The NDP's Jack Layton just committed to doubling pensions for seniors, which nicely sticks to his overall goal of only proposing policy that Canada cannot afford.
I'm reading through this right now. Some of it is hilarious.Canada.com has a site up called Decision Canada that tracks all of the promises made by each major party, which is great for an at-a-glance summary of where everyone stands.
So close to a million Canadians voted for Green and they should just be ignored? I am not saying give them the government, but look at PQ, they got about 500k or 55% more votes than the Green, but PQ got 49 seats. And I would put PQ in the same category as Western Block Party.
That's because the Greens can't threat with secession, like Quebec does.
What are the Greens going to do, declare Algonquin Park off-limits?
OTTAWA -­ A Liberal government wouldn't revisit any of the tough-on-crime legislation passed under the Tories, incumbent Liberal Mark Holland said Monday.
"I don't see anything right now that we need to go back and undo," the public safety critic said in phone interview with QMI Agency.
But Holland underscored that a Liberal government would focus on crime prevention, not incarceration.
...
Holland mused publicly last year that the Liberals might revisit C-25 after the PBO report was unveiled.
But on Monday he said the Liberals would instead review ways to slash the time inmates spend in remand centres.
Holland didn't say whether the Grits would roll back the $601 million in prison infrastructure spending that has already been announced.
"We're going to make sure our prisons are safe," he said.
You guys need to drop this Queen dissolving parliament stuff, it's embarrassing. Ger her off your bills already.
That's because too many people don't give a shit about the Green Party or its single issue platform.Originally Posted by sdifox View Post
So close to a million Canadians voted for Green and they should just be ignored? I am not saying give them the government, but look at PQ, they got about 500k or 55% more votes than the Green, but PQ got 49 seats. And I would put PQ in the same category as Western Block Party.
"Having a national debate without the Green party is like going deer hunting without an accordion. You leave a lot of useless, noisy baggage behind." (Topically edited from the original by Jed Babbin, former U.S. secretary of defense.)
The federal deficit is going to be one of the most important challenges facing the next government, and the platforms of the three major parties all claim that their programs are consistent with balancing the budget in the medium term. None of these claims are credible.
All parties are using the March 22 budget as a baseline for their scenarios; their platforms enumerate tax and spending plans in terms of deviations from the budget scenario. So the first problem to point out is that the budget’s scenario of freezing nominal expenditures for five years without cutting services or programs is at best implausibly optimistic.
The Liberal platform discussed here builds on that implausible baseline by overestimating anticipated revenues from an increase in the corporate income tax (CIT) by a factor of 2.5.
The Conservative platform’s variation on its own budget is a promise to identify and implement savings worth $4-billion a year within the next three years without cutting programs or reducing services. No other explanation is offered, but then again, neither do they seem to be able to explain the cuts that were announced in the budget.
But the prize for budgetary opacity must surely go to the New Democrats’ “costing document” (pdf). Firstly, their estimate of $9-billion a year from increasing the CIT rate is even more implausible than that of the Liberals: an overestimate by a factor of at least three. The next largest source of revenue -- “Tax Haven Crackdown” -- is supposed to produce more than $3-billion in 2014-15.
I cannot offer you any more in the way of explanation behind that number, because the NDP platform is completely silent on the matter. No measures are announced, no reasoning is offered to explain why those measures might be sensible, and no research is offered to justify the $3-billion estimate. The same goes for the “Ending Fossil Fuel Subsidies” entry: $2-billion a year in extra revenues, again with no explanation, discussion or research.
In the United States, proposals aren’t taken seriously until they are examined by the Congressional Budget Office. We should be thinking seriously about giving the Parliamentary Budget Office -- or some other independent source of professional expertise -- the resources necessary to perform the same service. The current state of affairs is simply unacceptable. Voters shouldn’t be reduced to guessing what lies behind parties’ thinking.
The Harper government misinformed Parliament to win approval for a $50-million G8 fund that lavished money on dubious projects in a Conservative riding, the Auditor-General has concluded.
And she suggests the process by which the funding was approved may have been illegal.
I wonder if this will become an issue:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...n-g8-spending-auditor-general/article1979865/
I still can't figure out whether Canadians are actually ok with all this shit the Cons do, or they just don't know what the "fiscally responsible" party does with their money.
Lots of people in Canada are every bit as bad as Fox News viewers in the US. Everything is some liberal conspiracy. If CBC exposes some bullshit a conservative does, it's because CBC is the liberal media. When they expose liberals doing the same thing, then suddenly CBC is the most credible source evar and it's good journalism. People are fucking idiots. Everyone below 50 IQ should be forcibly sterilized.
I wonder if this will become an issue:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...n-g8-spending-auditor-general/article1979865/
I still can't figure out whether Canadians are actually ok with all this shit the Cons do, or they just don't know what the "fiscally responsible" party does with their money.
Looks like they did it twice:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadavotes2011/story/2011/04/11/cv-election-weston-ag-fraser.html#
The Conservatives' report, presented as a dissenting opinion to the Commons the morning Parliament was dissolved last month, quotes Fraser giving high marks to the Harper government for prudent spending on the summits.
The report quoted the auditor general as saying: We found that the processes and controls around that were very good, and that the monies were spent as they were intended to be spent.
But in her letter addressed to members of a Commons committee on Friday, which was received by the clerk and members on Monday, Fraser said the quote had nothing to do with the summits.
Instead, she said, the Conservatives recycled an old comment she made on security spending by a previous Liberal government after the 9/11 terrorist attacks a decade ago.
Not sure, but rumor has it that Carbon Tax will be announce soon as Green Party main platform. And, the draconian proceed go to environmental projects (tax grab/gravy train).Are the Liberals still proposing a carbon tax?
I always thought Canadian's were smarter.
Just skimming over the comments posted on the Toronto Star and CBC News set me straight. You can't go more than a few posts before someone posts something along the lines of "take that you lefty idiots".