August1991 Posted October 15, 2007 Report Posted October 15, 2007 (edited) The lead story of the Toronto Star...An election cannot be far away if the Toronto Star dredges up lead stories like this.Who knows if this was anymore than someone's mere doodlings on the back of an envelope. The PM has the National Press Centre (if he ever wants to use it). More important, the PM has Centre Block itself. There is ample space and locations for press thingees or photo ops with suitable visitors. That's what Harper seems to prefer, wisely following no doubt the advice of Mulroney. NDLR: The people who dislike Harper will find any excuse to denigrate him. I reckon that Harper strongly irritates about 30% of the Canadian population. That's probably a good thing. They hate Harper so much that they'll play the man, not his policies and in the process, they'll miss the whole point. Hence, a campaign with stories such as this one, attempts to call him an Imperial PM or try the *scary, scary* thing again. 70% of Canadians will stare blankly. Edited October 15, 2007 by August1991 Quote
mikedavid00 Posted October 15, 2007 Report Posted October 15, 2007 (edited) Yes,you're right,but pittance compared to.....$500 million to cancel a helicopter deal $900 million for dry dock subs $100 million on new luxury jets $1 billion boondoggle by Human Resources Development Canada 5 Billion dollars each year on 'culture'. Edited October 15, 2007 by mikedavid00 Quote ---- Charles Anthony banned me for 30 days on April 28 for 'obnoxious libel' when I suggested Jack Layton took part in illegal activities in a message parlor. Claiming a politician took part in illegal activity is not rightful cause for banning and is what is discussed here almost daily in one capacity or another. This was really a brownshirt style censorship from a moderator on mapleleafweb http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1oGB-BKdZg---
Shakeyhands Posted October 16, 2007 Report Posted October 16, 2007 yeah at least they aren't as bad as those godless Liberals, and how bout that sponsership scandal eh!!!! Its a waste of money by a comlete control freak who, by the way, has very good reason to be a control freak (God forbid the electorate hear from some in cabinet as they would be found out for sure and seen for what they really believe) in order to "stay on script/message" . You all know its a waste of money, but hey, the Liberals were worse. Quote "They muddy the water, to make it seem deep." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Argus Posted October 16, 2007 Report Posted October 16, 2007 Yup, large wastes of money. And the Tories with $700 million to Via Rail, Are you saying that's wrong? A waste of money? Unneeded? billions for slushbreakers that won't really be able to travel north except when it is ice free Hardly ice free, but at least they will be able to do SOMETHING - which is miles ahead of whatever the Liberal policy was - assuming they ever had one - or ever will have one. Will the Liberals build bigger icebreakers? Who knows! They have no policy! and tens of millions for a new hall for the PMO to entertain are a continuation of that practice. A new hall to entertain? Would you like to expand upon that? And if all of this were a continuation of "that practice" which your party loves so much I'd have thought you'd be happier. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted October 16, 2007 Report Posted October 16, 2007 I think you got that right. If the media are denied access or access is controlled, they will report from the outside and the message will be a government that is non-responsive. How many press conferences did Chretien hold at the National Press Gallery during his last five years? In round figures, please. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted October 16, 2007 Report Posted October 16, 2007 It looks like the optics of building a press gallery where the press might choose not to come was something that the PMO didn't want. Perhaps they remembered how Stockwell Day used to duck the scrum and go to a press room where the media often didn't go. CBC and CTV used to show a wide angle of the empty room. Tell us again about the open access the media had to Jean Chretien during his terms of office as prime minister. How many press conferences did he hold during his last five years? One? Two? Chretien treated the national media like vermin, and kept them far away from him. Information was disseminated through the PMO to "loyal" media outlets, or through fax to the general media. Chretien despised the media in general, and the national press gallery in particular. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
jdobbin Posted October 16, 2007 Report Posted October 16, 2007 How many press conferences did Chretien hold at the National Press Gallery during his last five years? In round figures, please. I have no idea. It is probably why the media did their own stories anyways. Quote
jdobbin Posted October 16, 2007 Report Posted October 16, 2007 Tell us again about the open access the media had to Jean Chretien during his terms of office as prime minister. How many press conferences did he hold during his last five years? One? Two?Chretien treated the national media like vermin, and kept them far away from him. Information was disseminated through the PMO to "loyal" media outlets, or through fax to the general media. Chretien despised the media in general, and the national press gallery in particular. I don't disagree. And when the media felt wrong done because of this, they made sure they let everyone know about it. Quote
jdobbin Posted October 16, 2007 Report Posted October 16, 2007 (edited) Are you saying that's wrong? A waste of money? Unneeded?Hardly ice free, but at least they will be able to do SOMETHING - which is miles ahead of whatever the Liberal policy was - assuming they ever had one - or ever will have one. Will the Liberals build bigger icebreakers? Who knows! They have no policy! A new hall to entertain? Would you like to expand upon that? And if all of this were a continuation of "that practice" which your party loves so much I'd have thought you'd be happier. For VIA Rail, it is a waste of money. You think they should be paying even more to subsidize it? I supported the Tory policy on building icebreakers. I'm afraid the slushbreakers is not what they promised in the election. As for the entertainment hall, please look into the former U.S. embassy. The PMO has not denied that the government is looking at it for a hall for entertaining guests. Edited October 16, 2007 by jdobbin Quote
Michael Bluth Posted October 16, 2007 Report Posted October 16, 2007 Chretien treated the national media like vermin, and kept them far away from him. Information was disseminated through the PMO to "loyal" media outlets, or through fax to the general media. Chretien despised the media in general, and the national press gallery in particular. Why isn't the Toronto Star's fabricated story an issue? There is no new press theatre coming. Yet all the Harper haters here have gotten their panties in a knot. Too bad they can't admit when the Liberals favourite rag gets caught in a flat out fabrication. Yes, it is definitely a double-standard. JC can do no wrong. Quote No one has ever defeated the Liberals with a divided conservative family. - Hon. Jim Prentice
Pliny Posted October 16, 2007 Report Posted October 16, 2007 PMO working on government-controlled media centre, Another $2M worth of control Is that replacing the CBC? A bargain at $2M. Quote I want to be in the class that ensures the classless society remains classless.
jennie Posted October 16, 2007 Report Posted October 16, 2007 While I may curl my tongue at the cost of this, I do see it as being a better way for the government to handle the press and yes it means that things will not be as open to critism at the time of announcements, but it does then make for more thoughtful questions and answers at later gatherings, in stead of the raw edged gut reactions. Is it a form of Media control? Of course, but that is the right of the PM to choose this, and the press will just have to get used to it, as Harper will be around for quite some time to come. Is it really his right to so tightly control what we are allowed to hear? I don't think so. Quote If you are claiming a religious exemption from the hate law, please say so up front. If you have no religious exemption, please keep hateful thoughts to yourself. Thank you. MY Canada includes Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
jennie Posted October 16, 2007 Report Posted October 16, 2007 Why isn't the Toronto Star's fabricated story an issue?There is no new press theatre coming. Yet all the Harper haters here have gotten their panties in a knot. Too bad they can't admit when the Liberals favourite rag gets caught in a flat out fabrication. Yes, it is definitely a double-standard. JC can do no wrong. There is no new press theatre? How do you know for sure? Quote If you are claiming a religious exemption from the hate law, please say so up front. If you have no religious exemption, please keep hateful thoughts to yourself. Thank you. MY Canada includes Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
Keepitsimple Posted October 16, 2007 Report Posted October 16, 2007 (edited) There is no new press theatre?How do you know for sure? It was an old shoe store last year when this "secret project" was starting up - and it's still an old shoe store now. The information that the Star accessed had to be at least a year and a half old - they requested it a year ago. and since you have to wait six months before requesting access to information - that means at least 18 months has passed. Now the Star is trying to save face by implying that THEY stopped it in its tracks. Pardon me while I stick my finger down my throat. Edited October 16, 2007 by Keepitsimple Quote Back to Basics
M.Dancer Posted October 16, 2007 Report Posted October 16, 2007 What on earth was a shoe store doing in Parliament Hill? Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
old_bold&cold Posted October 16, 2007 Report Posted October 16, 2007 (edited) What on earth was a shoe store doing in Parliament Hill? This is in the PMO block that is across from the hill, it on its south side has the Sparks St mall, which is where the shoe store was. The PMO part of this takes up about 2/3 of the whole block between Elgin and Metcalfe St. with Wellington to the north. There is a tunnel between the center block of the hill to Lauvign Block (PMO) so security for people is a given. The PM has offices on the second floor of the Center Block west side end, and also more offices for his staff and the PMO is mostly in the block across Wellington St. Edited October 16, 2007 by old_bold&cold Quote
scribblet Posted October 22, 2007 Report Posted October 22, 2007 (edited) It was an old shoe store last year when this "secret project" was starting up - and it's still an old shoe store now. The information that the Star accessed had to be at least a year and a half old - they requested it a year ago. and since you have to wait six months before requesting access to information - that means at least 18 months has passed. Now the Star is trying to save face by implying that THEY stopped it in its tracks. Pardon me while I stick my finger down my throat. Your right, not only old news, but it never got off the ground, it died before the Star even got the information or published anything. Funny how people run with this stuff as if the Star only pushed absolute facts. LOL Edited October 22, 2007 by scriblett Quote Hey Ho - Ontario Liberals Have to Go - Fight Wynne - save our province
Fortunata Posted October 22, 2007 Author Report Posted October 22, 2007 The Toronto Star's Tonda MacCharles, who first reported the story said she requested the documents about a year ago and received them late Thursday night."There was nothing in there that indicated that the project was not going to go ahead and ... today the Prime Minister's Office is saying they're not pursuing it," MacCharles told CTV Newsnet's Mike Duffy Live. If Steve's office (and government) wanted to be on the up and up (you know, honesty and transparency) this story would not even been reported because the requester would have been fully informed on a timely basis. It took a year for the request to be completed and then, without all the information. Steve seems to have this secrecy thing down to a fine art - as in leave them guessing so when we actually get around to giving out the info we can stand up and say, wrong, see how the media always portrays us? It's something like the secrecy surrounding jelly beans. Quote
Fain Posted October 29, 2007 Report Posted October 29, 2007 http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...?hub=TopStoriesJust because Steve is not controlling enough. Sounds like a waste of money. He definately screwed up with taxpayer trust of this one Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.