Kincora

If that were the case, ( abortions allowed on a situational basis--rape, incest))would there not just be a skyrocketing rape rate throughout Canada...?

How dare they keep Jack Layton out of office for more than 9 months?

Such as? All I'm aware of is the Emerson and Dingwall issues. Emerson has morphed mroe into an internal CPC issue than outside accusation. Memebrs of his riding are seething over his crossing and a petition, that has grown quite long, is being passed around. Other DCPC members arem upset with his appointment to harper's cabinet, when he has a wealth of capable loyal Mps to choose from. ( I would think anyways ) As for Dingwall, that's a Conservative accusation against the Liberals. ( A baseless accusation without any substance whatsoever ) tell me what other accusations have been made. I haven't heard of anything else. Ah, saracasm and a jab at the extreme left. Gotcha.

You are probably right, or at least part right about Trudeau wanting to create a legacy for himself. But, if you're going to be fair, you have to accuse MUlroney of the same thing with Meech Lake. The entire premise of Meech lake was to make Constitutional peace with Quebec for the failures of the 1982 amendment. Fair enough, but why does peace have to be made if no war is raging? before Mulroney came to power and began raising the issue, the separatist movement was ebbing in Quebec. Support was at an all -time low since they came roaring into power. The result of Meech Lake? 1995 referendum that came within a % of permanently dividing the country. If not physically ( obviously the federal governmet would have done all in it's power to stamp out any physical attempt to separate) , then in spirit.

Dingwall being forced out is indeed a political issue. But the tribunal didn't rule that he was physically forced out by government. It ruled that he was forced out because of the allegations amde by a Conservative MP. Dingwall himself agreed that he left the job involuntarily, but he alleged that he left because the mint could not maintain itself as a profitable body if it's chief is operating under the shadow of accusations like the ones that were forwarded last year. The tribunal accepted this. That is why they believe him to ahve been forced out. As for your question relating to labour tribunals, they are not politically appointed. Their orders ahve the force of court orders, thus tying them to the judiciary, not the legislature.

Well Geoff, that is what some CPC's are saying. yes. But why didn't the Conservatives dispute it then? The Liberals didn't disclose it, but as was pointed out by many Liberals, the ruling wsn't a secret. It's well within the government's authority to accept the ruling of a judiciary body. The Conservatives knew the results of the ruling, and didn't make a peep. "His director of communications, William Stairs, told the Canadian Press that he did not expect the new Tory government to challenge the arbitrator's decision" The Tory Communications director was surprised by this. It sounds mroe to me like a few CPC members are dissapointed that they didn't win a majority when it looked like they had a chance to.

Whether its Liberal or CPC it doesn't matter, I'd be equally pissed. I didn't intend for the Liberal connection to be the most important part of my post. It isn't a labour law scandal. Labour law is on our side, labour law says he doesn't deserve it. So now I wonder why such an arbitrator would say he does deserve it? Is that not in the least bit questionable Kincora? Actually Geoff, labour law says he DOES deserve it. Labour law invests authority in these tribunals to settle matters of dispute relating to Labour law, in the place of courts. The tribunal is an autority on the matter, and that's how they found. What you are disagreeing with is the conclusion the tribunal came to. Now, you are getting to the heart of the matter. It doesn;t matter whether it was LPC of CPC. Exactly right, it has nothing to do with any political party. It is not a political scandal, and your last post shows you understanhd that. That's wat eats me about this Dingwall affair. it isn't a LPC scandal, but that's how a select few CPC mps and supporters are trying to spin it. This is a matter of disagreeing with the findings of an independant judiciary body./ If a judge makes a decision you don't like, and the Supreme Court certainly has it's share of characters who absolutely boggle the mind with their reasoning, do we blame the governmentn for that? No, we blame the judges, and then the entire debate over power of the judiciary in Canada starts up again. The DIngwall affair is the same issue.

I want to make things clear for you. I agree with you that Dingwal doesn't deserve a penny. I know all about his statement. He's a money grubbing, former public servant. There ar eno shortage of those , and there will be many more to come. But you can't blame the Liberals for following the tribunals order. It's binding Geoffrey. If they had ignored it, that would have been cause for a real scandal, because they would be thumbing their noses Canadian law. They would be breaking the rule of law, and that is a founding principal of Canada. Not only Canada, but of any Democratic country. Government is not above the law. You can't undermine the rule of law whenever you don't agree with the result, otherwise their is absolutely no legitimacy in government. If you don't agree with it, fine. Post about that. I agree, and I also agree that the tribunal didn't come to the ight finding, but there are those who would think that the results are fair.

Bullshit, the guy doesn't deserve anything. Again geoffrey, you are ignoring the facts. The Liberals simply foolowed a binding order. The only abuse is coming from you. I am posting the facts, again and again...and you simply refuse to listen. There is ABsolutely no getting through to you. Anyone who looks at this entire issue with some perspective will realize that this sn't a Liberal scandal. This is a labour law issue. Dingwall was awarded what he received, by a tribunal. Why can't you understand that? You rant on and on about how he doesn't deserve it. I AGREE! But that is irrelevant to the context of our debate, being blaming the Liberals. You cannot blame the Liberals for every single Labour Law that exists. You cannot blame the LIberals for following the orders of an authority... No, Dingwall doesn't deserve anything. We are in agreement, but for the umpteenth time, this has NOTHING to do with Liberal conduct.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...?hub=TopStories He quit. End of story, the guy tendered his resignation. He quit. Its over, he doesn't deserve a dime. http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/20...ion-060204.html He was forced out, as was found by an independant tribunal. He was forced out. End fo story. It's over. "The binding award of the arbitrator has the force of a court order, and the government has respected the decision." "Mr. Adams has concluded that Mr. Dingwall's departure was involuntary and the government has a legal obligation to pay him $417,780, as well as associated pension benefits," the Privy Council Office said in a statement. Tories won't challenge severance package So, klet's stick to the issues, and resist the temptation to go off on another anti-CBC rant. Dingwall was found to be forced out. The Liberals followed a BINDING order. Do you have any ides what that word means. When it comes to Dingwall, you're siomply ignoring the facts Geoffrey. You are blaming the Liberals because you don't agree with the findings of a tribunal, whose sole pr\urpose is to hear cases of this anture. You don't like the result, FINE. I don't agree with it either, but it has a BINDING order attached to it. It is not a scandal to follow the orders of a tribunal. Now THAT is the end of the story. Period. Debate the issue on it's merits, not on wantom, self-serving drawn lines.

You make absolutely no sense...is this a habit for you?

The BQ is based on the premise of Quebec independance. All I'm saying is that if Harper relies on them for support, it will diminish his image with hard line federalists. You are a complete and utter fool fixer. You're warping my words into some thing else entirely, and I have no patience for that. Play poolitics? What are you talking aboput? I am not playing politics. I am posting my opnion, and I am allowed to do so. The country is not better off without me becvause I happen to believe that harper's image will be tarnished if he relies on the BQ. That is exactly what you've said, and you've infuriated me in doing so. I've got no patience for neanderthals like you who see everything in black and white, your way or the highway. Other people ARE entitled to differeing opinions, despite what scumbags like you think, and I will not let you insult me personally just because I do not see things eye to eye with you. People like YOu are what's wrong with the country. Complete extremists who have absolutely no room to accomodate differing trends, or even differing strains of thought. Yes, that's you, to a tee. Halfwit, accept that there are other positions out there other than the 3.0 Conservative point of view. You say Ia scandal deprived the Conservatives of a moajority, I say the fabrication of a non-existant scandal would have damaged the Conservatives, so they are better off to have had this pass over after the votes were counted. Uh oh...I am deviating from your track again...am I bad for the country...? Moron. And the worse thing about people like you is that, after the fact, you will probably realize that you are in the wrong, but you will never bring yourself to apologize or move half an inch.

Give me a sou8rce on that Geoff, because the tribunal fidings I read found that he had been forced out of his job, and the Liberalas acted on those fkndings. I won't give up on the facts, as painful as they may be to some. He was bought out, yes, as any wrongfully dismissed employee ought to be. You are trying to blame the LPC for then findings of an independant tribunal, and that's just idiotic Geoff. You give it up, you're just spinning tales.

Fixer: I didn't pigeon hole anybody. I was merely stating what the party stand for, and you can take that right off of their party website fixer. This isn't me over simplifying, or spreading fiction. And I said that it would not be good for Harper's image. Your rant abgout the low intelligence of voters like me is precious, but means little. Tell me, is the Bloc not a party that represents the separatist movement in Quebec? Whether or not their votes come from people who agree with that policy is not the point here. That's the image of the party, and a self-constructed image at that. You can call the whole of Canada idiotic if you want, but that doesn;t change the fact that if Stephen harper relies solely on the BQ to get legislation, it will have a negative impact on his image. As for your point on a party holding the Conservatigves ransom on points that you seem to believe are automatically supoorted b a majority of Canadians, that's called politics. The COnservatives made their attempt at holding the Liberals hostage last Spring, and it flopped. Why should parties treat them any differently? And Canada is not better off without any voters, no matter what you may asusme of their intelligence. If you ask me, Canada is better off withou tpeople making over generalizing statements like that; calling anyone who doesn't agree with them idiots. You remind me of the now infamous poster Sam, only you have a better grasp of the English language. If you honestly think that the Dingwall affair is what held the Conservatives out of majority government, then you know very little about that entire debacle. He may not truly be entitled to that payoff, but then you blame the INDEPENDANT tribunal that awarded it to him.

Aw, lay off the guy. Just sounds like a miguided child to me. He most definately will never give up. He's like a whack-a-mole. Just keeps popping up for and more punishment.

Think things through a little more, I think the NDP actually ahve leverage here. Firstly, the Liberals will act the part of the opposition, and will not likely prop Harper. The Bloq are a likely candidate, despite ideological differences. They enough seats between the two of them, great. And what happens to Harper when his entire government is premised on being propped by a party whose sole objective is to promote Quebec independence? Harper will need the NDP simply to maintain an honest image, especially to Ontarians. Sure, Harper doesn't have to court their favour, if he plans on being tossed out whenever the next election comes along. I disagree, the Liberals will prop up the Conservatives. They don't even have a leader, do you actually think they want to hit a campaign right now. Conservatives have free reign until at least next year when the Liberal war machine finds out where they are going to get more loans. Something I never considered. How can someone support a party that claims that balanced budgets are a priority and the CPC will screw everything up... yet that party is the one in debt? Interesting seeing how poor the financial management of the Liberals has been, I sure wouldn't trust them with the country. If Harper can nail the $40mil sponsorship bill to the Liberals too, they won't be having an election for at least 18-24 months, at best. We'll just have to see. Just because the Liberals are waiting on a leadership convention, doesn't mean they won't play their role properly. They'll be a strong opposition.

An election won't be pushed for now, by anyone. The NDP do have some leverage here though, and they might as well use it. It'll be interesting to see what Compromises harper will allow himself to make. The NDP has zero leverage, they've lost power since last election. The CPC holds the balance of power with both the Bloc and Liberals. Just have to convince one. The Bloc is easy to convince if you give Quebec some cash. And if the Bloc votes against Quebec cash, Conservatives win 40-50 Quebec seats next election Think things through a little more, I think the NDP actually ahve leverage here. Firstly, the Liberals will act the part of the opposition, and will not likely prop Harper. The Bloq are a likely candidate, despite ideological differences. They enough seats between the two of them, great. And what happens to Harper when his entire government is premised on being propped by a party whose sole objective is to promote Quebec independence? Harper will need the NDP simply to maintain an honest image, especially to Ontarians. Sure, Harper doesn't have to court their favour, if he plans on being tossed out whenever the next election comes along.

An election won't be pushed for now, by anyone. The NDP do have some leverage here though, and they might as well use it. It'll be interesting to see what Compromises harper will allow himself to make.

Geoff, I totally agreewith you on Emerson. If there was anything I was excited about concerning the Conservative minority, it was that they'd be able to work onthe general air of corruption and scandal that has mired the country. While there isn't anything wrong with what he did, persay, he already has broken two promises. One was not to appoint any non-elected cabinet members, and another was to appoint only elected senators. After all the accusations flung by him at Scott Brison and Belinda Stronach, he freely admits that he approached Emerson with a promised cabinet position... I'm baffled... Again, if this is the worst the guy does he still gets my vote in the next election... Keeing things in context, yes, it is small peas. Let's just say it isn't a strong start.

Once again, Sam showing us he is unable to do the research before making general, sweeping statements about what Canada wants.

I read this post and could'nt do anything but sigh. 1) You people are blinded by Jack Laytons "car commercial". The NDP does NOT produce good results. What results do you expect them to produce? They hold 29 seats, and have never been over 50. They haven't exactly been in any position to produce results. Now, that being said, some people would think that what they did last term does qualify as results. They twisted Martin's arm into adjusting his budget. They may not be results you like, but, as already mentioned, about a quarter of Canadians agree with these sorts of policies... 2)He is already contesting the GST tax cut which will help us. He is also contesting the child care allounce which helps all parents with pre school kids, not just the ones who use day care. He is gonna try to stop all the tax cuts. Well this is a matter of opinion. The NDP believe that the tax cut Harper wants to repeal ( to low income Canadians) are more important at this point. So no, he doesn't want to stop all tax cuts. He wants them directed at different target groups. 3)Theirs no way he relates to the common man, because the common man hates taxes, and would love tax cuts. I really can't stand the NDP's ideology of "steal from the rich and give to the needy He relates to a quarter of the common man. We've been over this... 4)Come April when parliment starts reviewing the budget... If Layton and his democrats start slashing the tax cuts, then that is a majour sign to us that Layton does not understand what we want. Don't let that jackass win a single seat next time-- please. This statement is a sign that you are out of touch with anything that doesn't fit squarely within your 2 inch wide blinders. There are other points of view out there. You ask us to consider yours, and yet you ignore over a quarter of the polulation. And then , you call them all stupid. Sam, you are a piece of work, I tell you. “Your ignorance cramps my conversation”-- unknown

Geoff, I totally agreewith you on Emerson. If there was anything I was excited about concerning the Conservative minority, it was that they'd be able to work onthe general air of corruption and scandal that has mired the country. While there isn't anything wrong with what he did, persay, he already has broken two promises. One was not to appoint any non-elected cabinet members, and another was to appoint only elected senators. After all the accusations flung by him at Scott Brison and Belinda Stronach, he freely admits that he approached Emerson with a promised cabinet position... I'm baffled...

I'd like to hear about people's stories regarding mock parliaments. Have you ever taken part, at the university or high school level? Any good stories? I've had some good times participating in them. My first one was in grade 10, a part of the our history class( a unit on politics). This was during 1996, so obviously Quebec issues were at the forefront. My teacher knew nobody would want to take part as members of our imaginary BQ, so he fooled us into it. He had us fill out a questionnaire and one of the questions was: " Do you think Canada is better off without Quebec." I was pretty young then, and my father's complaints about being forced to learn French for his public works engineering job still echoed in my mind, so I said yes, and was one of the unlucky 5 that fell into sinister Mr Summers trap.

How would you know this? Are you his priest? Have you bugged the confessionals?

I agree with you totally. Parties modify themselves toa dapt to the current atmosphere. The Conservatives, for their part, have drawn quite a ways nearer to center from when they last campaigned in 2004. Once in power, it must be difficult to maintain many extremist positions your party may have held, or ought to hold according to principle. The NDP are not at all Left wing whenit comes to environmental protection. The CPC has even abandoned it's hard stance against SSM in favor of a more moderate one ( despite still intending to turn back the clock ). The Liberals do this the most of all parties. They go to great lengths to come off as a party with social sympathies,and then forget all about those claims once they get back into power. Nothing new here.