Derek 2.0

Are you suggesting the Liberals or NDP, if in Government 2008, wouldn't have engaged in deficit spending? Per historic, they both wanted to spend even more money........likewise, Trudeau is promising three years of further deficit spending if elected......so no, you don't have a point.

Not raising taxes during a period of worldwide economic turmoil, resulting in a loss in Government revenue, then returning to a balanced budget a year earlier than projected is though........

Would you agree that would be subjective......alas, per Suzuki, Trudeau isn't a friend of the environment....who knew?

Yes, my point exactly........returning money back to it's rightful owners.....a $14 billion surplus is $14 billion dollars collected by Government and taken out of the economy........A surplus that big is nothing to brag about.

If the NDP or Liberal had of been Government in 2008, would they not have run deficits? Likewise, would they not return to a balanced budget? I don't consider the return to balanced budgets heroic, but prudent.

Well no, the legislation, as mentioned already, allows for deficit spending in an emergency.

And what did they "blow" said surplus on?

It depends, Nick Clegg had as much influence in the Cameron Government as previous Liberal leaders had in Harper's minority Governments.......I think Mulcair is an opportunist leading socialists.

I don't know if Wales has ever beat England in a World Cup.......to boot, Wales was missing 3 of their best players from injury on their squad!!! England will be in tough against Australia, and if they loose, and Wales beats Fiji, England could find themselves on the outside looking in for the next round......on home soil!!!

I think the Liberal party try to present themselves as such. As a result, environmental policy is hardly embraced by mainstream political parties.......imagine if Suzuki did lend himself to politics? His presence alone within the political process would further the environmental conversation. ------- To the rest of your post, I'm not prepared to debate it, fore or against, but I will say this, the environmental movement isn't going to achieve their own agenda divorced from mainstream politics.

I don't know that he was, but he attempted to paint himself as such.

How do you know my beliefs on the environment and what opinion I hold of Suzuki? (In my 4+ years of posting on this site, I've rarely commented on environmental policy/climate change) I think many people, perhaps more so here in BC, listen to him, but might not always agree with what David Suzuki has to say.

How so? The legislation clearly states deficits are allowed if any event results in $3 billion+ losses to projected Government revenue, as such, the Government's stimulus spending regime post 2008 recession would have been included.

No different than the several minority Governments led by PM Harper, that relied upon Liberal indifference to govern......a result far better then allowing socialists anywhere near power.

How? They returned the country to surplus and enacted laws to keep it there, well not raising taxes, and only permitting running into the red in an emergency........isn't that sound fiscal policy......you know, live within your means?

In an interview today, climate change activist David Suzuki has spoken about a feud with Justin Trudeau over policy: Suzuki goes on to state: So is Trudeau a false idol on the Environment, or is Suzuki over the top? Will this effect some environmental types that wanted to support Justin Trudeau? Of the three parties and the environment, Suzuki says this in closing: Is the Green party truly the only party for those that value the environment?

Convenient? I would suspect by design

No he didn't, and is supported in his statement by Canadian industry........ Are you suggesting the Canadian aerospace industries fears over far larger future contracts are not valid? As noted in your link, Kendall is only speaking to present existing contracts.

He only misspoke by under estimating the current benefit the F-35 has brought to the Canadian economy.

WOW!!!!! Wales beats England, that's up there with the Japanese win against South Africa

Well no, he does, as Cameron very much so took issue, as did British voters, of a proposed Labour/SNP coalition.

Existing contracts, he speaks nothing of far larger future contracts, as addressed by the Canadian joint industry group.

Why? They didn't implement the law until they returned to surplus, as said, going forward, said legislation allows for deficit spending during your suggested "dangerous times", not for buying city buses and daycare.

What of it? If you claimed Harper was a robot, and had carnal knowledge with a VCR or toaster in his youth, it doesn't make it true... And campaigned against a Labour/SNP coalition that proposed tax hikes.........PM has had no need for a formal coalition when he was in minority, often supported by the Liberals.......David Cameron's partnership with their Liberal Democrats was simply formal governance with said party.......and now the Liberals are near gone and Cameron has his majority.

Reread your link and the quote of Kendall: Existing programs, that are already producing parts for current LRIP orders wouldn't be halted, he speaks nothing though of the far larger future production orders for the next ~25 years. As noted by Canadian industry itself: