willy

Argus, I can now easily say that none of those ideas are new. They also are not electable and they don't spell out a cohesive vision. So it seems that the Argus party would rely on low expectations as well. As you note the details I could note the omissions are many. This is why policies are general and directional in nature. Tactical planning comes in the costing out and implementation of policy. Good policy lays out the values that drive future decisions and the general scope of applying the values to issues.

Argus, what is your great new idea? Honest government by the way is a good vision if you ask me and it is something we haven't had for a long time. Policy to back it up: Less concentration of power in the PM's office, more free votes, Parliament appointed ethics commissioners. I think you will also find on the health care front that the Conservative Party would allow the provinces to purse a balance of private and public delivery based on the principals of the Canada health act. My party caries many principles of grass roots democracy. It was the members that set the policy this week and not Mr. Harper. IMO, it is not new ideas we need but to actually use the ideas and policies we currently have. It is about actually doing something and executing change. If we can do that we will be a much different government than what the Liberals have provided for the last 12 years. Just say no to HRDC scandal, Defense Contracts to HP, Ad Scam, ect.

They do have a vision. A trustworthy government that respects and serves Canadians. Harper continues to grow into his position. He is a very bright person who has done the impossible and not only merged two parties but united them. I was at the convention and we are united. Harpers charisma is growing and being at his speech everyone was ready to follow when he was done. The Conservatives have a team of strong young MP's that will emerge into a new great Canadian government. I will also have to through Martin a complement and I don't do this often. His eulogy in Edmonton last week was a great speech. He showed great charisma and compassion. Sometimes the glass is half full. It is very difficult to become a leader of a national party and the skills it takes to get there are many. I may fight the issues leaders stand for but I will always respect what it took for them to become leaders and serve us.

IamminBC, Each riding could send 10 delegates. One Delegate had to be under 27. The riding I represented had 3 people that were considered youth. Two that were under 35 and a mix of ages above. We have a strong youth presence in the actual party and the youth are the ones that turned down option A. I saw many 20 something’s running and jumping after the vote. At my table three seniors voted for option A. Most older people are ready to buy in that the future is in the youth. We will not follow the Liberals for good reason. They keep messing it up. IMO, you should not choose a party because they create a group for you. You should choose a party because you can be part of the group and they represent your view most of the time. The party policy will be compiled and released in the next couple of weeks and you can read it yourself. I should state that I don't speak for the party, I am only a member and that only takes $10.00. As to a constitution garneting 14 years old as the age to start voting in all party votes local ridings up, IMO 16 is a better age. As it stands with that policy amendment being voted down the National Council has the discretion to set the age. In the last few party votes 14 has been the age they set. Not party view just my own, at local nomination meetings members voting should be old enough to weigh the issues.

This is the same logic that allowed Jean to create the add scam fiasco. Note the problem and then evaluate the plausible contributions we can make. i.e. new regulations, add campaigns, development guidelines. We have another example in the national child care program. The problem is general access to child care and lack of affordability to low income and single parents. The Liberal answer is to set up a national delivery system by non profit and government sector organizations for all Canadians with children. They are hitting a thumb tack with a sledge hammer. Is this the best way to fix the stated problem? I would suggest a mixed solution that does not involve direct delivery. 1. Means tested direct subsidies (low income funding) 2. Tax incentives for businesses that operate daycares and grant access to pay for non profitable expertise. 3. Tax breaks for middle class families so they have choices around how the deliver child care. This is a dollar in dollar out solution. The Liberals are willing to use up our tax money in bureaucracy. For every dollar of delivery we will have a dollar of administration.

Enrollment has dropped every year the Libs have been in. Fewer students, means fewer schools. At the same time dollars have increased. Caesar, you can argue about many other things they have cut, i.e. social services budget. Why do you insist on attacking the areas they prioritized for spending? Is this where they got the term blind anger.

The BC Liberals continue to increase funding to education and health care, but I don't think the unions will yield their attacks. The attacks have nothing to do with funding or outcomes. They just want power. As the large increases in funding continues their aim becomes even more obvious.

Did you ever stop to wonder why the CBC doesn't get the long term funding they ask for. Every budget they get $60 million and no promise for next year. That I am sure has no influence.

The poll is probably accurate but advantage is really based on the eye of the beholder. And for us in BC we have many issues. As I go into the polls I will be thinking of the lack of trust I have in our government. SSM will pass in the spring and we will move on.

Go to New York. See the sight. I did and then this stupid topic on why is it still important will not be brought up again. The people that died that day touched many of us personally and that is the difference compared to an attack in a far off land.

Barack Obama will be the next president. Hilary will be VP. This is my early prediction. His election website.

I have knowen about this for 2 years and all I do is listen to cknw. It is and was always on the table.

We would have representation in the room when decisions are made. NORAD was about integrating our defense into a common strategy and system. We might not get our way but we would at least have influence. In the case of shooting an incoming missile down, I think the decision could be made even by PM PM. Shoot it down.

caesar, I encourage our government to move forward the way they are. One can not govern with NIMBY attitudes. Sometimes you have to do what benefits the greatest number or you will be paralyzed with in action. No change will harm more than this change. That cut and cover you talk of will save us tax payers $100 million. With that much savings we can afford to help the few business people along the way. Not to mention the rezoning of that land into a high density high rise corridor will make the land owners very rich when they redevelop with a commercial/residential mixed building all down Cambie. Access to the train will blossom into some great long term benefits. Clean air and mass transit. Cut and cover was no secret, it has been on the table for years. Oh boy .

caesar, we will have to make sure to put out a request then that any country that will fire a missile at us to give up prior notice. It is only fair that the attacker give us enough time to request the US to protect us. Now are you starting to see what Mr. Celluci was meaning? Celluci said they would protect us if we request or not. In the case of a missile coming at us, I am okay with that. If we maintain our obligation through NORAD we would not need to request help we would be part of the help. Have you ever heard the saying don't look a gift horse in the mouth.

The US is confused, I am confused. This is a ground based system that resideds in Alaska and the west coast. The US does not need Canada to put it in place. PM PM has said we would decide. Is he telling us that if a missile is coming at our country that the US should not just shoot it down. We have now removed ourselves from the process so they should give us a call and get our permission. This is ridiculous.

A local political commentator Van Palmer did a good analysis this week. Then NDP are strong in 20 ridings. They have an outside chance in another 20 ridings. They need 46 to form government. For those NDPers the concern should be that this is a trend. They are trending down going into the election. Carol James does not come across as personable or trustworthy. The BC Libs should have no problem as painting her as being in the pocket of the public sector unions. Don't get me wrong, I hope that the NDP don't come close to winning. I am a small business owner in BC and them forming government terrifies me for the business confidence in the province. That is not rhetoric, and I am not alone.

Strikes are only one of many political tactics. If you want this policy to change, you will need to understand where your support will come from. Will the teachers union support you, how about the political opposition? You need to appear to be part of a political body that can influence the election. If you are just upset under age people this will not influence policy. You can’t vote and the parties will assume by the time you are old enough tuition will be a bigger issue. Would your parents support the elimination of this policy? You need to figure out if you can be a pain in the butt and which is the best way to be a priority pain. If you strike, what will it accomplish? You may feel better because you made some noise but whom would it influence and if it did influence what would your message be? If you don't have a clear strategy and lots of support, you better buy a diary for your reflections, remember to stretch after exercise and volunteering can be rewarding.

I would suggest you hedge your bets and get started with the assignment. The May election is the provincial government. The Fall election is the municipal elections. The Fall election will also include the school boards. The Ministry of Education sets the curriculum and that is the provincial minister. The Minister is Tom Christensen. Mr. Christensen was elected to represent the riding of Okanagan-Vernon in 2001. He has served as Chair of the Government Caucus Committee on Education and as a member of the Legislative Review Committee, as well as the Select Standing Committees on Education; Aboriginal Affairs; Parliamentary Reform, Ethical Conduct, Standing Orders and Private Bills; and Legislative Initiatives. What exactly don't you like about the portfolio assignment? Good luck.

So Caesar where are we today?

It is a nice not to have responsibilities out side of our boarder. But what is the down side? • Access to international markets? • Influence on what the others are doing that will effect your country? • We are a G8 country and could extend our hand to other nations. It would probably have a much stronger impact with partners. There is an upside. We can always be a critic without action. Are we an adult country that takes care of itself and takes responsibility or are we child that relies on others but receives the benefits of the adults efforts.

Mr. Dithers is not a name I am calling the PM. It is the reputation he developed. At the NATO conference their are reports that he is having a hard time even finding leaders to meet with. He has become irrelevant. As you know the childish mag the Economist wrote a feature story on our PM. I don't feel childish by pointing it out. I wont bother referring to Layton anymore. Judging by the level of discussion on the board he is irrelevant.

Hey, I didn't attach anything to them. They earned the nicknames on their own.

To who Mr. Dithers or Wacky Jack.

Conservatives have more seats in BC than any other party.