[Canadian Political Polls]

This wont be the first time that the Liberals have been beaten down so that they could get up again.

I have seen two party politics in Manitoba. It brings out the worst in the province when there was only two choices.

[Canadian Political Polls]

Actually, I rather like the numbers. I think that my party has to lose bad and go into opposition of a minority before they can ever be fixed.

If that happens, I think it is it for the party.

We will see only two major parties then. It is the day I drop out of the process.

[Tories to crack down on parole for non-violent offenders]

Oh, you mean the riot that was "in part" due to overcrowded prisons? Any why was the prison overcrowded? Did just proposing a change in legislation fill the prison? Maybe the fact that prisons are overcrowded means more need to be built regardless of any new law.

The riot was based on overcrowded conditions.

And it is why I have asked where the growing numbers of prisoners would be kept.

I didn't ask you about deficits. I ask you about your premise, that prison spending was going to crowd out healthcare spending. Please tell us how much money we spend on jailing 30,000+ inmates, versus providing healthcare for 30 million plus citizens.

I think that is the question I have asked you. How much more is it going to cost for the policy? We have seen elsewhere in Naorth America how budgets are seeing an every growing chunk taken by corrections. You seem to think it is insignificant.

[Tories to crack down on parole for non-violent offenders]

Why are you referencing another country? Site some examples in Canada. California isn't a Canadian jurisdiction.

I have cited Manitoba already and gave you the actual numbers this month in jail and the riot that resulted a few weeks ago.

Do the math. The cost of 30,000 people in prison vs the cost of healthcare for 30 million citizens.

I have. And your party has a spending habit that results in deficits.

[Tories to crack down on parole for non-violent offenders]

Which jurisdictions? Be specific.

California for one. Other states are now facing the same problem as you well know.

But it's probably not worth discussing this issue with you, if you're so obtuse as to think incarcerating 30 - 40 thousand people costs more than providing healthcare for 30 - 40 million people.

You are so obtuse that you don't have any control over spending desires.

[Tories to crack down on parole for non-violent offenders]

I think that would rather depend on the extent of the crime. Do you think Bernie Madoff should ever get out of jail? The guy embezzled hundreds of millions of dollars, left some people all but penniless, having stolen a life's worth of savings and work that many are simply too old to re-earn.

I think I have said that some people ought to be in jail but I don't think Madoff's sentence is a a deterrent to others.

What I think is a better deterrent is better regulations and policing.

And what about the chronic fraudster, the guy that doesn't have the wit or talent of Madoff to bilk large numbers of people for stupendous amounts of cash, but still has a long history of identify theft, defrauding financial institutions, etc.?

I also think repeat offenders should be in jail.

Surely there has to be a point at which the extent of the white collar crime is so extreme, or it has become unavoidably obvious that the individual will not cease in this sort of crime that we finally and quite literally put them in jail and throw away the key.

The problem is that some people want to go the other way and remove all the regulations. Last week there was a Republican who said he wanted to remove regulatory oversight.

I'll be blunt here. I don't think Earl Jones, for instance, should ever see the light of day again.

I don't think he should have been allowed to operate period.

And believe me, I'm no big Conservative supporter (which anyone who reads these forums will know). Neither am I saying that those criminals who do show some willingness to change their ways should be given a fair shake, but parole should not be automatic, it should be earned, otherwise we might as well just reduce the sentence lengths and stop pretending that a guy who gets sent away for three or five or whatever many years is actually going to be put away for that long.

My feeling is that the Tories will fill the prisons to the rafters and leave it as someone else's problems as we have sen in some other jurisdictions.

[Ignatieff drops chief of staff, hires Peter Donolo]

Plus, people like Donolo having the ear of the Prime Minister can still do damage without opening the constitution.

Didn't seem to help with him Chretien and the monarchy.

I'll be watching closely to see if he sticks to his knitting.

[H1N1 "Pandemic"]

Based on real scientific evidence,

I see a lot of people who don't trust any science or medicine. That seems to be how some reach a decision.

[Tories to crack down on parole for non-violent offenders]

Ludicrous. You cannot monitor a fraud artist sufficient to keep him from commiting more fraud. Not unless you have one parole officer for every felon. Further, there is a requirement for punishment here. When someone defrauds thousands of people out of their life savings, society requires they be sent to prison for more than a few months given the harm they've commited.

Didn't say that prison wasn't necessary for some crimes.

I just think a life sentence for commercial crime is probably more costly than alternatives.

Your obstinate and senseless opposition to stricter prison terms has NOTHING to do with the cost and everything to do with your party's limitless sympathy for criminals.

And your obstinate approach to building prisons and life sentences no matter the costs has everything to do with your party's lack of control in spending.

[Tories to crack down on parole for non-violent offenders]

No need to get nasty.

I was referring to Van Loan who immediately blamed the Liberals in the news conference despite the fact that it was his former party, the PCs that enacted accelerated parole.

I love questions....but it's more than just building prisons. Putting pronciples aside, many of the "costs" are debatable on their own - with the arguments often being polarized:

Since I have shown you the latest capacities of prisons in the last weeks for Manitoba alone, any change in the legislation has to come with a prison building program. All I have seen here is that people don't care what it costs.

Well, that was the same attitude in other places until programs were about to cut on a massive scale elsewhere. Only then did people ask what the alternatives were.

1) Is tougher sentencing and earned parole a deterrent? If so, how much does society save by preventing the next Ponzi scheme for example.

I think better policing and regulations are better than hoping for sentencing afterward in deterring crime. Harder to set up a Ponzi scheme if the regulators shut you down for trying to set up a business without a securities license.

2) Will there be any noticeable impact on the availability of drugs if we keep the pushers in jail longer? Even a 5 or 10% decrease in availability might lead to some impact on usage.....and that translates into a whole bunch of tangible and intangible savings to society.

I think some police have already indicated that the price of the drugs goes up and violence remains steady.

Canada has a drug problem.

3) Will our courts recognize savings by removing some of the revolving door "cost of doing business" criminals? Looking at the rap sheets of some of these repeat offenders is mind-boggling.

I think repeat offenders should be jailed.

However, let's hear the costs of all options and consider alternatives to building ever greater numbers of prisons.

4) White collar crimes are very often not pursued by the police because they involve a lot of work and complex investigation.....and then there is just a slap on the wrist. If the consequences are more serious, will the police be more involved? If so, what does society save and how much does it cost to set up more comprehensive fraud squads.

Police don't choose not to pursue people because of what the courts do. They often don't go after certain areas of crime as hard because they lack the manpower or because they make violent crime a priority.

My belief is that better regulatory and policing are far more useful in stopping commercial crime. And when a commercial crime is committed, I believe it is far more effective in seeking restitution than long sentences.

5) If a prisoner has to "earn" parole by remorse, taking programs, and getting educated - will this have a positive impact on their return to society? If 10% more inmates decide to go straight or more correctly, are able to go straight....how much does that save society by avoiding their next crime, trial, and incarceration?

I'd like to hear how many re-offend using the present system.

It's more than just tax money. What gets lost in the "costing" are the hidden costs to society...the loss of a son or daughter to drugs, the loss of a senior's life savings to fraud....and many other examples.

The Tories should produce some of those numbers rather than acting like goons in pushing their plan.

[H1N1 "Pandemic"]

Don't listen to the freakin media overhyping it. Talk to your doctor. I can't stress this enough. Then make up your mind.

I have. Just curious about some here who don't trust scientists and doctors.

How do they make their decision?

[Ignatieff drops chief of staff, hires Peter Donolo]

Nothing came of it, obviously, but it still shows that he's unabashed and reckless.

I suspect that any talk of opening of the Constitution will be put down like the rabid dog it is likely to come.

These things will weigh heavily on my decisions come next election.

I won't look kindly to have any backdoor move on bringing about changes.

[H1N1 "Pandemic"]

Finally, someone is putting things in perspective.

So given what you have heard, you believe the cons outweigh the pros in getting vaccinated?

[Tories to crack down on parole for non-violent offenders]

I simply don't believe what I am seeing here. Don't you folks think the concept should be debated FIRST!

That is not is what has happened. There has been no debate. The policy has been announced and legislation put forward.

This isn't a concept deliberated in committee with recommendations for legislation afterward.

This *is* the legislation.

If it survives a debate, I would think the next step would be to cost it out and determine the viability of the concept. That is how the system SHOULD work. We have the cart before the horse wondering how much it will cost before we decide whether or not we are willing to embark on that path.

This isn't a concept being discussed. This is what the government will do. As such, the costs have to be discussed.

[Ignatieff drops chief of staff, hires Peter Donolo]

Exactly. It's frustrating as hell that they just don't seem to get it. I'd argue they have gotten worse under Ignatieff, and I honestly thought they couldn't get more pathetic than they were under Dion. :angry:

Why do you think would have made a difference?

[Ignatieff drops chief of staff, hires Peter Donolo]

He's also an unabashed and reckless republican.

There are a few of those. As long as they aren't the primary policy pushers on that matter, I am not overly concerned. Any big push for constitutional change that opens up a can of worms will see me fight any party that brings it up.

I used to be open to the idea of Ignatieff as prime minister, but as time goes by, I become less and less inclined to the idea. Perhaps not necessarily because of him in particular, but because of what will come along with him; namely, the same old, unchanged, entitled-to-our-entitlements-we're-the-one-true-Canadian-party-and-will-tell-you-how-to-be-Canadian Liberals. Ugh.

He has maybe three months to start putting it together before the party is in jeopardy of not only losing but ceasing to be viable in general.

[Tories to crack down on parole for non-violent offenders]

By that logic, we shouldn't be putting people in prison at all - and we'll save more of YOUR money.

No, that is not what was said.

Cost out a plan before plunging into the policy that will incur the costs. Debate it, explain it and compare it to the alternatives. And for Pete's sake, stop acting like a horse's ass about it all when someone raises questions about things like effectiveness, costs or anything else about the plan.

[Tories to crack down on parole for non-violent offenders]

If that's happening.....it's an even stronger signal that we have to invest in our prison system....but as usual, you've evaded my original question to you. Do you believe that in general, it's OK to let these prisoners out after serving 1/6 of their sentence and almost uncontested after serving 1/3?

If they are non-violent offenders, I'd rather invest in stronger parole measures, restitution and monitoring. All I see happening with the Tory plan is ever greater costs and capacity being built to the point that we see what is happening in other jurisdictions.

[Ignatieff drops chief of staff, hires Peter Donolo]

Too bad it had to be someone from the "old gang". So much for renewal.

It wouldn't matter who came in as a replacement. If it had been God you would have said, who does he think he is?

Negative only works if it is used in conjunction with something positive such as visuals. Visual as in using the colour blue as much as possible. Blue as in Pantone #333399 to be exact. Hey, it worked for the Liberals with Liberal red on federal government identity so it's a proven.

The evidence that a strong negative campaign in New Jersey has turned things around. I suspect we are going to see the same.

Who says Donolo won't get replaced before Ignatieff.

Who's to say that Harper won't call an election tomorrow?

[Ignatieff drops chief of staff, hires Peter Donolo]

There are only so many people that Donolo can turf, others are rather untouchable.

Once the news gets around that Donolo was an adviser to Chretien, many eyes will roll.

We'll see. Given the unhappiness with how the office was working over the summer, I expect Donolo has a pretty wide mandate to get the right people in place.

I'm sure there will be rolling eyes but experience is needed in the office to head things off before they become a public problem.

We'll see if the Liberals go negative in a big way. The Tories have shown negative works and I expect it is the one way will the Liberals will close the gap.

Ignatieff probably has three months to show progress. He could be asked to leave if things get worse.

[Ignatieff drops chief of staff, hires Peter Donolo]

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...ub=TopStoriesV2

Michael Ignatieff has dropped his chief of staff, Ian Davey, and replaced him with veteran political strategist Peter Donolo, CTV News has confirmed.

Donolo was a communication director under former Liberal prime minister Jean Chrétien and was a partner at the Strategic Counsel, an Ontario polling firm.

"Mr. Donolo is a very smart political operator and is very-well liked by people inside the party," CTV's Ottawa Bureau Chief Robert Fife reported Tuesday.

He is an experienced operator. It certainly couldn't hurt the leader's officer to have someone as skilled in the position.

Look like there will be a new Communications Officer as well. Jill Fairbrother was Ian Davey's girlfriend.

There is talk that the position will be filled by someone from Quebec.

[Tories to crack down on parole for non-violent offenders]

That's complete nonsense. Healthcare consumes, and will consume that vast majority of government operations. Besides, one could probably build a decent prison with the eqivalent amount of money Liberal's stole in adscam.

Utter nonsense? I think not. In many jurisdictions prisons have started to squeeze all other parts of the budget.

So tell us: What taxes will you raise or what cuts will you make to keep Canada from diving deeper into deficit?

[Tories to crack down on parole for non-violent offenders]

Oh, and Dobbin's pseudo-concern over such a small expense when it comes to the overall federal budget is laughable.

Tell us what the expense is and I will tell you whether it is small or laughable. Your political parties hardly have a good record on financial expenses.

[Swine Flu]

But I made my appointment to get my H1N1 this year. Sole reason being - I'm pregnant. Otherwise there is noway I would get one.

Congrats!

It does seem this flu had a very heavy impact on pregnant women last year.

As far as the last time you had the shot, I wouldn't be surprised if you did get the flu. Around three years ago people had better immune results from flu mist versus the flu shot.

I'll probably be getting the shot when more of the priority people have had it. I hate shots. I'd rather be hit with a hockey stick.

[Tories to crack down on parole for non-violent offenders]

So your answer is to have these types of convicted felons roaming our streets?

So your answer is to have convicted murders escape from overcrowded prisons?

Hasworked out great for the Peg' so far eh? Gang capital of Canada, Native gangs I might add.

The proposed change of law won't have an effect for crimes committed by youth, many as young 10 to 13 years of age.

I suppose you want them in adult prisons, right?

So instead of prison riots you'd rather let them go free and be on our streets, Those animals are exactly where they belong. You'll get little sympathy from Canadians. I doubt even Iggy is stupid enough to take your position on this.

Didn't say that either. I asked you to produce numbers about how much it will cost and identify how this won't blow up in our faces.

You'll get little sympathy from Canadians for producing ever greater deficits. I don't even think Harper wants that to happen but he won't be straight about the costs. He'll leave it for someone ten years from now to make drastic choices.

Public safety is paramount. Cost is irrelevant.

So I keep hearing. Tories will raises taxes and cut services to ensure their policy is put into play. They just won't tell us the costs.

Do you care what Healthcare costs? Should we scale back healthcare services even more to save money? Of coarse not, cost isn't an issue. Same goes for public safety. Our citizens lives are worth more than some money. I find it disheartening that you'd take the side of letting criminals going free without earned parole then you would on public safety. Very sad dobbin, very worrying.

Yes, we should scale back health costs to save money.

Not the answer you expected?

My party is taking action. The Liberals took no action for over 20 years and look at the mess we have now.

Your party created accelerated parole, not mine.

I'm unsure why you keep taking the side of convicted criminals over protecting the general public. If people cannot obey they law, they deserve to be punished and of that punishment involves prison time, so be it. I want convicted criminals to prove they deserve to get out early not just automatically get out early. The onus needs to be placed on the criminal. We are all responsible for our own actions it's about time convicted felons do the same.

I'm unsure why you want to take away Grandma's old age security? Do yo hate seniors so much?

Dobbin, you're really coming apart here I'm afraid. Again the monetary cost to public safety is irrelevant. I doubt you'd find one victim of violent crime who would be against this proposal. We need to consider the victims in all this not just our partisan friends. This is a non partisan issue, the public wants to feel safe and more then that it wants to be safe.

Lets keep criminals where they belong, behind bars!

I'm afraid you are too emotional and can't be trusted with money. Tories are going to create even more massive deficits and let Grandma freeze in the dark. They hate Canada.