According to this article in Healthzone, “A question about pregnant women and the H1N1 vaccine provoked a bizarre bout of heckling and laughter on the Tory benches in the Commons on Tuesday.”
Showing their class once again and reaffirming their disdain for Canadians in general and women in particular, the “Harper Government” shouted down Liberal MP Carolyn Bennett when she tried to ask a question related to the kind of vaccinations pregnant women should be getting.
“I "just was astounded," she told reporters after question period. "I don't know why these people think it's funny or whether it's just offensive or what it is. ... They were just heckling and laughing."”
Another disgusting display by the Reform-a-Tories.
Did John Baird really compare the Harpercrites to “any other Liberal government” as reported in The Hill Times today?
"More infrastructure spending will have been completed this year than in any year in our history. It is moving 10 times faster than under any other Liberal government," Transport Minister John Baird (Ottawa West-Nepean, Ont.) said last week in Question Period, who is overseeing the rollout for much of the money promised in the budget, as a large part of it is going to "shovel ready" infrastructure projects.
If the quote is accurate, it would certainly confirm what many neo-Cons have long suspected about the Harper government.
UPDATE JUNE 2, 2009
I contacted the Hill Times for confirmation of the quote but received no reply, so I went looking in Hansard. On Monday May 25, Hansard records the following reply to a question from John McCallum about the delays in getting infrastructure funds out the door. “More infrastructure spending will have been completed this year than in any year in our history. It is moving 10 times faster than under any other Liberal government.” So it looks like John “Freudian Slip” Baird was reported correctly.
Today on Adler Online, guest host Roy Green (true Conservative Blue pundit extraordinaire) tried to nail down ol’ Flim-Flam Flaherty on his stunning failure to accurately predict Canada’s budget deficit as recently as 4 months ago.
Green - But how do you miss the deficit numbers by as much as you did in such a short period of time?
Flaherty - Oh it’s not... But... But it’s not a significant change.
You got that right. Being off the mark by about 50% is “not a significant change”. Flaherty then proceeds to explain, one more time, just how we are in so much better shape than the US, the UK, Japan, never really answering the question (no surprise there).
So Green tries again.
Green - But Minister … that $50 billion still represents a huge change from what you projected in January. So where I’m going with this is how do you now stick with that $30 billion number for next year?
Flaherty - A large part of it Roy is the auto settlements. I have a pretty good idea what the General Motors arrangement is going to cost. It’s significantly more than was anticipated, so this is a one time, one year payment. It’s not a continuing deficit and it accounts for a good part of the increase in the deficit that I referred to yesterday.
Still no answer except that now we know that apparently the GM deal is going to cost way more than anticipated. Nothing to indicate he has clue one about next year’s fiscal situation, so Green tries one last time.
Green - Minister, what do you say to the Liberals and their finance critic John McCallum’s challenges that you’ve lost all credibility? What do you say to Mr. McCallum?
Flaherty - Well I look for credibility and all I see on the other side is hypocrisy quite frankly. We asked them for their ideas for the budget, they had none. Literally none. Not one idea for the budget. And the only idea that they’ve come up with the budget according to Mr. Ignatieff is that he has a plan to raise taxes. That’s their only idea. None of the opposition parties are saying to the government, please spend less. What they are in fact are saying is spend more, but don’t increase the deficit, which is nonsense. And Canadians know nonsense when they hear it. (emphasis mine)
No answer to the question, but finally something honest from Flaherty’s own lips. “Canadians know nonsense when they hear it.” Let us hope that Canadians remember this nonsense when it comes time to vote in the next election and turf this ex-ambulance-chaser-cum-financial-wizard. He is an embarrassment.
So says columnist Gerry Barker in this article in the Guelph Mercury.
Barker aptly likens Jim Flaherty to MAD’s Alfred E. Neuman (“What, me worry?”) and proceeds to articulate just a few of the boneheaded moves of this ex-ambulance-chaser now Finance Minister that make his judgement highly suspect when it comes to getting Canada through this recession with as little long-term damage as possible.
But the main thrust of his piece is focused on the Cons lies about income trusts. According to Barker, Flaherty and Harper were acting under pressure from senior corporate and insurance industry lobbyists whose companies were being negatively impacted by the growing popularity of the income trust investment vehicle. And so, without a shred of hard evidence and using highly suspect tax calculations, Harper and Flaherty reneged on a major campaign promise a mere 9 months into their mandate. As a consequence $35 billion or so of wealth in the Canadian markets was effectively vaporized overnight, affecting thousands upon thousands of seniors and RRSP holders.
And the pain continues. Now, current projections are that the government will lose billions in tax revenues annually as trusts (which were taxed in the hands of the taxpayer at rates of 40% or so) convert to corporations (which are taxed under the corporate tax laws at a maximum of 15%). However Flaherty still insists he made the right decision, and still refuses to provide the financial analyses that supported the decision in the first place. But let’s face it, he will never provide those figures for the simple reason that as soon as he does, everyone will see just how incompetent he and his “economist” boss really are.
As Barker says (MAD meets Pogo), “Alfred E. Flaherty met the enemy and, guess what? They is us!”
As Randall Denley says in today’s Ottawa Citizen, “Events of the past several months have certainly made private-sector executives look incompetent, but the corollary is not that politicians are better at business.”
He then goes on to describe how the public and private sectors have different motivators and drivers as well as different reward systems. In short, a properly functioning marketplace operates on a financial risk-reward basis, while governments operate in a no-risk environment where they control the resources, the laws, the money-collecting mechanisms, and the money-printing equipment to be used once the taxpayers have been wrung dry.
And the irony of it all is that we now have politicians taking control of large businesses like GM and Chrysler, not because the politicians have better business smarts (you only need to look at Jim Flaherty to prove that point) but because the businesses had themselves become too big and unwieldy. “GM is failing because it is bureaucratic, unable to make tough decisions, can't control costs and doesn't have a compelling plan for the future. In other words, it was run too much like a government and not enough like a business.”
With few exceptions (across all parties) I wouldn’t trust the fiscal ability of any politician to balance my check book, let alone direct the day-to-day operation of a multi-billion dollar corporation dedicated to profits and wealth creation. Yet that is precisely what they are doing.
If GM and/or Chrysler are going to fail, they will fail for reasons beyond the scope of this (or any) government to fix, so by dabbling in an area they know nothing about, the politicians are simply delaying the inevitable and incurring huge taxpayer obligations in the process.
"I don’t have the brains for business. I want to go into politics." - Mao Xinyou
After watching the debate last night, and in anticipation of the Cons platform supposedly arriving from Australia some time next week, this picture seemed appropriate:
For the past month or so I have been lurking in the shadows, watching the blogosphere react to the Cons latest questionable actions related to the in-and-out scandal, the religious wingnuts’ (is that an oxymoron?) attempt to get Chief Justice McLachlin removed from the bench with, presumably, a scarlet letter of some sort attached to her robes, and the Harpercrite’s own musings about a dysfunctional Parliament (another oxymoron?). While fun and amusing in a watching-a-train-wreck sort of way, it is all so tedious and predictable. Religious fundamentalists of all stripes will never be satisfied or silent until all of society adheres to their own little warped and twisted view of what constitutes acceptable behaviour coupled with suitable obeisance to their imaginary god(s). And politicians are simply elected idealists who have morphed into opportunists who will tell any lie, break any rule, abuse any trust to continue to manipulate the levers of power. Fakes and phonies all.
Contrast that to a couple of weeks ago when I had an opportunity to mingle with some real people – people who had no pretences, no hidden agendas, no ulterior motives, and who wanted nothing from me but respect and friendship. I was in Sturgis South Dakota for the 68th Annual Black Hills motorcycle rally, along with 450,000 other pilgrims, for it is, in fact, a pilgrimage for many of the people who attend year after year. These were men and women who crossed continents and oceans for one reason only – to be in Sturgis for the rally and ride the Black Hills of South Dakota. I guess that’s actually two reasons, but whether it was the guy who allowed as he’d “had some trouble with the law”, the UPS pilot, or the Wisconsin firefighters, what you saw was what you got, most everyone got along, and all had a great time.
There is no comparison between the two worlds, and right now I know which one I’d rather occupy. So I guess I’ll go back to lurking for a while, periodically reminding myself that not everyone is a cheat and liar and that there are still real people out there, living real lives, outside the political bubble.
I have no intention of getting into the Ethics Committee hearings on the Cons in-and-out scheme, but I just had to comment on Kady O'Mally's live blogging report where she refers to "Poilievreian wisdom". Aside being an obvious oxymoron, that expression made me think of what could be the shortest book ever printed: "Poilievreian Wisdom - The Collected Original Thoughts of Pierre Poilievre, Conservative MP".
It seems it’s finally here. After a long, snowy winter and a miserable spring, we’re now into the 30-degree days of summer. The water temperature in the lake has reached 27 degrees (about 80 on the ‘old’ scale) – perfect for floating in the lounger with a cold beer at hand. The golf courses are in great shape after all that rain. Bass season has just opened. And plans are afoot to take the new ride to Sturgis for the 68th Anniversary Rally in August.
So with all those reasons to exit the cocoon and enjoy this all too brief respite from the other 9 months of the year, why on earth would anyone waste any time at all paying the least bit of attention to all the political posturing, gamesmanship, and general bullshit that sadly never takes a break?
But I do have to relate this one told me last week:
“Why is it that our politicians all seemed surprised by the sudden shortage of oil?” “Because the oil is in Alberta, Saskatchewan, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland. And the dipsticks are all in Ottawa.”
All of which is to say that unless something catastrophic happens over the course of the summer such as Stephen Harper deciding to become an NHL General Manager (Please, someone make him an offer!) I don’t expect to be doing much political blogging. I’ll leave that in the hands of far more capable folks than I.
And you’ll find me in the lounger, on the golf course, in the boat, or on the road.
