Ignatieff continues to make overtures to farmers, west

[capricorn]

Did he really say that?

See for yourself Oleg.

He referred to farmers as “stewards of the land” and “stewards of the water.”

http://blog.macleans.ca/2009/02/25/the-com...nd-the-farmers/

[Smallc]

What farmers do has a large impact on the water...not to mention there are also fish farmers....

[capricorn]

As I said earlier in this thread, when Ignatieff speaks you learn something. I did when I heard him say it.

[Oleg Bach]

As I said earlier in this thread, when Ignatieff speaks you learn something. I did when I heard him say it.

That's fine as long as he is learning something also!

[Alta4ever]

Well Oleg, he came darned close to saying exactly that to the farmers. I listened to his whole speech at the Canadian Federation of Agriculture meeting on CPAC tonight. He said:

"If I don't listen to you, I'm dead in the water."

I can tell you no matter what he says alberta farmers won't listen, the liberals party is dead in the west.

[jdobbin]

Think he'll have to get elected and put his money where his mouth is. He does have a refreshing attitude compared to previous Liberals. However talk is cheap.

As most analysts have said, it is unlikely to have any change in most regions of the west. They will vote Conservative regardless of the policies offered.

[jdobbin]

I can tell you no matter what he says alberta farmers won't listen, the liberals party is dead in the west.

I suspect that even if the policies are better that some will still vote Tory.

[Alta4ever]

I suspect that even if the policies are better that some will still vote Tory.

I doubt it, unless he is going to remove the wheat board, and does more in opposition then just promise it.

[jdobbin]

I doubt it, unless he is going to remove the wheat board, and does more in opposition then just promise it.

I think you are stating what some Alberta farmers want and not what the majority seem to want. In the vote held just a few months ago, the majority of the directors elected supported the Board by a large margin.

[Alta4ever]

I think you are stating what some Alberta farmers want and not what the majority seem to want. In the vote held just a few months ago, the majority of the directors elected supported the Board by a large margin.

Define farmer, those that hold papers within the wheat board or those who actually produce crop, there is a big difference.

[Smallc]

I can tell you no matter what he says Alberta farmers won't listen, the liberals party is dead in the west.

Its nice that you always keep an open mind about such things.

[Alta4ever]

Its nice that you always keep an open mind about such things.

The west has been burned often enough by the liberals that anything said by one of them is held suspect, unless in means money flowing east from west this we know we can count on.

[jdobbin]

Define farmer, those that hold papers within the wheat board or those who actually produce crop, there is a big difference.

The Conservatives didn't raise any concerns with how grain farmers were included the vote. Do you have some evidence that non-farmers voted? Do you have a link or is this just your personal opinion?

The directors that were elected were all grain farmers. The majority were against shutting down the Board.

Edited February 26, 2009 by jdobbin

[Alta4ever]

The Conservatives didn't raise any concerns with how grain farmers were included the vote. Do you have some evidence that non-farmers voted? Do you have a link or is this just your personal opinion?

The directors that were elected were all grain farmers. The majority were against shutting down the Board.

I am questioning how much is produced by some of the farmers and if they stil hold a log book even though they may no long be actively farming.

Not to mention the 200million the board has lots tring to hedge the markets, who pays for that?

Edited February 26, 2009 by Alta4ever

[jdobbin]

The west has been burned often enough by the liberals that anything said by one of them is held suspect, unless in means money flowing east from west this we know we can count on.

It is why it is unlikely that you would ever change your vote from Conservative. We saw the same thing from diehard PCs in Alberta even when Mulroney screwed the west.

[Alta4ever]

It is why it is unlikely that you would ever change your vote from Conservative. We saw the same thing from diehard PCs in Alberta even when Mulroney screwed the west.

the vote sure did change from pc to reform in a hurry.

[jdobbin]

I am questioning how much is produced by some of the farmers and if they stil hold a log book even though they may no long be actively farming.

The Conservatives were happy enough with how the voter registration was handled. They were not happy with how the vote turned out but they didn't raise issues prior to that.

Can you give a cite that Tories are now unhappy with how the vote was carried out? This is just your opinion?

Not to mention the 200million the board has lots tring to hedge the markets, who pays for that?

Farmers. Just as they did well when hedging did well.

[Visionseeker]

The west has been burned often enough by the liberals that anything said by one of them is held suspect, unless in means money flowing east from west this we know we can count on.

Yup. The National Policy - a Liberal construct. ERR - FALSE: that was J.A. MacDonald, a Conservative.

They didn't give us control of our resources (alternating Liberal and Conservative regimes). Why? Because corruption within the local political classes was far too prevalent to offer such power.

The Liberal's NEP killed us! ERR - False again, the global price of oil falling below $30 a barrel was to blame (though all sane observers currently admit that NEP was dumb).

Look Alta4ever. You prattle on about the supposed victim hood of Alberta to the point of sounding like a slave reparationist. You have become what you revile.

Frankly, your shtick is even more tiring than that of Quebec separatists.

Alberta’s economy remains tied to and elastic commodity. When times are good, Alberta thinks it can rule the world. When times are bad, they blame Quebec.

Give it a rest.

Edited February 27, 2009 by Visionseeker

[Visionseeker]

delete duplicate

Edited February 26, 2009 by Visionseeker

[bill_barilko]

The comment about young Canadians staying on farms to become agricultural leaders might have had all farmers rolling their eyes at the same time. That's impressive.

Agreed but not as much as the laughable gem quoted below

The duty of a farmer is to grow food and feed people - our people first then others.

Since when did farmers have duties-other than an obligation to keep their own body and soul together?

[noahbody]

As most analysts have said, it is unlikely to have any change in most regions of the west. They will vote Conservative regardless of the policies offered.

I agree. The Liberal Party has far too much baggage for a candidate's good intentions to have any impact. Paul Martin promised the same. Igantieff does have political baggage as well. He is the guy who backed the Green Shift. That didn't exactly take farmers needs into consideration.

Edited February 26, 2009 by noahbody

[Progressive Tory]

You would have to watch political shows to see and hear Lord. He comes off as eloquent, and has some personality. He's cool, but not cold. All in all would do a good job.

He's charismatic but very down to earth. I like him. Enough to vote for him? Probably not, but he'd be a worthy opponent.

I also grew up in a bi-lingual household, though French was all but forgotten once we moved to Ontario. When my grandparents got married, my grandfather; son of an Irish immigrant, spoke no French. My grandmother, with an Acadian father and French-Canadian mother from Trois-Rivieres, spoke no English. I have some great family stories.

Still a New Brunswicker at heart.

[jdobbin]

He is the guy who backed the Green Shift. That didn't exactly take farmers needs into consideration.

It is unlikely that Harper's cap and trade will endear him to farmers either. It will be far more expensive on the west.

[Progressive Tory]

As most analysts have said, it is unlikely to have any change in most regions of the west. They will vote Conservative regardless of the policies offered.

Exactly. However, it might help to heal some of the feelings of 'Western Alienation'. No matter who's PM, they have to try to get all provinces back on the same page. The recent Conservative separatist campaign opened a lot of old wounds.

Igantieff has promised to work with Alberta to not only clean up the oil, but re-market it. I believe he'll do that, simply because it's in the entire country's best interest to make our resources competitive. I like the approach.

[Progressive Tory]

I agree. The Liberal Party has far too much baggage for a candidate's good intentions to have any impact. Paul Martin promised the same. Igantieff does have political baggage as well. He is the guy who backed the Green Shift. That didn't exactly take farmers needs into consideration.

The campaign against the 'Green Shift' was successful, but it was a good plan. Nobel prize winning environmentalists and economists agreed. The fact that Alberta will now suffer for not acting on environmental concerns early, could make many change their minds. Not enough to vote Liberal, but at least enough to keep an open mind if Ignatieff does win the election.

Before calling an early election, Harper himself warned that his own measures were going to hit us where it hurt.

"Prime Minister Stephen Harper is warning Canadians to expect higher energy bills as new technologies such as the underground storage of carbon dioxide develop and come online. “Canadians have to understand that there is a price to this.” "

He just couldn't say that during an election campaign. MacLean's magazine called the Conservative environmental 'cap and trade', 'just as expensive, twice as confusing and half as effective.' Alberta has been brought on board environmental concerns as a necessity if they want to remain competitive. It's no longer the boogey-man.