Blue Like You

Archive for the ‘Entitlement’ Category

Because you can’t threaten the Prime Minister of Canada and then hide behind "Freedom of the Press".

Scott Reid, take note.

*   *   *   *

Update: Apparently Stephen Harper is also responsible for sore ovaries. Is there any evil in the history of the whole world that can’t be directly attributed to Stephen Harper?

I need to take a short time-out to work on some technical issues here at Blue Like You, but I do have a few thoughts to share with you this morning.

The leadership of the Liberal party is currently in a very volatile state, with party sentiment saying that Dion has to step down now, and a replacement has to be found quickly. Dominic LeBlanc has already withdrawn from the race and thrown his support behind Ignatieff, who along with Bob Rae is pushing for an accelerated process to choose a leader. However, their methods differ (Globe):

…Mr. Ignatieff and Mr. Rae both hit the airwaves on Sunday and called for an accelerated leadership process. Liberal sources said that Mr. Rae could support a system in which every Liberal member votes for the new leader next month, while the Ignatieff camp has contemplated a selection process involving the party hierarchy…

As Ezra Levant humorously points out, Bob Rae has suddenly developed a taste for democracy.

Where does all this turmoil leave the coalition? Well, Jack Layton was just on Canada AM continuing to promote his dream, but many Liberals are starting to get cold feet after getting an earful from their constituents. Michael Ignatieff himself has never fully committed to the plan.

If Ignatieff were to win the leadership race by the end of January, and the opposition parties still voted down the budget, what would happen? Would they still try to convince the GG to allow this three-headed monster to govern?

To me there are two deal-breakers here. The first is the fact that the Liberal party did not run on the platform of a coalition in the last election. Tom Flanagan points this out in today’s Globe:

The political situation has changed fundamentally through Mr. Dion’s willingness to form a governing coalition with the NDP, because he explicitly rejected that possibility during the campaign. "We cannot have a coalition with a party that has a platform that would be damaging for the economy. Period." That’s what Mr. Dion said three weeks before election day, after Jack Layton had started dropping hints about a coalition. The 26 per cent of voters who supported the Liberals were led to believe that such a coalition was out of the question. When Mr. Dion resurrected in November what he had rejected in September, he wrought a fundamental change in the political situation because it involved an entire potential government, not just this or that policy.

But the other deal breaker is that this coalition was so hungry for power that the socialist and separatist heads of the Hydra settled for a lame-duck leader that the Canadian people and his own party had soundly rejected, thereby putting at risk the stability of the entire country (if the Governor General had not allowed prorogation.)

[Also please read Link Byfield's excellent essay at Ezra's.]

I hope that the Coalition will self-destruct over the next few weeks, but it is imperative that Canadians continue to make their voices heard. The opposition parties have demonstrated that they cannot be trusted, and we should all be wary of a coalition by stealth even if this dangerous agreement appears to die.

*   *   *   *

NEWSFLASH: Recently defeated Kitchener Centre MP Karen Redman has just announced on Newstalk 570 that she will come out in support of Michael Ignatieff and she plans to run again in the next election. Karen told Jeff Allan that there’s no reason why the leadership issue can’t be sewn up quickly via electronic voting.

Let’s start that campaign now, folks!

*   *   *   *

Refuting the 62% Argument:

Check out Canada Free Press - Jack Layton must resign. Great article Arthur! Dave made a similar observation yesterday regarding Marlene Jennings (2:26 pm). But Jack is the Leader of the Hypocrites and as such, he should indeed resign.

Or course, reader Gabby has posted a remarkable numbers of arguments proving that the 62% argument is bogus. I will add relevant links to her comments in previous posts as time permits.  Anyone wishing to address this issue in comments is also welcome to do so - Here’s a good place to start: Gabby gives the stats at 11:19 pm. This is required reading.

Here’s another must-read: Harper not out of line for wanting to crush the opposition. We need more MSM columnists like Christie Blatchford. (H/T Sammy)

*   *   *   *

Welcome, Newsbeat 1 readers!

Last one off the Entitlement Ship is the dirtiest rat.

CBC is reporting that Liberal MP Jim Karygiannis referred to last night’s Dion taping as a "gong show".

According to CTV, Bob Rae is still gung-ho for the Coalition. However, the knives are out for Dion.

More from the Globe:

…Liberal MP Jim Karygiannis wasted no time in calling Mr. Dion to be replaced before the House returns in January. "Who are we kidding? I think it’s over," he said, heading into a closed door caucus meeting.

"To become Prime Minister at all costs? Where do we take the Liberal brand? … The brand got hit. The brand is good. The CEO of the company screwed up."

The Scarborough MP emerged from caucus saying the party supports remaining in the coalition, but Mr. Dion must be replaced. "The party still wants the coalition to keep together. My constituents want Mr. Dion to go."

He said it’s time to move the party’s leadership race up - a conventon is slated for May - or find some way of making sure it has "a leader who can lead us" if there is an election in February or March.

Mr. Dion’s botched video address was a clincher, he said: "We bombed."

Even more at the Western Standard.

*   *   *   *

Unsolicited advice for PM: As satisfying as it would be to grind these numbskulls into the political ground, please take the high road and reach out to any opposition MPs who seem willing to work with you and who actually put Canada’s interests first! I beg you.

Throw them a bone and let them think that their petty hijinks have had some effect and that you are now chastened and circumspect. We know they are pathetic, but please suck it up for Canada. Thank you.

*   *   *   *

Siscoe seems to like my advice.

Ipsos Reid Poll - Political power struggle scaring Canadians: Poll

Support for Tories up amid House crisis, CBC-EKOS poll suggests - CBC.

Petition: Our right to vote on the Coalition Government. (H/T Brett in comments.)

*   *   *   *

Yesterday’s events were quite dramatic - so much so that I needed to bury my head in a fiction book last night to get my mind off it for a while.

Today I’m thinking back to the promises of civility and cooperation in Parliament - all the while during which the opposition was busy cooking up this scheme.

Canadians need stable government right now. We need our Government to be able to concentrate on the global economic crisis, and yet Ottawa is far from stable at the moment. How will this affect the markets - both now and if the coalition coup takes place?

How is this helpful? The Harper Government has removed the poison pills and yet the opposition parties continue with their plan. Why? Is it a personal grudge? Do they hate Stephen Harper that much that they will grab power and to give the governance of this country to a man who has not yet been democratically elected as leader and as PM?

What has the Harper Government done that is so egregious as to warrant this kind of political chaos in our country and its likely devastating blow to our economic stability?

As Lorne Gunter points out, the Liberals sat out many votes during the previous Parliament when the issues appeared to be more important. First he mentions the complicity of some MSM:

What the Tories underestimated, though, was the absolute and utter shamelessness of the Liberals — and to a lesser extent the NDP — not to mention the willingness of most media to bite uncritically on the opposition version of events …

…And let’s not forget the Liberals’ Afghanistan volte-face. Last February, Stephane Dion said he was "absolutely unwavering" in his commitment to end our Armed Forces’ combat mission in Afghanistan by February, 2009. If the government didn’t commit to that target date, he and his caucus would pull the Tories down. Yet. two weeks after Mr. Dion’s exercise in tub thumping, he and his party agreed with the Tories that the combat mission should continue into 2011.

In short, there has been no single principle the Liberals believed in strongly enough — not the environment, not peace, not open immigration — that they were willing to force an election. But threaten to cut off the nearly $8-million they extract from taxpayers each year to pay for office, staff, propaganda, conventions and the like — well, we have finally found the one hill on which they are prepared to die. ..

Andrew Coyne is one of the other three or four media pundits in Canada with a similar balanced view:

…But what am I saying? Notwithstanding the hundreds of column-inches attacking the Tories for their intolerable affront to opposition sensibilities, it is important to remember that the opposition’s sudden lurch for power had nothing to do with the impending loss of public funds. No, the reason they are absolutely forced to defeat the government this time, having declined to do so over Afghanistan, or global warming, or budgets 2006, 2007 ot 2008, is on account of the fall update. Nothing bespeaks the fierce urgency of now so much as an annual statistical review …

Why can’t the opposition wait a few weeks to see what the government has in store in its upcoming budget? And as both Sandy and Jacqueline Thorpe observe, the Harper government has already done more than many other countries to stimulate the economy, having foreseen some of these problems earlier.

But it never really was about the stimulus package.

It’s about a power-hungry opposition that can’t stand Stephen Harper and is hell-bent to take him down - whatever the cost to Canada.

The big question is, will Canadians put up with it? (Check out the Letters to the Editor at the Post - How low will the opposition sink?)

How will they feel about a coalition needing the support of the Bloc for every money bill that they attempt to pass? As Lorrie Goldstein points out, this could threaten our sovereignty and the stability of our entire country:

For the first time, a party dedicated to the political destruction of Canada, operating contrary to the wishes of the majority of Canadians outside and inside Quebec, holds the balance of power between competing federalist forces in a minority Parliament. That alone could reignite western separatism and tear Canada apart.

What exactly was Duceppe promised? Will money be siphoned from Alberta to Quebec?

And will the Coalition run as a unified left-wing party in the next election? Will the Bloc start running candidates all across the country?

Please voice your concerns to MPs, the Governor General, newspapers and radio talkshows before it is too late.

*   *   *   *

New Poll up - If the Government falls, what should the Governor-General do?

Update - From DWT in comments:

"…Jack ran in the last election on the premise that he wanted Harper’s job. He just didn’t tell Canadians how he planned on getting it."

Do you trust that man?

Would the opposition parties have conspired to take down the government over the economic update if the party funding issue hadn’t originally been included?

Would they instead have been able to wait the short time until the late January budget, and after the Obama plan has been announced and assessed, so that we could be working together to solve this crisis?

And how would you get anything out the door any faster, Stephane? Would you still need your 30 days?

Or do you need a retake on that one, Stephane? I know these English tenses are difficult for you.

And BTW Stephane, how did it suddenly become so palatable to govern with "somebody who wants to raise the (corporate) taxes by $50 billion"?

And in related news, Name that Coalition.

*   *   *   *

Update - Good comment here by R. Carriere from the Maritimes at the Globe (29/11/08 at 1:21 PM):

…Some issues to consider amongst MANY others!

1) Afghanistan. The NDP are adamant that troops should be out now-yesterday, while the Liberals voted for the 2011 extension. Who Blinks and puts beliefs on the side for the lust of power?

2) October 11/2008: Mr. Dion criticized NDP Leader Jack Layton for his proposal to put a $50 billion, job-killing tax increase on all Canadian businesses large and small.

‘Mr. Layton’s $50-billion tax on Canada’s employers and job creators means you won’t get that raise you need to make your mortgage payments. It means you’re going to be looking for work while your job is shipped overseas, said Mr. Dion

Who blinks again? Who abandons beliefs?

So what does this coalition do?
Cut corporate taxes or collect more.
Leave Afghanistan today or stay until 2011?
Instant child care for all or status quo?
Layton’s Cap and trade or the Green shift Carbon tax?

Evening Update: "…Kill him. Kill him dead…" "…If you don’t put Mr. Harper in his grave, he’ll put you in yours…" - Scott Reid. (H/T National Newswatch)

Scott’s a big boy now. He’s way past Beer & Popcorn. The PM’s bodyguards may want to take note of Scott’s column.

I just feel sorry for the kids.

This post is a continuation of the one from this morning, which is becoming unwieldy with all the updates.

Here’s the latest from CBC (2:40 pm): The Liberals with the help of the socialists and the separatists, plan to bring down the government on Monday with the following motion:

"In light of the government’s failure to recognize the seriousness of Canada’s economic situation and its failure in particular to present any credible plan to stimulate the Canadian economy and to help workers and businesses in hard-pressed sectors such as manufacturing, the automotive industry and forestry, this House has lost confidence in this government and is of the opinion that a viable alternative government can be formed within the present House of Commons."

Stephane Dion would be the new Prime Minister for the next few months.

If this wasn’t November, I’d think this was an April Fool’s joke.

*   *   *   *

Related thoughts: There is actually a lot of support among various experts for the wait-and-see approach to providing an economic stimulus - i.e.  after the Obama administration takes over. And some are skeptical of stimulus measures in general.

TD’s Derek Burleton suggests that we wait 4 to 6 weeks until the January budget to get it right. Even Don Drummond mentioned yesterday on CTV that Canada isn’t the problem and that Canada has already done its part. (Interview with Mike Duffy Nov. 27 at 3:30)

It is important that we act in concert with the U.S. in order to maximize our returns and not do something counter-productive. However, the opposition parties seem hell-bent on bringing this government down.

In any event, how could a coalition government end up bringing in anything sooner than the Tory Government would have in the upcoming budget? And how long would it take to get the NDP Cabinet Ministers (how does that sound?) up to speed on the various files that they are demanding?

So the NDP will finally get to play Government, and the Bloc will support the whole charade as long as Quebec is first at the trough.

The Conservatives will be pushed to the sidelines.

However, the Liberals stand to lose the most in this little game - namely their credibility.

*   *   *   *

Late Afternoon Update: Liberals unveil plan to topple Tories - Globe.

Governor General could come home if constitutional crisis erupts - CP

So apparently Stephane Dion will actually be the leader of the Coalition of Losers (H/T to Kunoichi in comments). Now will Dion please tell us what HE would have done had he been Prime Minister in this fiscal update which isn’t even a budget? Or do you need a retake, Stephane?

Oh never mind. I know the answer. You would have enacted a CARBON TAX!!!

*   *   *   *

Stephen Taylor - Fact, fiction, and speculation:

Fact: The Throne Speech passed in the House yesterday after the economic statement was read. The opposition approved the government’s mandate knowing full well that they’d be bringing it to the brink this weekend.

Bloody hypocrites.

CTV - Experts doubtful a coalition government would work.

What would the NDP-Liberal-Bloc Coalition party be named that Robert McClelland predicts at Stephen Taylor’s will certainly occur as a result of the government’s plan to eliminate taxpayer subsidies of political parties? The Coalition of Campaign Welfare?

Whatever they call themselves, they’re going to have a tough time selling it to the Canadian public. And of course, that all assumes that the GG would be favourable to such a development.

At a time when any public leeching from the taxpayer needs to be carefully reviewed, the opposition parties seem to be bristling at any thought of losing their entitlements and perks.

Frankly, I fail to see why the NDP wouldn’t support the subsidy elimination plan, because the measure would tend to favour parties that have excellent grassroots fundraising systems in place, and that would include the NDP and the CPC.

There are many reasons to end this practice.

Stephen Taylor has outlined several, including this very intriguing theory in his post entitled Obama sets example for Canada , that parties would have to work a little harder to reach the grass roots and try to inspire:

…People are goaded out of fear to vote against and they often hold their nose for the not-as-offensive choice they end up “supporting”. Since money comes from support, we should break the model that rewards false support and strengthen one that challenges parties to offer ideas rather than fear. Government subsidization of political parties hurts Canadian politics.

The motto of Barack Obama’s campaign for President was “Yes We Can”. Under the current Canadian system, we give welfare to parties for being best able to convince Canadians of the other parties, “No They Can’t”. If we made politics about the positive (Yes), responsibility of self (We) and enablement (Can) rather than the negative (No), what one’s opponent would do (They) and a need to stop them (Can’t), perhaps we could reduce voter apathy both at the ballot box and when parties pass the hat. If we gave voters more power to finance those they support rather than sustain those they least detest we could shift Canadian politics for the better. ..

(That Taylor guy is brilliant.)

Also, don’t forget that every time a Canadian votes, a $1.95 goes from your taxes to support that particular party (except in the case of independents of course.) Therefore, Canadians across the country are also financially supporting the growth of a party that wants to break up Canada (Bloc), and has no real stake in the interests of any province outside Quebec.  Amazing when you think about it.

It’s time to let your MP know how you feel about Campaign Welfare.

*   *   *   *

Update: Gerry Nichols puts another spin on this initiative - Welfare for Politicians.

Should we increase individual contribution limits?

Ivison has the stats on subsidies and contributions by party at the end of this article - Political ‘War’ Looms.

Phantom Observer explains why there won’t be a Tri-Party Coalition in Canada.

*   *   *   *

NEW POLL UP! Do you agree that the public subsidy for political parties should end? H/T to Mary T for the suggestion.

Lots of different opinions across the Blogging Tory spectrum.

Afternoon Update: This story is really heating up. Really there are just too many links and opinions out there to mention, but be sure to check out Andrew Coyne. Any Blogging Tories better have some smelling salts ready. Coyne says, "…it’s the right thing to do".

Kelly McParland: Stephen Harper, Evil Genius.

Excellent discussion going on at Fortress of Knowledge: Prime-Minister Dion or Layton?

I’m seeing a pattern developing here, aren’t you?

CAW offers no breaks for auto bailout - Post

Union: Treasury Board can put offer where the sun don’t shine. - Ottawa Sun.

GM Canada beset by pension crisis - Globe’s Report on Business.

The CAW must give ground - Kelly McParland (Post)

No Concessions? No bailout. - Boston Globe

If you read the comments at many of these links, the recurring sentiment is anger and frustration over big companies and public unions trying to pressure governments into thinking they are ‘indispensible’.

As the Boston Globe article notes:

…But companies across the country are shedding workers and benefits, and no one is showing them much sympathy. There will be no taxpayer-funded federal rescue plan for those Americans who don’t work in industries considered too big to fail. If they are lucky enough to continue working, they have no recourse once employers decide to cut benefits. If they lose their jobs, they face the fear of long-term unemployment and an uncertain economic future …

The Globe also notes that "Concessions shouldn’t be a one-way street. As a condition of any bailout, auto executives should be prepared to reduce their ranks, accept management changes, and take cuts in salaries and bonuses, too."

As the bleeding continues across North America and indeed the whole world, the over-tapped and under-protected regular taxpayers are going to start screaming. And then who will the governments listen to?

- Big Auto, Big Union,  or the little guys?

*   *   *   *

Thursday Update: There is a rumour circulating that Chinese automakers are interested in scooping up GM and Chryler assets! !

Some of the comments are great.

Autonut - "It is fitting: blue Mao coveralls for all union workers. The mentality is already settled in."

Airhen - "I would look forward to see how the Chinese deal with the UAW."

And this is downright scary!!! On the hook for billions? (Sun):

Ontario could be responsible for "billions" in General Motors pensions if the tottering company goes bankrupt, Finance Minister Dwight Duncan said yesterday.

"It’s a substantial amount of money. I’m not privy to the company’s up-to-date books (but) it would be in the order of magnitude of billions," Duncan told reporters. "This is one of the reasons, one of the very real costs associated, if General Motors is not able to continue viable operations."

Because of a complicated deal cut back in 1992 to preserve plants and jobs in Ontario, GM, Ford and Chrysler — along with some steelmaking firms — were allowed to cut back on their pension funds, instead of paying into what auto consultant Dennis DesRosiers says was a "Too Big To Fail Fund."

GM is the only one of the firms that still pays into the government’s Pension Benefits Guarantee Fund instead of having to fund its pension on a solvency basis.

DesRosiers said the latest estimate he saw for the GM’s unfunded liability was more than $4 billion. "It’s seriously underwater," he said…

How did we get here?

*   *   *   *

Friday Update: CBC boss in no hurry to dish on expenses - Sun.

Hard times all over the place (as reported by CBC).

Except of course, at CBC.

Gee, I wonder why?

*   *   *   *

Wednesday Update:  Hunter and Raph have both picked up on this arrogant spending by the Mothercorps:

CBC, Their Hands in Our Pockets! - Climbing out of the Dark.

Twice at the Government Trough - Unambiguously Ambidextrous.

Ottawa-Orleans Conservative MP Royal Galipeau has now joined several other MPs in a bid for the Speaker’s chair.

I was shocked to see that 100% of my 58 respondents to a recent poll believe that it’s time for a new Speaker. I’ve never had an unanimous poll result before. Should be interesting to watch who ends up with this cushy job that has lots of lovely perks including an official residence.

Meanwhile, that other race is getting a bit more interesting too. At least now there’s a remote chance that it won’t have to be classified as a ’sleep aid’ anymore.

*   *   *   *

Monday Update: Speaker’s perks draw objections (Chronicle Herald):

…The speaker’s job comes with a cozy apartment in the rear of the Centre Block, a rustic mansion and grounds in the Gatineau Hills near Ottawa, a car and driver to shuttle the Speaker between the two, and a $1-million budget that includes up to $167,500 for hospitality.

The country residence at Kingsmere, Que., called The Farm, has its own wine cellar.

And when Parliament is adjourned, the Speaker has a foreign travel budget that allows flights to exotic destinations around the world.

Milliken has drawn on that extensively, spending several hundred thousand dollars over the last two years on visits abroad, always with a contingent of MPs from all parties along for the ride.

In Parliament, Milliken has established a practice of hosting informal weekly dinners, invariably a meal of lamb with wine, in his Centre Block apartment for up to two-dozen MPs …

Interesting insider strategy here at The Hill Times - House Speaker race heats up, gets interesting:

One Liberal MP said Mr. Milliken, who has been the Speaker since 2001, has been in the position for too long, the MP said he felt he’d been treated unfairly by him in the past and that Mr. Milliken panders to the government. The MP, who said he plans on voting for Mr. Scheer, said " a few" people in his caucus are looking for someone else to support besides Mr. Milliken. "Peter has been there too long, Peter thinks that we owe it to him…Besides, it gets the Tories down by one vote."

Mmm… Something tells me Joe Comartin is the best choice here.

*   *   *   *

Globe’s Lawrence Martin - Wanted: A Speaker who can end the bedlam:

...Speaker Milliken, who has been in the job seven years, is a nice, soft-spoken man. But therein lies the problem. He’s too nice, too soft-spoken. He’s like the high school teacher who knows his stuff but can’t control the class. We all remember those types. You spotted them the first time they entered the room. The paper airplanes and spitballs started to fly. ..

Excellent column. Please read the whole thing.

Kady’s rooting for Andrew Scheer. And check out her poll! How many times has Peter Milliken voted for himself?

Stephen Taylor has interviews with the candidates!