[Regina]

[ASLplease]

Shouldn't the Liberal party have it's own election first? Iggy still hasn't been democratically elected by his own party. IMO, that should make him ineligable to be on a federal ballot.

Edit: oops, interesting question, but as it turns out he has been elected. too bad I didn't ask this back in January.

[EyeBrock]

Lets have an election. I haven't sparred with Rev Blair for a few months now.

[ryan29]

ASLplease ASLplease:

Shouldn't the Liberal party have it's own election first? Iggy still hasn't been democratically elected by his own party. IMO, that should make him ineligable to be on a federal ballot.

Edit: oops, interesting question, but as it turns out he has been elected. too bad I didn't ask this back in January.

elected against who ? nobody else even ran against him in the end . he was just handed the position , no race and definity no election .

[ryan29]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

Lets have an election. I haven't sparred with Rev Blair for a few months now.

of course the opposition might change there minds or come to there senses by monday . as i don't see them being ready for an actual election . this might just be rhetric and threats .

but i just find the opposition very unsensible this parliament , they've just done one thing or another to try and create problems or try and take it over themselves so they could run the show . they honestly have not tried to make it work and many canadians must be disapointed in that .

[ryan29]

Election is not needed or wanted at this time
Date: Jun 10, 2009

We're not sure what to make of federal Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff's threat to force an election over changes he is demanding the Harper government make to Employment Insurance.

We're not sure if we should be laughing hysterically at Ignatieff's threatened summer election, or should we be extremely angry about this ridiculous suggestion?

The last thing Canadians need at this time is a federal election. The economy is showing signs of recovery. The federal government is embroiled in the delicate matter of bailing out segments of the North American automotive sector. There is no crisis surrounding the federal government that begs for the government to be defeated at this time.

Ignatieff's threat of forcing an election over Employment Insurance changes he wants made is absolutely ridiculous. First of all, the change he wants were first implemented by the Liberals as a means of fighting the deficit in the mid-1990s.

Just two weeks ago the Liberals were demanding that Finance Minister Jim Flaherty resign because the budget deficit was far more than what was initially expected. Now the Liberals are threatening to defeat the government and force an election over Employment Insurance changes (Ignatieff wants the federal government to loosen up the requirements Canadians need to achieve in order to receive EI benefits) that will certainly push the federal government further and further into deficit.

By taking this stance the federal Liberals are talking out of both sides of their mouths. On one hand the deficit is too big, but on the other hand the government should be spending significantly more to provide EI benefits to Canadians.

The entire spectacle is absurd. Canada doesn't need an election. Voters across this country don't want another election. They elected this current Parliament less than a year ago.

We believe the Employment Insurance system in Canada does need an overhaul. However, any move towards improving the system needs to be studied thoroughly with all the options fully costed out to ensure the potential financial impacts of any changes are known ahead of time.

Does Ignatieff really think that the EI system can be improved in a shoot-now, aim-later game of chicken with the threat of an election hanging over the head of the current government like the Sword of Damocles?

Meaningful improvements to the EI system are needed, but what the system doesn't need are changes that are obviously designed to provide the Liberal Leader with a good sound bite as he campaigns in Ontario and Quebec in the next election.

Ignatieff has promised Canadians a more thoughtful approach to politics. It's time for him to start delivering.

http://www.collingwoodconnection.com/co ... cle/138076

[kenmore]

ryan29 ryan29:

kenmore kenmore:

Whats bad for Canada is this do nothing minority government... and wouldn't say the idea of coaltion is dead..harper is pondering it to cling to the throne.

the parliament is not a do nothing parliament , alot has been done , billions have been spent on economic stimulus projects . the same projects the opposition was beging for last winter . and more could be done in the coming months if the liberals were willing to do anything and actually let the minority parliament work .

uh hun ,, yep yep,,, not!

[bootlegga]

sandorski sandorski:

haha, Harper's has been playing the Election game since becoming PM. You're late to the party.

Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:

I had a hard time understanding the report, so I don't know whether to like it or not, or even what the opposition parties issues behidn it are.

However, barring anything laughibly stupid (this could be one of those things if I had a greater understanding),I would liek to go to the polls. I'm a big fan of Harper as a leader, but every week some new scandal or mishap creeps out showing just how incompetent his cabinet really is. No wonder he kept such a tight grip on them.

As such, I'd liek to let Iggy have a go at governing to see if he can muster a cabinet that is a little less inept. Not a full blown majority, but a comfortable minority similar to what the conservatives currently have to let them show us what they got. At the same time this could allow Harper to backslap his minions into line and hopefully have the right people lined up to form a better cabinet should the Liberals go tits up.

By no means do I want Harper to quit as leader should the conservatives lose the next election. He's probably one of the best leaders the country has had in a long time. The party around him just needs to get it's act together.

I don't know if we need an election, but his party has had so many gaffes in the past year it's getting ridiculous. Frankly, I'd rather wait, because I want a majority government, because none of these bozos seem to be able to do anything other than bicker like children at the playground.

[ryan29]

Money is flowing, put election on hold
June 12, 2009
THE RECORD


Note to Her Majesty's loyal opposition in Ottawa: Give Canadians a break -- a summer break.

June, July and August of 2009 are not the time for another federal election. The federal government's economic stimulus program is not the issue that should precipitate such a vote, which would be the fourth general election in just five years.

Whatever Canadians take away from Stephen Harper's economic progress report in Cambridge yesterday, whatever they think of the prime minister and his government, they should agree a return to the polls in the next few months would jeopardize the nation's exit and recovery from this gruelling recession. The opposition parties should see this, too, and cool their jets.

Granted, Harper put the best spin on things while extolling the virtues of his government's economic stimulus. To hear the PM, it sounded like the Conservatives have built the eighth wonder of the world since their January budget. Well, they are spending money, $22.7 billion this year alone, to get Canada's economy firing on all cylinders again. Harper says 80 per cent of the money earmarked under his plan has been rolled out across the country.

In response, Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff, who demanded these progress reports in return for supporting January's federal budget, complained the money is not flowing fast enough and coyly said he hadn't decided if he would try to topple the government.

Spare us the game-playing. Ignatieff wanted the government to spend. It's spending like no government in Canadian history. "I voted to stimulate the economy,'' Ignatieff admitted yesterday. Well, what does he think all the cheques being mailed out to municipalities across Canada, including Ottawa's share of $77 million in stimulus projects in Waterloo Region, are meant to do?

Is the cash getting out fast enough? Opinions will vary. Certainly, the Conservatives are trying to get these infrastructure stimulus projects underway with greater than normal alacrity.

There is a real danger that if too many rules are cast aside, if too many untendered projects proceed, the country will regret it, either in bridges that break, roadways that collapse or contracts and consultancy fees that are wildly inflated. (Just read about the eHealth Ontario spending scandal and its $5 million in untendered contracts that has thrown the Ontario Liberals for a loop.)

The plain fact is, Ignatieff will not get the money spent more quickly by forcing an election. On the contrary, such a move could easily delay spending. Nor does it seem likely an Ignatieff government would spend more on the stimulus.

The billions being spent on infrastructure and bailing out General Motors and Chrysler already have this country on the road to a record-high $50.2 billion deficit for this year. Does Ignatieff want to inflate the deficit balloon even more, until something goes pop? We doubt it. In fact, we suspect that were he in Stephen Harper's place, Ignatieff would be doing essentially the same as Harper. All in all, the government's handling of this recession, at least since its January budget, has been responsible and, we think, effective.

There will be a time to judge this Harper government and in particular its handling of this recession. But we see no benefit for the country in stopping Harper now, no gain by forcing an election, no progress in forming another minority government, even if it is a Liberal one. There are other, more important battles facing the country than a trumped-up one over the stimulus package.

American protectionism is an urgent threat. Bank of Canada governor Mark Carney warned governments yesterday that they need to prepare an exit strategy for the massive stimulus projects. These are the kinds of fights that Ignatieff should join.


http://news.therecord.com/Opinions/article/552426

[ryan29]

Time to put some ice on Michael Ignatieff's raging election fever


Vancouver SunJune 9, 2009

We know that Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff wants to be prime minister. We know also that to do so, he will have to persuade Canadians that the current office holder is not up to the job.

But as warm weather settled in across most of the country last week, bringing with it the hope of lazy days at the beach and backyard barbecues, the thought that Ignatieff is becoming fixated on triggering an election now is too much to bear.

We know also that this won't be a relaxing summer for many Canadians, regardless of the weather. The economic slowdown has thrown thousands out of work and threatened the jobs of thousands more.

So the Liberal leader has appropriately focused attention on the Employment Insurance system, which is in need of an overhaul.

But it may not be a very good election issue. After successive Liberal governments used the EI system as a cash cow -- raising more than $50 billion in excess premiums, it's a bit of a stretch to think that Canadians will believe that the Conservatives should be blamed for the way it is functioning now.

Perhaps that's why the Liberals latched onto the non-issue of a minister's briefing notes left behind accidentally in a television station rather than focusing on one of the many other crucial issues now facing the country.

Where Opposition MPs smelled blood in the water and a chance to score political points, most Canadians outside the myopic world of Ottawa politics see a good argument for shutting Parliament down early this year.

That is especially true if Ignatieff comes back this week with the foolhardy notion of forcing a summer election.

Liberals, the New Democrats and the Bloc Quebecois all tried desperately to turn a memory lapse by a staff member into an indictment of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's leadership and proof positive of the incompetence of the government.

Their logic goes something like this: The staffer forgot the briefcase, which contained papers stamped "secret." Her boss, Natural Resources Minister Lisa Raitt, is responsible for those papers. She should therefore resign -- under a policy spelled out last year -- when Harper accepted the resignation of Maxime Bernier for leaving NATO briefing documents at his girlfriend's apartment. Since Harper refused to accept Raitt's resignation, the whole affair is now proof of his incompetence.

The whole argument, carried on over three days in Question Period last week, is the kind of thing that makes sense inside the cloistered wall of Parliament, but elicits only blank stares when tried outside. Meanwhile, the $10-billion auto bailout package rated barely a mention.

Ignatieff said he would come back this week with a "serene and clear decision" on whether to force an election this summer.

We hope he was listening to his constituents over the weekend, not his ambition. There is no appetite for another election -- which would be the fourth in five years -- any time soon and especially not over the summer.

The Liberal leader will be much better advised to use the remaining two weeks before Parliament is scheduled to break for the summer to come up with a more realistic plan for reforming EI than the unaffordable solution he has tendered so far.

He might also want to start sketching out a plan to pay for the new stimulus spending he is demanding and have some answers for the long-term impact of higher budget deficits and mounting debt so that when the next election finally come, he can present a credible alternative to Canadians, not just trumped-up issues

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Time+s ... story.html

[ryan29]

bootlegga bootlegga:

sandorski sandorski:

haha, Harper's has been playing the Election game since becoming PM. You're late to the party.

Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:

I had a hard time understanding the report, so I don't know whether to like it or not, or even what the opposition parties issues behidn it are.

However, barring anything laughibly stupid (this could be one of those things if I had a greater understanding),I would liek to go to the polls. I'm a big fan of Harper as a leader, but every week some new scandal or mishap creeps out showing just how incompetent his cabinet really is. No wonder he kept such a tight grip on them.

As such, I'd liek to let Iggy have a go at governing to see if he can muster a cabinet that is a little less inept. Not a full blown majority, but a comfortable minority similar to what the conservatives currently have to let them show us what they got. At the same time this could allow Harper to backslap his minions into line and hopefully have the right people lined up to form a better cabinet should the Liberals go tits up.

By no means do I want Harper to quit as leader should the conservatives lose the next election. He's probably one of the best leaders the country has had in a long time. The party around him just needs to get it's act together.

I don't know if we need an election, but his party has had so many gaffes in the past year it's getting ridiculous. Frankly, I'd rather wait, because I want a majority government, because none of these bozos seem to be able to do anything other than bicker like children at the playground.

the reality is no government is perfect , sure there's been some gaffee's but the opposition has tried hard to make them seem more important than they really were in the grand scope of things .

and some of the things the opposition or media tries to make a fuss about are just plain old like mulroney . what he did or didn't 20 years ago is not relavent to what the current government is doing or our current economic situation .

i just don't see any reason for an election at this time and when doing soem searching most of the recent editorials seem to be against one .

[bootlegga]

ryan29 ryan29:

the reality is no government is perfect , sure there's been some gaffee's but the opposition has tried hard to make them seem more important than they really were in the grand scope of things .

and some of the things the opposition or media tries to make a fuss about are just plain old like mulroney . what he did or didn't 20 years ago is not relavent to what the current government is doing or our current economic situation .

i just don't see any reason for an election at this time and when doing soem searching most of the recent editorials seem to be against one .

Some gaffes?

You're being generous...almost 20 people dying from Listeria after the government let Maple Leaf inspect their own plants, running out of isotopes that hospitals all over the world depend on to treat patients, reneging on senate reform, cutting taxes AND increasing spending at the same time, promising not to run a deficit and then doing it...the list goes on and on. Then there's all the PR screw-ups in the past three years (O'Connor, Ritz, Raitt, et al). Check out this thread for more info;

canadian-politics-f17/thread-for-compilation-of-conservative-scandals-and-misdeeds-t63234-630.html?hilit=scandal

And if what Mulroney did 20 years ago isn't relevant, then neither should what the Liberals did 15 years ago, like the sponsorship scandal. Yet that gets plugged ad infinitum on here every week or so by one of the Conservative supporters at CKA.

So what's the expiry date on a 'scandal'? A year? Five years? Ten years? 20 Years? Or just long enough to exonerate the Conservatives and shaft the Liberals? Most of you can only see back about 16 years or so...after that, it's all irrelevant, expect of course when people guys like PET give the finger to people at Salmon Arm or discussions arise about cutting defence spending. Then it goes back as far you guys want...

[DerbyX]

bootlegga bootlegga:

ryan29 ryan29:

the reality is no government is perfect , sure there's been some gaffee's but the opposition has tried hard to make them seem more important than they really were in the grand scope of things .

and some of the things the opposition or media tries to make a fuss about are just plain old like mulroney . what he did or didn't 20 years ago is not relavent to what the current government is doing or our current economic situation .

i just don't see any reason for an election at this time and when doing soem searching most of the recent editorials seem to be against one .

Some gaffes?

You're being generous...almost 20 people dying from Listeria after the government let Maple Leaf inspect their own plants, running out of isotopes that hospitals all over the world depend on to treat patients, reneging on senate reform, cutting taxes AND increasing spending at the same time, promising not to run a deficit and then doing it...the list goes on and on. Then there's all the PR screw-ups in the past three years (O'Connor, Ritz, Raitt, et al). Check out this thread for more info;

canadian-politics-f17/thread-for-compilation-of-conservative-scandals-and-misdeeds-t63234-630.html?hilit=scandal

And if what Mulroney did 20 years ago isn't relevant, then neither should what the Liberals did 15 years ago, like the sponsorship scandal. Yet that gets plugged ad infinitum on here every week or so by one of the Conservative supporters at CKA.

So what's the expiry date on a 'scandal'? A year? Five years? Ten years? 20 Years? Or just long enough to exonerate the Conservatives and shaft the Liberals? Most of you can only see back about 16 years or so...after that, it's all irrelevant, expect of course when people guys like PET give the finger to people at Salmon Arm or discussions arise about cutting defence spending. Then it goes back as far you guys want...

Well Said.

[OnTheIce]

300 million seems like a brutal waste of money right now.

[RUEZ]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

300 million seems like a brutal waste of money right now.

This is exactly what liberals were saying before last october. Interesting how six months and some favourable polls can change their mind.