misdeeds. To my mind, he shoud have spoken outright about his concerns over spending long before now.
It doesn't matter whether he knew or did not know...he did take the right steps to find out WHO did know with the Gomery enquiry.
The question before voters is now quite simply; Do you feel Stephen Harper is Prime Miinister material? While support for the Liberal party ie: "Martin is slipping daily in the polls" it is important to consider the other question asked "Would you vote for a Harper governent?"
The polls show it to be less than a tie in favor of the Liberal in the last poll i read.
I'm not tied to any party but it is important to know that the polling companies are directly related to the political parties, ie: ownership.
The Liberal and Tory Parties will always quote certain results and deny others. Media also quote only certain polls.
It's the medias way of telling you their "editorial position" without taking a stance early in a political story.
How a question is asked will also produce the required result. That is the most important aspect of any poll. What was exactly the question asked.
The Gomery enquiry should be allowed to finish and Canada should vote, if needed, on it's findings.
I do not believe we need a media based election. Since the advertising dollars for a summer election would boost all media company profits, they have everything to gain by urging Canadians to go to a summer (june) election.
My 2 cents
The question isn't wheather I'd want Harper as PM. The question is whether I want Martin and the Liberals to continue to run this country and to continue to steal from me.
There's all these defenses of Martin in this thread that talk about how Martin "never knew" but as soon as he was elected party leader he worked to "clean up the party". This logic is flawed. What exactly is Martin cleaning up? After all, if he didn't KNOW about the money being stolen and who stole it, how can he clean anything up? How can he fire people who are obviously yet to be proven guilty of anything? (Unless of course he knew from day one who was involved and who stole what). By very definition this makes it apparent that he knew all along where the money was being spent.
As Finance Minister, Paul Martin was notorious for setting up "foundations" that are outside of the scrutiny of parliament. The national unity foundation provided the Prime Minister $50 Million annually to spend as he saw fit. Martin never once questioned where this money was being pissed away despite repeated scathing audits from the auditor general during his reign as finance minister. Furthermore, the Martin government continues to create these foundations (the national daycare program is yet another example of one of these) and literally billions of dollars is taken outside of the scrutinty of parliament and the Auditor General. What exactly is Martin trying to hide by doing this?
So, would I want Martin as the PM? No and I never did. I would prefer a party in power that is not going to overtax me. I would prefer a party in power that is not going to build illegal surpluses in an EI fund that is bloated beyond reasonable and thumb it's nose at the Canadian Public as it reaches into their pockets. I would prefer a government in power that actually gives a rat's ass about what the Canadian Public want and not what they feel is best for them while lining their own pockets with MY MONEY.
You can rest assured that Paul Martin, in more than one way benefited from the sponsorship scandal. If not directly than by being able to leverage the election war chest of a party that used our money to bankroll his election.
So bring on the election because I have little or no faith that Martin ever prosecute the likes of Gagliano or that lying, arrogant bastard that preceded him as Prime Minister
There's all these defenses of Martin in this thread that talk about how Martin "never knew" but as soon as he was elected party leader he worked to "clean up the party". This logic is flawed. What exactly is Martin cleaning up? After all, if he didn't KNOW about the money being stolen and who stole it, how can he clean anything up? How can he fire people who are obviously yet to be proven guilty of anything? (Unless of course he knew from day one who was involved and who stole what). By very definition this makes it apparent that he knew all along where the money was being spent.
As Finance Minister, Paul Martin was notorious for setting up "foundations" that are outside of the scrutiny of parliament. The national unity foundation provided the Prime Minister $50 Million annually to spend as he saw fit. Martin never once questioned where this money was being pissed away despite repeated scathing audits from the auditor general during his reign as finance minister. Furthermore, the Martin government continues to create these foundations (the national daycare program is yet another example of one of these) and literally billions of dollars is taken outside of the scrutinty of parliament and the Auditor General. What exactly is Martin trying to hide by doing this?
So, would I want Martin as the PM? No and I never did. I would prefer a party in power that is not going to overtax me. I would prefer a party in power that is not going to build illegal surpluses in an EI fund that is bloated beyond reasonable and thumb it's nose at the Canadian Public as it reaches into their pockets. I would prefer a government in power that actually gives a rat's ass about what the Canadian Public want and not what they feel is best for them while lining their own pockets with MY MONEY.
You can rest assured that Paul Martin, in more than one way benefited from the sponsorship scandal. If not directly than by being able to leverage the election war chest of a party that used our money to bankroll his election.
So bring on the election because I have little or no faith that Martin ever prosecute the likes of Gagliano or that lying, arrogant bastard that preceded him as Prime Minister
Paul Martin never resigned from the Liberal Party. He's been a member for close to 40 years.MarkII said:
Sorry to be pedantic, but the Prime Minister is not the head of state; he is head of government.
Touche, but the fact of the matter is that the Liberals have done all of the above and worse. At least the Conservatives, after several years in the political wasteland, have hopefully learned some lessons and will at least begin to take some steps in the right direction. Being that Martin is actually the architect of many of the Liberal Financial policies that continue to rape our pocket books; I have no confidence that he will take any measures other to continue to find new and better ways to steal from us and keep all money possible outside of the stewardship of parliamentimpala77 said:Utopia!!!! find me such a politician or political party and I'd vote for them as well; so would alot of other canadians.
turnaround
I have a feeling that today's Harris/Manning report on privatizing health care will give pause to those who were planning to vote against the liberals. Too many people feel the conservative/reform/rightwing party has too many hidden agendas. Harris and Manning, what an inspirational pair.
I have a feeling that today's Harris/Manning report on privatizing health care will give pause to those who were planning to vote against the liberals. Too many people feel the conservative/reform/rightwing party has too many hidden agendas. Harris and Manning, what an inspirational pair.
Don't fall for the old Fiberal bait and switch
Don't fall for the standard Liberal diversion of playing the healthcare card. The Harris/Manning report was commissioned by the Fraser Institute not the Conservative Party of Canada. Moreover, the report is not so much about privatizing healthcare but actually giving more power to the provinces who are handcuffed by the Canada Health Care Act. Currently, provinces' collective hands are tied and options limitted especially when the Federal Government gets so much say over the requirements placed on the provinces while at the same time slashing healthcare transfers to the provinces.
Make no mistake. Paul Martin and his fiscal policy of making massive cuts to provincial healthcare transfers are at the heart of the funding crises in our healthcare system today. Paul Martin is the last person who should be preaching about saving our healthcare system. He was one of the key players in decimating it. Then again, he did pull this little report out of his ass today totally out of context in order to simply draw attention away from the fact that he was refusing to answer a question that may well have shown that he perjured himself in front of the Gomery Inquiry.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1113419188079_108828388?s_name=&no_ads=
strange1 said:
Don't fall for the standard Liberal diversion of playing the healthcare card. The Harris/Manning report was commissioned by the Fraser Institute not the Conservative Party of Canada. Moreover, the report is not so much about privatizing healthcare but actually giving more power to the provinces who are handcuffed by the Canada Health Care Act. Currently, provinces' collective hands are tied and options limitted especially when the Federal Government gets so much say over the requirements placed on the provinces while at the same time slashing healthcare transfers to the provinces.
Make no mistake. Paul Martin and his fiscal policy of making massive cuts to provincial healthcare transfers are at the heart of the funding crises in our healthcare system today. Paul Martin is the last person who should be preaching about saving our healthcare system. He was one of the key players in decimating it. Then again, he did pull this little report out of his ass today totally out of context in order to simply draw attention away from the fact that he was refusing to answer a question that may well have shown that he perjured himself in front of the Gomery Inquiry.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1113419188079_108828388?s_name=&no_ads=
If the Conservatives are to get anywhere, they're going to have to start standing up to the typical Liberal libel that the Conservatives are a sinister fifth-column plotting to destroy society, bring down the State, and hand the country over to America. This means aggressively challenging Liberal orthodoxies instead of kowtowing to them, which is what they're doing right now. The problem with this sort of pink-Tory appeasement strategy is that it places them in a necessarily defensive posture in a necessarily doomed attempt to compete with the Liberals on the latter's own ground; as long as they continue to acknowledge various Liberal shibboleths as somehow sacred, they put themselves in the position of heretics (if liberalism is sacred, what else could a conservative possibly be ?).
This means that Conservatives are going to have start publicly asking just what exactly it is about State-monopolized medicine, gun control, exorbitant taxes, concentration of power in a central State behemoth, etc. that makes them define Canadian nationhood, other than the fact that the Liberals happen to favour them. It needs to be pointed out that Canada existed before these policies did and will continue to exist without them; in short, the Liberal's self-arrogated role as custodian of all that is Canadian has to be challenged. Canadians should also be asked to consider whether or not the party that decimated the military, signed Kyoto, and forfeited our seat at the missile- defense table can be taken at their word when they claim to be nationalists and defenders of Canadian sovereignty. The various standard Liberal doom prophecies also would have to be exposed for the reactionary, authoritarian phantasmogoria that they are; to this end, not a day should go by without the public being reminded that the Liberals made the exact same apocalyptic forecasts concerning the Free Trade deal and they didn't come true then, either. Liberal ideology should also be attacked in its fundamentals; a good starting point would be pointing out that their agenda owes more to the psychotically totalitarian ambitions of Trudeau- who cloaked his will in nationalism just like every other fascist demagogue- than to any authentic "Canadian identity" values.
The Conservatives will never win an election until they start fighting back; since they've so far shown no sign that they're going to (in the last campaign, they actually refused to even run modern attack ads), there should be no election.
This means that Conservatives are going to have start publicly asking just what exactly it is about State-monopolized medicine, gun control, exorbitant taxes, concentration of power in a central State behemoth, etc. that makes them define Canadian nationhood, other than the fact that the Liberals happen to favour them. It needs to be pointed out that Canada existed before these policies did and will continue to exist without them; in short, the Liberal's self-arrogated role as custodian of all that is Canadian has to be challenged. Canadians should also be asked to consider whether or not the party that decimated the military, signed Kyoto, and forfeited our seat at the missile- defense table can be taken at their word when they claim to be nationalists and defenders of Canadian sovereignty. The various standard Liberal doom prophecies also would have to be exposed for the reactionary, authoritarian phantasmogoria that they are; to this end, not a day should go by without the public being reminded that the Liberals made the exact same apocalyptic forecasts concerning the Free Trade deal and they didn't come true then, either. Liberal ideology should also be attacked in its fundamentals; a good starting point would be pointing out that their agenda owes more to the psychotically totalitarian ambitions of Trudeau- who cloaked his will in nationalism just like every other fascist demagogue- than to any authentic "Canadian identity" values.
The Conservatives will never win an election until they start fighting back; since they've so far shown no sign that they're going to (in the last campaign, they actually refused to even run modern attack ads), there should be no election.
I think you guys are missing a very important point.
Paul Martin could not have known about the scandal. He's was too busy "sharpening the knife" to plunge it into his Jean's back.
Paul Martin could not have known about the scandal. He's was too busy "sharpening the knife" to plunge it into his Jean's back.
