canadian government held in contemp

lukin2006

So now all three federalist parties have released their platform...now all 3 parties should agree to give their platform to the same independent accounting firm and allow them to releases a report on each platform, paid for by the political parties of course...my guess neither platform will work like they tell us it will.

I do really like the NDP's proposal to abolish the senate, never understood why Harper, other than the obvious, it wasn't his idea ,who wants senate reform, never agreed with the NDP and abolish it. I hope if Iggy and Layton form a coalition government that Layton insist this be part of coalition platform.

Kel Varnsen

I saw on one of the TVs at the gym today that one of the NDP's proposals is that they will cap credit card interest at 5%. But I am not sure how the hell that will work. I mean it sounds great at face value, but if you think about it I see it leading to three possible outcomes (since banks like to make money). First option is banks realize they aren't making as much money and either (or both) cut interest rates on accounts or raise mortgage rates, which would piss me off. Or if they aren't making as much money their values go down, and as I am pretty sure I have a bunch of financial sector stuff in my RRSP that would also piss me off. Or the option I see happening most is that is banks are forced to charging a maximum 5% interest, that they make the criteria for getting a credit card much stricter, meaning that only people with really good credit ratings would get one. People with average or worse credit who would normally rely on a credit card to help them out, and now can't get one will now rely on pawn shops and payday loan places meaning those places would be making more money. So while the third option probably wouldn't affect me as much, I really don't want to see more payday loan places opening up.

lukin2006

Kel Varnsen wrote:

I saw on one of the TVs at the gym today that one of the NDP's proposals is that they will cap credit card interest at 5%. But I am not sure how the hell that will work. I mean it sounds great at face value, but if you think about it I see it leading to three possible outcomes (since banks like to make money). First option is banks realize they aren't making as much money and either (or both) cut interest rates on accounts or raise mortgage rates, which would piss me off. Or if they aren't making as much money their values go down, and as I am pretty sure I have a bunch of financial sector stuff in my RRSP that would also piss me off. Or the option I see happening most is that is banks are forced to charging a maximum 5% interest, that they make the criteria for getting a credit card much stricter, meaning that only people with really good credit ratings would get one. People with average or worse credit who would normally rely on a credit card to help them out, and now can't get one will now rely on pawn shops and payday loan places meaning those places would be making more money. So while the third option probably wouldn't affect me as much, I really don't want to see more payday loan places opening up.

To me using credit cards is a personal responsibility issue...don't use if you don't like the interest or pay them off within the interest free time period. What I think is a bigger problem is the no payment, no interest for X amount of time, but has an admin fee which is usually equal to what the interest would be, I think these type of plans out there are sneaky, they should be forced to tell people that the admin fee equals what you would pay in interest.

I know the federal government has no control over educational curriculum, but it's to bad financial education courses are not made mandatory.

polaris_x

good thing there's an election! ... i like that sheila fraser ... every time she rats out these crooks - the better ...

***********
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/arti ... neral?bn=1

OTTAWA—The auditor general says the Harper government misinformed Parliament to win approval for a $50-million G8 fund that lavished money on dubious projects in a Conservative riding.

And she suggests the process may have been illegal.

The findings are contained in a confidential report Sheila Fraser was to have tabled in Parliament on April 5.

The report was put on ice when the Harper government was defeated and is not due to be released until after the May 2 election.

However, a Jan. 13 draft of the chapter on the G8 legacy infrastructure fund was seen by The Canadian Press.

It reveals that Industry Minister Tony Clement, the mayor of Huntsville, and the general manager of Deerhurst Resort chose the 32 projects that received funding — with no regard for the needs of the summit or the conditions laid down by the government.

The report analyzed the $1-billion cost of staging last June’s G8 summit in Ontario cottage country and a subsequent gathering of G20 leaders in downtown Toronto.

lukin2006

polaris_x wrote:

good thing there's an election! ... i like that sheila fraser ... every time she rats out these crooks - the better ...

***********
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/arti ... neral?bn=1

OTTAWA—The auditor general says the Harper government misinformed Parliament to win approval for a $50-million G8 fund that lavished money on dubious projects in a Conservative riding.

And she suggests the process may have been illegal.

The findings are contained in a confidential report Sheila Fraser was to have tabled in Parliament on April 5.

The report was put on ice when the Harper government was defeated and is not due to be released until after the May 2 election.

However, a Jan. 13 draft of the chapter on the G8 legacy infrastructure fund was seen by The Canadian Press.

It reveals that Industry Minister Tony Clement, the mayor of Huntsville, and the general manager of Deerhurst Resort chose the 32 projects that received funding — with no regard for the needs of the summit or the conditions laid down by the government.

The report analyzed the $1-billion cost of staging last June’s G8 summit in Ontario cottage country and a subsequent gathering of G20 leaders in downtown Toronto.

How come when it's the government,it's always misinformed, in the private sector it's fraud. If someone working for a corporation had spent millions inappropriately and misinformed his boss I'm pretty sure he/she would fired and the police likely would be involved.

lukin2006

Conservatives gain further ground: poll

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/conservatives- ... 6-555.html

This election is reminding me of when Rae defeated Peterson in Ontario around '90, people will vote for Harper to get a majority to end this election cycle we've been in. The problem is we'll end up with a government we don't really want.

polaris_x

lukin2006 wrote:

How come when it's the government,it's always misinformed, in the private sector it's fraud. If someone working for a corporation had spent millions inappropriately and misinformed his boss I'm pretty sure he/she would fired and the police likely would be involved.

what's sad is that most conservatives will never forget the liberal ad scandal but will turn a blind eye to this ... this is why harper has put a muzzle on the access to information ... it's the same harris cronies gutting the system for their friends ...

just brutal ...

lukin2006

I know Mulroney isn't popular with most Canadians, I still found this an interesting read.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/poli ... ories?bn=1

Mulroney shows his unease with Harper's Tories

It was an illuminating moment in a remarkably candid conversation.

Brian Mulroney, the most successful Conservative prime minister since Sir John A. Macdonald, was sitting down for a rare television interview the other day in Montreal.

TVOntario’s Steve Paikin, always adroit at coaxing politicians to dish, broached the subject of the May 2 election and Conservative Leader Stephen Harper.

“You’re voting for Mr. Harper, I take it,” said Paikin, coincidentally the moderator of Tuesday’s English-language leaders’ debate.

“At this point,” replied Mulroney with a pause that seemed to hang in the air longer than its mere second, “I’ll vote for the Conservative candidate in my constituency.”

Although the architect of decisive Progressive Conservative victories in 1984 and 1988 conceded that Harper is “clearly a competent Prime Minister,” his unease with the current Tory leader was barely concealed.

He praised Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff (“an intelligent man, hard-working guy”), NDP Leader Jack Layton (“an outstanding leader of his party”), and even Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles Duceppe (“respected in Quebec”), whose party began in 1990 as a separatist offshoot of Mulroney’s Tories.

He suggested Ignatieff could win despite polls indicating otherwise: “You never can tell what happens in political life. I’ll tell you this, in 1984, when the campaign started I was 14 points behind. We ended up in a rather different fashion.”

He touted former Liberal prime minister Lester Pearson, who endured similar political uncertainty to Harper, but had far more to show for his tenure, including medicare and the Maple Leaf flag: “You can do big things — even if you have a minority Parliament. Witness what happened with Mr. Pearson, who achieved great things with minority status.”

And he pointedly dismissed a central tenet of the Conservative campaign, the spectre of an Ignatieff-Layton-Duceppe government: “They should not speculate in any way about coalitions or all of this nonsense.”

Certainly, Mulroney is still smarting from fallout of his ill-advised business dealings with German lobbyist Karlheinz Schreiber, now in prison serving an eight-year sentence for tax evasion.

Confidants say he feels like he was “thrown under a bus” over the Schreiber affair by people he trusted in the highest levels of the Harper government and such wounds are unlikely to easily heal.

“You have to understand, nothing matters more to him than loyalty,” said an associate. “And he feels he was betrayed by some people who wouldn’t be where they are if it weren’t for him.”

Yet, several Tories insist, there is more at play here than just personal slights.

Mulroney — like others from disparate wings of the Conservative Party of Canada, be they former Reformers or Progressive Conservatives — appears disappointed by Harper’s paucity of ambition.

Reform Party founder Preston Manning famously urged Canadian conservatives to “think big,” but his one-time underling has for the most part governed cautiously, using the constraints of a minority Parliament as an excuse for the lack of any major initiative.

“Being in power is better than not being in power,” explained one Tory MP, who like others interviewed spoke on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to publicly discuss such machinations.

The MP noted Harper spent years in opposition as a Reform MP, Canadian Alliance leader, and, finally, Conservative leader, so survival in government trumps any sweeping policy dream he may once have espoused.

“It’s as simple as that,” the Tory member said, emphasizing that Harper’s greatest legacy was “uniting the right” to create a viable and enduring alternative to the Liberals.

Still, after a middling half-decade in power, some Tories wonder what else the history books will say about Harper.

“What, really, have we got to show for our five years in office?” asked a former senior official in the Prime Minister’s Office.

“An accountability act that forces us to hire kids,” the insider said with a scoff, referring to the legislation designed to curb lobbying that has made it difficult for the Tories to attract talent to government.

Even the few accomplishments that actually touch Canadians’ day-to-day lives are questioned.

Sources say Mulroney, who created the goods and services tax two decades ago, has privately expressed concerned about Harper’s reducing the GST rate from 7 per cent to 5 per cent. (It has since been melded with the 8 per cent provincial sales tax into a 13 per cent harmonized sales tax.)

“He should have lowered income taxes instead. Conservatives believe in taxing consumption, not output. How does a GST cut increase productivity?” fumed a veteran Tory.

A Mulroney-ite attacking Harper’s conservative bona fides?

It gets worse.

With the retirement from electoral politics of Reform and Canadian Alliance icons Chuck Strahl, Jay Hill, and Stockwell Day, it’s apparently not just the Conservatives’ centrist Mulroney wing that feels ornery.

There was Alberta conservative stalwart Link Byfield on the front page of the National Post last Tuesday, complaining that Harper has “systematically suppressed debate” on matters such as same-sex marriage and abortion.

“Harper has made it abundantly and compellingly clear that the social conservative agenda is not to be contemplated in his government and not to be advocated or advanced. And he will have come to this conclusion because he has seen it necessary to get centre voters. As long as he’s leader that will remain the case,” Byfield told journalist Charles Lewis.

Such fractiousness can, of course, be viewed as growing pains in a maturing political party.

But something Mulroney told Paikin lingers longer than the one-second dramatic pause over his voting intentions.

“There are big ideas out there,” said the man who helped end apartheid in South Africa and gave Canada free trade with the United States.

“Popularity is meaningless unless you use it to do big and good things for your country and for the people of Canada.”

lukin2006

polaris_x wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

How come when it's the government,it's always misinformed, in the private sector it's fraud. If someone working for a corporation had spent millions inappropriately and misinformed his boss I'm pretty sure he/she would fired and the police likely would be involved.

what's sad is that most conservatives will never forget the liberal ad scandal but will turn a blind eye to this ... this is why harper has put a muzzle on the access to information ... it's the same harris cronies gutting the system for their friends ...

just brutal ...

You're right just brutal, but I also find it sad that they have been this corrupt with a minority parliament. I am not letting the other 2 parties off the hook, but mostly I think the liberals have some responsibility here, they played a major role in keeping this government in power for so long.

Imagine how corrupt they'll be with a majority.

polaris_x

lukin2006 wrote:

“Popularity is meaningless unless you use it to do big and good things for your country and for the people of Canada.”

really ... i've said this all along ... i may be a socialist but i will take a man or woman of integrity any day over the fraudsters that now occupy our newspapers ...

it's about Canada and the people of Canada ... not the agenda of your friends ...

on a side note: mulroney was also the first PM to bring to light the issues of global warming ...

lukin2006

polaris_x wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

“Popularity is meaningless unless you use it to do big and good things for your country and for the people of Canada.”

really ... i've said this all along ... i may be a socialist but i will take a man or woman of integrity any day over the fraudsters that now occupy our newspapers ...

it's about Canada and the people of Canada ... not the agenda of your friends ...

on a side note: mulroney was also the first PM to bring to light the issues of global warming ...

I remember reading one time that he was one of the greenest Prime Minister's

polaris_x

lukin2006 wrote:

I remember reading one time that he was one of the greenest Prime Minister's

yeah ... corporate knight's rated him ... i wouldn't necessarily go with that publication's account but nonetheless ... that was when the conservatives were progressive ... not anymore ...

lukin2006

polaris_x wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

I remember reading one time that he was one of the greenest Prime Minister's

yeah ... corporate knight's rated him ... i wouldn't necessarily go with that publication's account but nonetheless ... that was when the conservatives were progressive ... not anymore ...

I have to agree with you, now their more of a branch of the republican party...sad. This country could really use someone like Dany Williams

Kel Varnsen

lukin2006 wrote:

Kel Varnsen wrote:

I saw on one of the TVs at the gym today that one of the NDP's proposals is that they will cap credit card interest at 5%. But I am not sure how the hell that will work. I mean it sounds great at face value, but if you think about it I see it leading to three possible outcomes (since banks like to make money). First option is banks realize they aren't making as much money and either (or both) cut interest rates on accounts or raise mortgage rates, which would piss me off. Or if they aren't making as much money their values go down, and as I am pretty sure I have a bunch of financial sector stuff in my RRSP that would also piss me off. Or the option I see happening most is that is banks are forced to charging a maximum 5% interest, that they make the criteria for getting a credit card much stricter, meaning that only people with really good credit ratings would get one. People with average or worse credit who would normally rely on a credit card to help them out, and now can't get one will now rely on pawn shops and payday loan places meaning those places would be making more money. So while the third option probably wouldn't affect me as much, I really don't want to see more payday loan places opening up.

To me using credit cards is a personal responsibility issue...don't use if you don't like the interest or pay them off within the interest free time period.

That's the thing it totally is a personal issue. If you don't like the rates the credit card is offering don't get one. But this seems like one of those standard promises the NDP throws out there that they have to know would be impossible to implement, but it sounds awesome to a ton of uninformed voters (especially ones who have credit problems). So it will probably get them a ton of votes, and they will never have to do anything about it.

ACCBootlegGoddess

What gets me is Harper and the Conservative government are found in contempt of Parliament, they run roughshot over human rights during G8....now they may have illegally got the funding for the G20/G8 passed through parliament.....and YET Con supporters are STILL planning to vote for them.

I'm not a fan of Ignatieff and I have not forgotten the sponsership scandel either BUT they didn't show the contempt for Canadians, Canadian Law and democracy that the Conservatives have.


To the Conservative supporters in here...what WOULD it take fo you guys to NOT vote conservative...what kind of scandal would have to happen for you guys to switch allegiances?? Just curious?

polaris_x

ACCBootlegGoddess wrote:

BUT they didn't show the contempt for Canadians, Canadian Law and democracy that the Conservatives have.

you have to care about those things for it to matter ... i would say most conservative voters don't care about how Harper conducts himself as long as he continues to cut taxes ...

ACCBootlegGoddess

polaris_x wrote:

ACCBootlegGoddess wrote:

BUT they didn't show the contempt for Canadians, Canadian Law and democracy that the Conservatives have.

you have to care about those things for it to matter ... i would say most conservative voters don't care about how Harper conducts himself as long as he continues to cut taxes ...

You're right and thats very sad :( What they need to ask themselves before it's too late is.."we want tax cuts but at what cost?? What is too high a cost for lower taxes?"

If Harper gets a majority I don't think anyone will like the answer.

polaris_x

ACCBootlegGoddess wrote:

You're right and thats very sad :( What they need to ask themselves before it's too late is.."we want tax cuts but at what cost?? What is too high a cost for lower taxes?"

If Harper gets a majority I don't think anyone will like the answer.

his friends will ... in any case ... it dosen't matter to conservatives ... look at the fools that voted for rob ford ... a few months in and already he's messing things up ... and people are like - what the fuck? ... uhhh, it was pretty obvious from the get-go this was gonna happen ... but you got sucked in like a "Leon's don't pay now scam" ... same thing on the federal level ...