[lostandfound]

http://cameronholmst...with-twist.html

Quote

Well today came the Conservatives economic update and the Harper Conservatives followed through on the rumours that have been circulating. As reported here last night, the Conservatives have table their threat to eliminate public financing for Canada's political parties as a part of their fiscal plans. This "plan", and I use that word extremely loosely, is garbage, plain and simple. So how have the Opposition Parties responded??? Here's what they had to say in Question Period today (courtesy CBC):

"Canada's opposition parties said Thursday they will vote against the Conservative government's fiscal update, sparking speculation the country could face another election in the midst of a global economic crisis.

"We will vote against this plan … (It) does not address the economic slowdown," Liberal leader Stéphane Dion told reporters.

The NDP and Bloc Québécois also said they would not support the government on the changes proposed by Finance Minister Jim Flaherty if it is put to a confidence vote, which could come as soon as Friday, the CBC's Keith Boag reported from outside the House of Commons in Ottawa.

The parties assailed the government's plan to eliminate the $30 million in public subsidies all political parties receive, saying Stephen Harper's Conservatives were more interested in playing politics than protecting Canada's threatened economy."

After Mr. Flaherty made his update in the House of Commons, both the Liberals and New Democrats renewed their objections and both stated that they would vote this down, even with it being a confidence vote. And good on them all for standing up to the Conservatives and putting the pressure straight back on the bullying Conservatives government that we have.

So, let's look ahead for a moment folks. What if the Opposition Parties all follow through on this and don't swallow the poison pill that the Conservatives are trying to ram down their throats? The Conservatives will scream of another election, but thankfully it's not in British Parliamentary tradition to automatically go back to the polls, especially when an election has just so recently happened. The Conservatives are not entitled to a new election if they loose the confidence of the House of Commons. The fact is that the Opposition is entitled to ask to have the chance to form a government of their own. That's right folks, remember all those rumbles during the election about forming a coalition??? Well, we might just be staring that in the face here, and it would be an historic one. We could very well see the New Democrats get together with the Liberals in a formal coalition, with the Bloc Quebecois, while not formally joining in, probably supporting the move going forward. This whole situation has shades of 1985 in Ontario, with the exception of the fact that their is a fourth party involved. Back in 1985, we saw that coalition work for a while and change the history of Ontario. This coalition probably wouldn't last as long, but it has a much better chance at a longer life than this current government does, especially acting like this. Things sure have gotten interesting pretty fast, and it will be interesting to see what happens over the next few days up on Parliament Hill.

[nitronuts]

Opposition threatens to oppose fiscal update
Updated Thu. Nov. 27 2008 5:32 PM ET

CTV.ca News Staff

Opposition MPs were threatening to topple the Conservatives Thursday after the government announced it would put off a new economic stimulus package until next year and would slash funding to political parties.

Defeating the Tories in Parliament could trigger another federal election or allow opposition parties to band together and form a new government.

"This is not a way to govern on the edge of Niagara Falls," said Liberal MP Michael Ignatieff, referring to the country's teetering economy.

"Nobody wants to play political chicken," he added. "I'm thinking of the workers in the forestry sector, in the automobile sector: what they are crying out for is a government that doesn't play games with us, comes back to us and says, 'how can we make this work?'"

The government will cut about $5.9 billion out of the federal budget and will post a small surplus of about $100 million this year, said Finance Minister Jim Flaherty.

"Without a doubt, these are difficult times that require difficult choices," Flaherty said in Parliament Thursday. "All countries are struggling to cope with this crisis."

The new measures will go to a vote in the House of Commons early next week.

Other highlights from the government's fiscal update include selling off $2.3 billion worth of federal assets, limiting raises for public servants and slashing close to $30 million of federal funding for political parties.

Under the new proposal, this is how much the parties stand to lose:

Conservatives: $10 million
Liberals: $7.7 million
NDP: $4.9 million
Bloc Quebecois: $2.6 million
Green Party: $1.8 million

While the Conservatives would lose the most money, it would be a smaller share of their overall revenue because they get most of their funding through private donations.

"The Conservatives have much better grassroots organizations and are much better at raising money," CTV's Ottawa Bureau Chief Robert Fife said Thursday.

But opposition MPs slammed the proposed Conservative legislation as a cynical move intended to weaken other parties.

"Instead of an immediate stimulus package to attack the recession, this government is apparently going to attack democracy," said NDP Leader Jack Layton during question period Thursday afternoon.

"I'm asking the Prime Minister, how such an attack is going to create one job or protect one pension? Why are they protecting the Conservative party?"

Liberal Leader Stephane Dion said that Harper was out of touch with Canadians and added that he has no plan to steer the country out of a deepening economic meltdown.

"Is this Prime Minster even able to move beyond cheap political games and do anything for what matters to Canadians: the economy and their jobs?" said Dion.

Responding to opposition MPs, Harper said Canada is in a relatively strong economic position, despite the global downturn.

"This country has the strongest fiscal and economic position of the G7," he said. "This country is virtually alone at this moment in continuing to run a surplus."

Meanwhile, Harper said the proposed cutbacks are essential in trimming government spending during lean economic times.

"Parliamentarians, beginning with Conservatives, will lead by example," said Harper.

In 2007, the Conservative Party received just 37 per cent of its funding from the public subsidy. In contrast, the Bloc Quebecois receives 86 per cent, Green Party 65 per cent, Liberals 63 per cent, and 57 per cent for the NDP.

"They're going to have a hell of a fight on their hands. This is not the way to behave in a democracy," Liberal leadership contender Bob Rae told CTV News.

Other opposition members also said the Conservatives should rein in their own spending, noting that Harper's cabinet has increased in size from 26 members to 37






Don Martin: Crossing the line into fiscal fantasy
Posted: November 27, 2008, 6:22 PM by Kelly McParland

The true horror wasn’t in the let’s-pretend numbers contained in the much-dreaded fiscal update from Finance Minister Jim Flaherty. Those were fluffed to give the delusion of deficit-free, rising-revenue fiscal stability, subject to so much imminent change as to be almost meaningless.

It’s the nightmarish aftershock from a sneaky, ill-timed, irresponsible government move to eliminate the $1.95 annual per-vote public subsidy to political parties which, given the united lineup of opposition parties that instantly formed Thursday, sets up Canada for another federal election.
Yes, an election. Like the one that wrapped up 45 days ago. All over again. (Insert screech of national outrage here.)

Prime Minister Stephen Harper put away his friendly sweater vest and, in an epic mistake that might only be resolved if his Conservative government does an uncharacteristic retreat, pulled on his brass knuckles in a ugly bid to inflict knockout blows on his political rivals.

Political parties hooked on taxpayer subsidies for their lifeblood will suffer catastrophic withdrawal from the public purse if this proposal goes ahead next April Fool’s Day, almost to the point where they would be put out of business for the short term. That threat ensured they would vote as a block against the proposal which, as a money bill, would be a confidence vote the government must win or be forced to quit.

So seriously is that threat being taken that former prime minister Jean Chretien has been called in to try and broker a deal between outgoing leader Stephane Dion and the three leadership candidates to see if an new leader could be crowned in time to fight a snap election.

Given Mr. Harper’s legendary chess-match three-moves-ahead insight, the opposition’s united wall of fury had to be anticipated.

His rational for risking his government’s defeat by unleashing such an incendiary idea is a deep mystery.
True, an election can be delayed. Procedural tactics will be deployed by all opposition parties and the Senate to put the financing change in limbo until a time when the next Liberal leader is in place and they have fresh ideas for an economic salvage operation. There’s always the chance of a compromise through, say, matching grants for every dollar raised.

But where’s the win for Mr. Harper in this beyond appeasing a loyal Conservative base that may be unimpressed by his oncoming megadeficit?

An election might catch the Liberals financially flat-footed and between leaders, but the public outrage at a election-triggering stunt perpetrated by the prime minister would unleash a backlash of historic proportions - and the reaction would be angriest in Quebec.

While the merits of political funding might be worth a debate during calm prosperous times, it has no place on an agenda that should now be devoted to important decisions.

The result of such reckless shenanigans would be a $300-million electoral exercise at the precise moment the country needs firm and united parliamentary leadership the most.

To put the entire federal bureaucracy on hiatus, which always happens during a writ period, so financially insolvent parties can clash over a $30-million savings, would trigger an unholy public brouhaha, not only against the unforgivable waste of money and time but for the risk of exacerbated economic damage while the MPs hustle votes.

While not as politically egregious, the fiscal update was almost as pointless as Harper’s move to use his economic update as stealth cover to sabotage his political opponents.

The fiscal update’s numbers are mostly carved in cotton, a document of denial because it represents a snapshot of circumstances today without taking into account any downside developments to come.

It’s not until you reach the very last page of the background material under the heading of “Risks to Fiscal Projections” where everything in the document is put to a harsh reality check.

Income tax revenues will go up, it says. Unless they go down.

Corporate revenues dip slightly and then rise anew, it predicts. Unless, of course, corporations record losses and claim them as a tax break.

Commodity prices are what they are, unless they’re weaker than anticipated.

There’s a thin line between a government putting on its best face to stare down a gloomy situation and practicing fiscal delusion. With this document, Finance Minister Flaherty crossed the line.
dmartin@canwest.com

This post has been edited by nitronuts: 27 November 2008 - 05:47 PM

[keano8]

just give the ndp power. steven harper has no soul

[Carpe Diem]

wow. this is going to be interesting.


using the economic crisis as an excuse to punish political opposition? thats pretty low, even for the Conservatives.


Although, I expect cooler heads to prevail before anything drastic happens. I expect Harper to come to his senses. Canadians are not stupid.

[Toxic]

My wet dream come true

[nitronuts]

Is it just me or is Harper slowly becoming Canada's own version of Rasputin. This man will do anything to achieve a strangle hold on this country. And he is not the type to release his grip before it is too late. Our future is at risk.

[ThePointblank]

Hmm... wasn't it the Liberals that introduced public funding for political parties?

[Mr.Noodles]

nitronuts, on Nov 27 2008, 05:11 PM, said:

Is it just me or is Harper slowly becoming Canada's own version of Rasputin. This man will do anything to achieve a strangle hold on this country. And he is not the type to release his grip before it is too late. Our future is at risk.

Hey, look at the silver lining, we'd get a sweet Boney M tune out of it.

[masutheakita]

looks like harper wants to bankrupt the liberals.

[ThePointblank]

masutheakita, on Nov 27 2008, 08:17 PM, said:

looks like harper wants to bankrupt the liberals.

Nah, the Liberals did it to themselves... The Liberals primary source of donations was from large corporations and unions; when Chretien limited the amount that such large organizations can donate to political parties in the wake of the Sponsorship scandal, it was a major hit to the Liberal pocketbooks. All the Conservatives did was to remove a legal loophole.

[masutheakita]

ThePointblank, on Nov 27 2008, 05:21 PM, said:

Nah, the Liberals did it to themselves... The Liberals primary source of donations was from large corporations and unions; when Chretien limited the amount that such large organizations can donate to political parties in the wake of the Sponsorship scandal, it was a major hit to the Liberal pocketbooks. All the Conservatives did was to remove a legal loophole.

true but this might be the last nail in the coffin.

considering there is no way they will have enough funds to run another election campaign.

[ThePointblank]

masutheakita, on Nov 27 2008, 08:25 PM, said:

true but this might be the last nail in the coffin.

considering there is no way they will have enough funds to run another election campaign.

They don't now anyways; the last election sent the Liberals into debt. The leadership convention will also set them back.

[drdeath]

Has Stephen Harper never read the story of the boy who cried election?

[lostandfound]

masutheakita, on Nov 27 2008, 05:25 PM, said:

true but this might be the last nail in the coffin.

considering there is no way they will have enough funds to run another election campaign.

The Liberals of course are going to vote against it , I mean the Liberals are push overs but I don't think any Political Party would vote to pass legislation that means almost certain ruin.

This is a real overplay on Harpers part , big tme.

This post has been edited by lostandfound: 27 November 2008 - 06:33 PM

[Harbinger]

Stephen Harper truly hates democracy.

[Hordichuk]

I hate it when there's less government spending.

[Harbinger]

Hordichuk, on Nov 27 2008, 05:34 PM, said:

I hate it when there's less government spending.

Are you going to say this is a good thing for democracy in our country Hordichuk?

[Archon]

Why the hell should any political party get any tax dollars at all?

If a party can't survive on donations from the grass roots than it shouldn't exist at all.

[Hordichuk]

Krusty McFreeze, on Nov 27 2008, 05:37 PM, said:

Are you going to say this is a good thing for democracy in our country Hordichuk?

It depends what democracy costs me.

[insomniac199]

Hordichuk, on Nov 27 2008, 08:34 PM, said:

I hate it when there's less government spending.

But i bet you love one-liners


Ballsy move by Harper, dunno what he's banking on though. The way I see him spinning this is that the parties shouldn't be 'mooching' off of the public dime and spinning it so that if an election is called, he can paint the parties that passed the no-confidence movement on him as greedy leeches who'd knowingly push down a new government and force an election in a time of economic turmoil.

I'm still a novice when it comes to understanding party spending but I'm against this policy-change. Having vote-based public funding allows fringe parties more financial support, and for parties like the Green party, that's gotta mean something. They may not have gotten a seat in the HC but they did win a decent chunk of the popular vote. It also means that parties can't just cater to those that privately contribute since they have a financial interest in getting as much popular support as they can.

Can't remember where I read it, might've been the Metro today, but apparently the party least likely to be affected by this policy change is the Conservatives. However Harper spins this, this isn't a levelling of the playing field, he's just crippling the rest of the political parties. And while I can't say the Liberals are my cup of tea right now, I'd rather have them as a significant factor in electoral politics in Canada than have the neocons dominate for the next 8 years or however many elections it takes for parties to regain their footing with private funding.