13820 Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Using Harper as your excuse is lame. The decisions of the Conservative Party are those of the Conservative Party. The three stooges are using Stephen Harper as a target but really this is just a power grab. It is not even about cutting their funding as this was started before the Economic Statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
13820 Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 If you are for the coalition then you back Jack Layton! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagger Posted December 2, 2008 Author Share Posted December 2, 2008 30 BILLION before you even know what the US is doing? After deriding Harper for possibly running a deficit. WOW. We need a made-in-Canada plan, we don't need to do what the US is doing line by line. What is important is the magnitude of what the US will do which is pretty much known. It will be north of $500 billion (and some say $750 billion), so on a pro-rate basis, $30 billion by us, on Canadian priorities should be sufficient. All parts of Canada will need help. The story today is that the OECD does not expect a turnaround in oil prices (which hit $46 today) for 12 to 18 months, so if you think you don't need a little stimulus in Alberta and Saskatchewan, you're in for a shock. We're getting a string of announcements now on deferred oil sands investments. We also know that we don't need mortgage relief like the US does. What we do have is plenty of crumbling infrastructure, large hydro projects that can be built in four provinces, an auto industry to modernize - all US automakers are tabling their plans this week - and EI benefits that can be extended so that long-term recipients don't go on welfare, adding to the burden of the provinces. You can come up a made-in-Canada list that can include tax credits for modernizing export industries, subsidies for modernizing older schools and hospitals, accelerating transit and freight rail projects (see Pacific gateway...) And please. I never derided Harper for possibly running a deficit. I think most economists believe stimulus is warranted in a crisis of this severity. It's Flaherty's economic statement, forecasting surpluses in the next three fiscal years, that is being derided, because it was completely at odds with what Harper had said only days earlier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagger Posted December 2, 2008 Author Share Posted December 2, 2008 If you are for the coalition then you back Jack Layton! yes, backed him into a corner where he gave the Liberals carte blanche in exchange for six cabinet posts, none of which can be finance or external affairs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
13820 Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 30 Billion without a clear plan is unacceptable. My mistake on the deficit. The coalition did that. the government has a made in Canada plan it is wait and see. We are on solid financial ground compared to the rest of the world. 30 Billion is knee jerk and the wrong way to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
13820 Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 laugh.gif yes, backed him into a corner where he gave the Liberals carte blanche in exchange for six cabinet posts, none of which can be finance or external affairs. You obviously don't get why people are mad. While you have backed Jack into a corner you have given your control to the Bloc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagger Posted December 2, 2008 Author Share Posted December 2, 2008 You obviously don't get why people are mad. While you have backed Jack into a corner you have given your control to the Bloc. Sorry, if you choose to be willfully ignorant, that's your problem. There is no control to the Bloc. They signed the deal. The deal does not give them extra goodies for Quebec. That's why they only signed on for 18 months - to get some credit for stimulus spending, I suppose - instead of 30. Dion is no friend of separatists and he crafted a PRO-CANADA deal here. You have to ask yourself, why is the ADQ in Quebec excoriating the Bloc today for selling out Quebec? The Bloc went along with this because they can't trust Harper and have no reason to exist right now (Watch the Quebec election results next Monday, going to be bad news for separatists.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
13820 Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 I think this whole thing is bad news for the separatist. I'm not sure what you mean by me being willfully ignorant. There are no extra goodies for Quebec but the have veto power on all matters of the coalition. This is in no way a PRO-CANADA deal. We could debate all night. I don't think you will see my position and I am sure I disagree with yours. Good night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fido Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 Get your head out of your butt and have a real look at the Alberta economy. There was 280 billion worth of projects on the table and there was no way that they could all be built. There are not enough people available to build that much. Fully 1/3 of that 280 billion needed to be cancelled or deferred for at least 10 years. As an example, Syncrude cancelled 3 billion of their immeadiate plans. They still have 6 billion in the planning and building stages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagger Posted December 3, 2008 Author Share Posted December 3, 2008 I think this whole thing is bad news for the separatist. I'm not sure what you mean by me being willfully ignorant. There are no extra goodies for Quebec but the have veto power on all matters of the coalition. This is in no way a PRO-CANADA deal. We could debate all night. I don't think you will see my position and I am sure I disagree with yours. Good night. Where do you keep inventing this? They have no veto. They could back out and force an election, that's only implied leverage they have. As a matter of fact, the Conservatives agree. Today they derided Duceppe for giving the Liberals a "blank cheque" and say Duceppe is now Dion's Quebec lieutenant, which is meant as the supreme insult. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
13820 Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 OK I'll bite. What am I inventing? If the Bloc is unhappy with any motion brought forth they can bring down the coalition. That to me means veto power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
13820 Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 Fido, where do you get that number and is that still the case with oil prices where they are now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fido Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 Fido, where do you get that number and is that still the case with oil prices where they are now? You can go back about a year and read the comments of former premier Peter Lougheed. He suggested a moratorium on any more development but most people were just looking for a cool down on the number of projects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagger Posted December 3, 2008 Author Share Posted December 3, 2008 OK I'll bite. What am I inventing? If the Bloc is unhappy with any motion brought forth they can bring down the coalition. That to me means veto power. They are required to support the coalition on confidence votes. They get nothing for it. Unless they renounce the agreement they made, which will mean an election no ifs, ands and buts, they have no leverage. But they are under an agreement and it would seem to leave them little room to complain. Since the agenda of the coalition is to be stimulus, stimulus and nothing particularly controversial, I would expect nobody is going to be pulling out of any agreements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
13820 Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 I think economic reality will take care of that figure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
13820 Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 Since the agenda of the coalition is to be stimulus, stimulus and nothing particularly controversial, I think the agenda of the coalition is keep the subsidy. The rest is a smoke screen. If the cause is stimulus then where is the money going? I am assuming east of Winnipeg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagger Posted December 3, 2008 Author Share Posted December 3, 2008 I think the agenda of the coalition is keep the subsidy. The rest is a smoke screen. If the cause is stimulus then where is the money going? I am assuming east of Winnipeg. They did agree to accelerate infrastructure spending, construction and retrofit spending on housing, make strategic investments in such key sectors as manufacturing, forestry and automaking. The coalition also proposes a new agency to reform Employment Insurance and introduce reforms to reduce minimum withdrawals from RRSPs. "We believe there are steps that can be take very rapidly, bold steps," Layton said. It is also proposing reforms on bankruptcy laws to protect pensions and a support program for elderly workers who have lost their jobs to help them make the transition to retirement. Notably, Dion said the corporate tax cut program announced by the Conservatives in Budget 2008 would proceed. The corporate income tax rate is to drop to 19 per cent from 19.5 per cent next year and will drop to 15 per cent by 2012, giving Canada one of the lowest corporate income tax rates in the world. Dion also said the coalition would not revisit the issue of the Canadian commitment to Afghanistan. Harper had already indicated that Canadian troops will continue their current combat role with NATO forces in Afghanistan until 2011. As you can see, they will help industries like manufacturing and forestry that are certainly represented in parts West of Winnipeg as well as East. It was Premier Campbell of BC that specifically demanded part of the stimulus go to forestry in his province. Go down some of the other items. Does this look threatening to you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
13820 Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 This whole thing is threatening to me. I voted for a Conservative government. I certainly did not vote for Stephane Dion or Jack Layton or Gilles Duceppe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
13820 Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 Sorry I am not sure where you are quoting from. It was Premier Campbell of BC that specifically demanded part of the stimulus go to forestry in his province. Go down some of the other items. Does this look threatening to you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagger Posted December 3, 2008 Author Share Posted December 3, 2008 Sorry I am not sure where you are quoting from. The quote is from a CanWest article I posted in another thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
13820 Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 The Montreal Gazette. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
13820 Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 I read your link. Saw no mention of Gordon Campbell. I think 100% of this "incentive" will fall east of the soo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireFox Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 yes, backed him into a corner where he gave the Liberals carte blanche in exchange for six cabinet posts, none of which can be finance or external affairs. Not true according to the agreement. No mention of external affairs that I can see. Why don't you do a little research once in a while? December 1, 2008 An Accord on a Cooperative Government to Address the Present Economic Crisis This document outlines the key understandings between the Liberal Party of Canada and the New Democratic Party of Canada regarding a new cooperative government. 1. Role of caucuses The Liberal and NDP caucuses will continue to meet as distinct caucuses. They will receive briefings and be consulted as appropriate. Both are entitled to offer advice to the government. The two caucuses may meet jointly as agreed from time to time to jointly address issues. The caucuses will sit next to each other on the government benches. 2. Cabinet Nothing in this Accord is intended to diminish or alter the power and prerogatives of the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister will be the Leader of the Liberal Party of Canada. The Minister of Finance will be appointed from the Liberal caucus. The cabinet will be composed of 24 ministers plus the Prime Minister. Eighteen of these ministers will be appointed from within the Liberal caucus. Six of these ministers will be appointed from within the NDP caucus, plus six Parliamentary Secretaries, sworn in as Privy Councillors, will also be named from the NDP caucus. In the event the Prime Minister chooses to appoint a larger cabinet, the NDP proportion will be maintained. The specifics of these cabinet appointments will be made by the Prime Minister in appropriate consultation with the Leader of the NDP. The rules and practices of cabinet confidentiality and solidarity will be strictly maintained. Normal processes of cabinet appointments and governance in the Canadian federal government will be respected. The cabinet is jointly and collectively accountable to Parliament for its work, including in daily question period. 3. A “no surprises” approach Within the limits of common sense and the needs of cabinet government, the two parties agree they will work together on a “no surprises” basis. Furthermore, upon its formation, the government will put in place a permanent consultation mechanism with the Bloc Québécois. 4. Appointments Both parties are committed to restoring the integrity, transparency and efficiency of the appointments process in the Public Service and in federal bodies like the Supreme Court, the Senate and Commissions like the CRTC. The Prime Minister will consult the Leader of the NDP as appropriate on appointments. 5. A standing managing committee of the Accord A standing managing committee of the Accord, chaired by the Prime Minister, will be struck. It will be composed of the Prime Minister, the Leader of the NDP, and such other persons as the leaders deem appropriate from time to time. The committee will meet regularly to ensure the good order of the Accord; to deal with key issues that have arisen; to consult on key appointments; and to resolve any disputes which might arise from the Accord (for example, by referring issues relating to the Accord to a trusted committee of experienced, distinguished Canadians). 6. Term of this Accord This Accord will expire on June 30, 2011 unless renewed. Agreed on December 1, 2008. Hon. Stéphane Dion Leader, Liberal Party of Canada Hon. Jack Layton Leader, New Democratic Party of Canada Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
better4me Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 Does this look threatening to you? What is threatening to me is what is not included in the accord. Each party (NDP and Liberal) ran under a full platform. For the liberals this included Green Shift. The current accord and propositions do not speak anything beyond the stated economic objectives. This would be fine if the coalition was going to get the country through the current economic crises and then call an election to decided on a full mandate with platform. However the coalition wants to govern for a full 18 months and have a full mandate. Clearly the Green Shift plan was rejected by Canadians, it was the liberals central plan and they lost big because of it. However now the Liberals would have the power to implement Green Shift. So now we have a government with no mandate that can push through a their desires at will. With the economic platform thought out, the coalition needs to develop a full merger of their platforms (each of NDP and Liberal) and maybe drop some of their less popular items (e.g. Green Shift) in order to deserve the support of Canadians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fido Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 Nah. The coalition has not thought of anything beyond keeping their $30 million and getting into power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.