10%ers Banned. Only Conservatives Oppose.

[nicky10013]

So you think maintaining and strengthening your brand loyalty is not worthwhile?

I wonder why my bank keeps sending me info about stuff they do?

You'd think that would be done by local MPs who can send out stuff free to all their constituents. Isn't that upholding the brand?

[Mr.Canada]

Its a way to maximize reach and frequency...and a great way to reinforce brand loyalty be sending more "propaganda" that the lone MP could. St Pauls is a bell weather riding. It hasn't always been Liberal. There was once a real foxy PC there...Babs McDonald...

McDougall.

Edited March 17, 2010 by Mr.Canada

[madmax]

I still receive between 1 to 3 Conservative Flyers per week.

Have always hated the waste and the Conservatives are the party of wasteful spending.

It seems that they are happy to use government monies to pay for these flyers. Seems they don't feel the same way about a tax return.

Edited March 17, 2010 by madmax

[ToadBrother]

Tories say they'll ignore vote to ban tax-funded mailings

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20100317/mailings_mps_100317/20100317?hub=TopStoriesV2

And this, oh all you Tory supporters, is the party you want everyone to believe is the best at running this country. They loathe Parliament. You'd think Conservatives would be all about preservation of institutions, not about ignoring them at their leisure.

[Smallc]

Wow, that's all I can say. The Conservatives are beyond contempt. I wish the Liberals would push this, and make sure that everyone knows...if only that had a leader.

Edited March 17, 2010 by Smallc

[Smallc]

The Parliamentary Secretary of the Prime Minister just declared war on the opposition. They are going to end political subsidies if they can. They won't say they'll introduce it in the house.

Edited March 17, 2010 by Smallc

[DrGreenthumb]

Wow, that's all I can say. The Conservatives are beyond contempt. I wish the Liberals would push this, and make sure that everyone knows...if only that had a leader.

I told you they'd ignore it.

[Smallc]

I told you they'd ignore it.

Unfortunately, the NDP might ignore it too. So much for being the people's party. The Conservatives say that they support eliminating political subsidies. As long as that includes tax credits for donations, that's fine by me.

[M.Dancer]

Jack (fighting bravely) Layton just now on Power Politics, says he is against the 10%ers but is for them when they are used to promote issues the NDP believes in.

Fight Bravely Jack...

[M.Dancer]

Tories say they'll ignore vote to ban tax-funded mailings

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20100317/mailings_mps_100317/20100317?hub=TopStoriesV2

And this, oh all you Tory supporters, is the party you want everyone to believe is the best at running this country. They loathe Parliament. You'd think Conservatives would be all about preservation of institutions, not about ignoring them at their leisure.

Interstingly, that's not what your link says.

But in a statement issued to the media late Wednesday afternoon, a spokesperson for Prime Minister Stephen Harper said the Conservatives support ending the program but the final word on the issue rests with the Board.

"We support getting rid of out-of-riding 10 percenters so long as the restriction applies to all parties," PMO spokesperson Dimitri Soudas said. "However, we do not have a majority on the board."

And that is important...Jack (fighting bravely) still wants them (as long as they are used to promote NDP approved issues)...watch for the NDP claus....

[Topaz]

I say if you are a supporter of a party then go to their website and send them your e-mail address and it won't cost anyone anything. I'll sign up to all 3 parties just to see what he difference is and once done reading it I'll "delete it"!!

[nicky10013]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/tories-to-ignore-vote-on-mp-mail-outs/article1503609/

This sheds better light on it. The Conservatives aren't saying it's because it only applies to them, but because the vote, a passed vote in the house, apparently isn't "binding." If a house vote isn't binding specifically banning something, then what is?

[M.Dancer]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/tories-to-ignore-vote-on-mp-mail-outs/article1503609/

This sheds better light on it. The Conservatives aren't saying it's because it only applies to them, but because the vote, a passed vote in the house, apparently isn't "binding." If a house vote isn't binding specifically banning something, then what is?

Becasue not all votes are binding.

[Wilber]

Let's face it, contrary to what they may maintain, those who favour 10%ers also favour political subsidies because that is exactly what they are. Same goes for franking. It's all partisan BS at the public's expense

[nicky10013]

Becasue not all votes are binding.

This one was.

[kimmy]

These should not be ended unless bulk e-mailings from incumbent MPs are likewise ended. The mail-outs from sitting MPs are pure partisan propaganda, and if they are publicly funded, then a rebuttal from the opposition should likewise be funded.

-k

[nicky10013]

These should not be ended unless bulk e-mailings from incumbent MPs are likewise ended. The mail-outs from sitting MPs are pure partisan propaganda, and if they are publicly funded, then a rebuttal from the opposition should likewise be funded.

-k

Interesting argument. Though, the other side of it is that in order to get on an incumbent MP mailing list you actually have to sign up for it. Having bulk email lists on people that aren't party members and that weren't solicited wouldn't be a problem for this law but the privacy act. Even the government doesn't have that kind of info.

[kimmy]

Interesting argument. Though, the other side of it is that in order to get on an incumbent MP mailing list you actually have to sign up for it. Having bulk email lists on people that aren't party members and that weren't solicited wouldn't be a problem for this law but the privacy act. Even the government doesn't have that kind of info.

Your MP needs your address and your permission to send you bulk mail?

I thought Canada Post just loaded that crap into their bags with all the other junk-mail they now dish out.

-k

[nicky10013]

Your MP needs your address and your permission to send you bulk mail?

I thought Canada Post just loaded that crap into their bags with all the other junk-mail they now dish out.

-k

These should not be ended unless bulk e-mailings from incumbent MPs are likewise ended.

I was going on the email bit in terms of the privacy act. In terms of actual mailings, I think there should be a guideline and personal and partisan fines for anything that crosses the partisan line. If an MP wants to send out a mailing that advertises for a non-political event in the community or for a new government service, I don't see a problem with it. However, I've actually never recieved anything from my MP, nevermind anything political. AS with all mailings by all MPs, I'd like to see how much of this stuff is sent out. I'd also like to see a study to see how much 10%ers actually affect polls. By all accounts most end up in the trash. Whether they affect people's decisions or not, both are reasons to trash them.

Edited March 18, 2010 by nicky10013

[kimmy]

I was going on the email bit in terms of the privacy act.

My mistake. I intended to refer to those brochures MPs send out by Canada Post unaddressed advertising.

In terms of actual mailings, I think there should be a guideline and personal and partisan fines for anything that crosses the partisan line. If an MP wants to send out a mailing that advertises for a non-political event in the community or for a new government service, I don't see a problem with it. However, I've actually never recieved anything from my MP, nevermind anything political. AS with all mailings by all MPs, I'd like to see how much of this stuff is sent out. I'd also like to see a study to see how much 10%ers actually affect polls. By all accounts most end up in the trash. Whether they affect people's decisions or not, both are reasons to trash them.

I would personally be all in favor of ending that kind of junk. I'm not sure how practical it would be to enforce some kind of antipartisan policy for these "Updates from your MP" mail-outs. Short of saying something provably false, how could you police something like that?

They don't have to lie for these things to be an unfair advantage over their next electoral opponents. It might not necessarily be a significant advantage, but it's still and unfair one.

-k

[BubberMiley]

Fight Bravely Jack...

What is it about cancer that amuses you the most?

[nicky10013]

What is it about cancer that amuses you the most?

Clearly, the implication is dancer doesn't believe layton has cancer and used it once (he only brought it up at the one press conference) to gain sympathy. Now, I think Jack Layton is a used car salesman, but even he hasn't degraded himself to the level of sleeze that dancer has by trying to use cancer as a weapon.

[nicky10013]

My mistake. I intended to refer to those brochures MPs send out by Canada Post unaddressed advertising.

I would personally be all in favor of ending that kind of junk. I'm not sure how practical it would be to enforce some kind of antipartisan policy for these "Updates from your MP" mail-outs. Short of saying something provably false, how could you police something like that?

They don't have to lie for these things to be an unfair advantage over their next electoral opponents. It might not necessarily be a significant advantage, but it's still and unfair one.

-k

No overtly partisan messaging in MP mailings. No advertising of partisan events in MP mailings. Community/Service announcements only. All complaints by any party/citizen can be referred to the ethics comissioner for judgement and punishment. Punishment to be a $5,000 fine to the MP an $100,000 to the party. Easy. How cool is that? I just wrote a piece of legislation.

[kimmy]

No overtly partisan messaging in MP mailings. No advertising of partisan events in MP mailings. Community/Service announcements only. All complaints by any party/citizen can be referred to the ethics comissioner for judgement and punishment. Punishment to be a $5,000 fine to the MP an $100,000 to the party. Easy. How cool is that? I just wrote a piece of legislation.

These things, from what I have seen, don't contain that sort of thing anyway. They contain legislative issues your MP wants to highlight. They contain economic updates your MP wants to tell you about. They mention the MP attending community events and meeting with old-people. None of this is necessarily partisan, but all of it helps your MP get his face and message out to the electorate.

-k

[BubberMiley]

None of this is necessarily partisan, but all of it helps your MP get his face and message out to the electorate.

Really? I got this in the mail in Winnipeg from a Conservative MP in Ontario.

http://i865.photobucket.com/albums/ab220/bmiley_album/cpcleaflet.jpg