The Coalition and the fact that the Conservatives always bring it up

[Guest Gregory Thompson]

Hi everybody with the Conservatives constantly reminding Canadians about a possible coalition with the Liberals, NDP and the Bloc Quebecois should those political parties be worried and launch counter attacks against the Conservatives saying that the Conservatives signed a similar agreement with the Bloc Quebecois and the NDP in 2004 to try to unseat Paul Martin.

I am just saying by all this what is good for the goose is good for the gander and Harper this past week has made excuses to try to dispel the renovation scandal, the veteran's scandal and the scandal that has to do with misleading the public about the $16 billion dollar expenditures about the F-35 aircrafts. I just thought that the Liberals and NDP and Bloc Quebecois can try some things since it always works out for Harper and he does not seem to be getting lower in the polls.

Some people I have talked to about this issue say that the Liberals and NDP forming in a coalition is alright but once you include the Bloc Quebecois it is a no-brainer that no one would be for that. I tell them that what about if the parties came together just the NDP and Liberals and they had more seats than the Conservatives and would that be okay with the Bloc just supporting legislation and having the coalition last for 3 years. They say it is out of the question. I tell those people that Harper had his budgets passed of 2006 and 2007 by the Bloc Quebecois and what I am saying is Harper wants things his way or the highway and he constantly has a double standard over the other parties.

The main thing I wish to bring up is the fact that let us say the Conservatives do this during the campaign and it sticks to the Liberals and the NDP, how can those parties ever hope to be a viable alternative to anyone with this over their heads. I mean the Conservatives could use this tactic in any election no matter the leader the Liberals or the NDP elect as long as Harper is prime minister. What I have told others in the past and even now is I feel the Canadian public is becoming more and more conservative which is fine and people are entitled to what they want to believe in but what I am saying is for the rural regions which usually vote conservative and usually distrust liberals since they believe everything the conservatives say why not have another party that is conservative but moderate conservative and progressive conservative and they would subscribe to red toryism. i have noticed this new conservative party is blue tory and there is a huge gap between the liberals and the conservatives. i believe rural canadians and especially western canadians are beginning to see harper for what he really is a big government conservative and i am centrist and i believe that a third option for voters is a good idea. i am bringing this issue up because not only can the coalition thing damage the ndp and liberals chances in western canada but in ontario as well; i mean it could make it so the conservatives use this tactic all the time and the only chance of ever getting elected in certain regions is having another party take your place and run independently to you and be sort of an opposing party for the sake of being untainted from the whole coalition issue.

the reason i bring this up is because well i may run as a progressive canadian candidate in the riding where i live and i am knowledgeable when it comes to politics and i believe a party between the liberals and conservatives could bring pragmatic, centrist people and people willing to find middle grounds and be balanced on tax cuts, spending, the debt and deficit and health care and education and it could support a huge range of the spectrum. that is why i believe a liberal and ndp supported progressive conservative party in western canada and rural areas and quebec and atlantic canada could work and when presented correctly to the canadian people may be better than the two parties. i think the more options you present to people the better and it will bring better people to the house of commons. another party could change the landscape and rid of this ultra-partisan type of politics we currently have in ottawa.

you know just one progressive canadian could add a person in the leader's debate, make people understand the party and actually listen to its platform and make sure the canadian people have a third option that has a chance of running the country. let us be serious and to you ndp supporters i don't mean to be insulting but i want to say that the ndp will never form government but they will be a party that will have a balance of power with another party. that is their only purpose. i believe an option between the liberals and conservatives that is moderate and conservative is needed and can win votes from both parties and will be a party that will probably be the second choices of most people out there.

thank you and i look forward to some comments about what i wrote and i believe this story can generate a lot of discussion.

[Shwa]

another party could change the landscape and rid of this ultra-partisan type of politics we currently have in ottawa.

This begs the question whether the NDP, The Reform or the Bloc were effective in getting rid of ultra-partisan politics when they entered the scene. Well if you are saying it still exits, I doubt that they did. This begs a further question as to whether there is a critical number of parties that will cause a collapse of this ultra-partisan-ness and will adding another party necessarily make everyone smarten up? I doubt it. So I would then question if there was really any ultra-partisan politics currently going on to any great degree.

The fact is that the current minority government is being supported by someone which would indicate that the type of politics being played are not too ultra-partisan and likely much of it being played out behind closed doors or in the some of the more trendier or upscale bars on Bank St. or in the Market. There is complicity going on - for one purpose or another - but silence is approval. And the silence is deafening.

I would go out on a limb and predict that if they did a poll, the prevalent Canadians attitude is like the famous line in 'Won't Get Fooled Again' by The Who: "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss." I doubt adding another party - one that resembles the old PC - will change this attitude one bit.

[Keepitsimple]

"Progressive" is a term that today's media and the opposition seems to indicate any party but Conservative. It's become a term that sees to has very little meaning at all. What exactly do you mean by Progressive?

Edited October 10, 2010 by Keepitsimple

[Wild Bill]

I always thought that a Red Tory was really just another Liberal! What would be the point?

At least today, for the first time in decades we have more clear cut choices. Having one really conservative party and a half a dozen that are really just different shades of Liberal just muddies the waters.

[Smallc]

The Conservatives don't act like a real conservative party. Also, I don't see how you don't understand red tory. People who are red tories are best described as collectivist conservatives. Not everyone can be divided into your black and white world of 'conservative and various shades of liberal'.

[Mr.Canada]

The Conservatives don't act like a real conservative party. Also, I don't see how you don't understand red tory. People who are red tories are best described as collectivist conservatives. Not everyone can be divided into your black and white world of 'conservative and various shades of liberal'.

I agree with you here. The Conservatives we have are not acting very conservative at all but more like true Liberals. However the reason for this is that the whole political spectrum in this country has shifted to the left so the Tories had no choice but to move also to fight for the middle ground. If the Liberals would move back to the right and claim the middle I'm sure you naturally see the Tories also shift slightly to the right again.

[Saipan]

Hi everybody with the Conservatives constantly reminding Canadians about a possible coalition with the Liberals, NDP and the Bloc Quebecois should those political parties be worried and launch counter attacks against the Conservatives saying that the Conservatives signed a similar agreement with the Bloc Quebecois and the NDP in 2004 to try to unseat Paul Martin.

What do you mean "should". They always do.

and Harper this past week has made excuses to try to dispel the renovation scandal, the veteran's scandal and the scandal that has to do with misleading the public about the $16 billion dollar expenditures about the F-35 aircrafts.

What makes you think it's "scandal"? Long overdue.

Liberals decimated our National Defence. On the other hand new Lear jets (Chretein ordered instead helicopters for military) for politicians to travel around are not needed.

I just thought that the Liberals and NDP and Bloc Quebecois can try some things since it always works out for Harper and he does not seem to be getting lower in the polls.

Yes, they should - it would help Harper

why not have another party that is conservative

But we do. You can join Clark and Orchard Red Tories

Brian Mulroney split conservatives once - to a great amusement of Chretein. It won't happen again.

Edited October 10, 2010 by Saipan

[Topaz]

Some people on the Right keep saying what he Libs did to the military. Stop and think what would happen NOW if they hadn't reduce to military expenses to pay off the debt? Our National debt is very close to trillion, I bet and with the way the Alliance/Conservative are running the credit cards we are over that, do we know exactly how high the deficit is? I think the Libs did the right thing at the time and if the Tories hadn't sent us into deficit, Canada would be better off. I wish someone would bring a Bill forward saying the seating government has to open the books and let the other parties and the country exactly how bad it is or how good things are BEFORE an election.

[capricorn]

I wish someone would bring a Bill forward saying the seating government has to open the books and let the other parties and the country exactly how bad it is or how good things are BEFORE an election.

Why just before and election? Finance monitoring is an ongoing process. We have the Auditor General...

The Office of the Auditor General of Canada is an independent and reliable source of the objective, fact-based information that Parliament needs to fulfill one of its most important roles: holding the federal government accountable for its stewardship of public funds. The Office audits departments and agencies, most Crown corporations, and many other federal organizations; it is also the auditor for the governments of Nunavut, the Yukon, and the Northwest Territories.

---

The Office of the Auditor General of Canada audits federal government operations and provides Parliament with independent information, advice, and assurance regarding the federal government’s stewardship of public funds. While the Office may comment on policy implementation in an audit, it does not comment on policy itself.

We are in the business of legislative auditing. We conduct performance audits of federal departments and agencies, annual financial audits of the government’s financial statements, and special examinations and annual financial audits of Crown corporations. We also audit the governments of Nunavut, the Yukon, and the Northwest Territories.

http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/au_fs_e_371.html

...and the Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO)...

The mandate of the Parliamentary Budget Officer is to provide independent analysis to Parliament on the state of the nation's finances, the government's estimates and trends in the Canadian economy; and upon request from a committee or parliamentarian, to estimate the financial cost of any proposal for matters over which Parliament has jurisdiction.

http://www2.parl.gc.ca/sites/pbo-dpb/index.aspx?Language=E

...and more than one parliamentary committee regarding finances and government operations.

[Smallc]

Our National debt is very close to trillion,

First, the Liberals did not pay off the debt. They paid down some debt after they eliminated the deficit. Second, where I went to school, $600B was nowhere close to $1T

[Topaz]

First, the Liberals did not pay off the debt. They paid down some debt after they eliminated the deficit. Second, where I went to school, $600B was nowhere close to $1T

Maybe you're right, maybe I'm right. http://www.visualeconomics.com/gdp-vs-national-debt-by-country/

[Smallc]

Maybe you're right, maybe I'm right. http://www.visualeconomics.com/gdp-vs-national-debt-by-country/

Even the CTF (whoI despise because of their very BS tax freedom day) has the number far lower than even my estimate. That number you have given probably includes all of some provincial debt.

http://www.debtclock.ca/

[Saipan]

Some people on the Right keep saying what he Libs did to the military. Stop and think what would happen NOW if they hadn't reduce to military expenses to pay off the debt?

Liberals INCREASED the debt, while robbing U.I., pensions, and GST. And GST was put in place specifically to pay off the debt. Only Chretien benefited from GST, that he promised wouldn't be there under his government.

Our National debt is very close to trillion

Do you have any evidence?

I bet and with the way the Alliance/Conservative are running the credit cards we are over that, do we know exactly how high the deficit is?

Yes we do, only you don't. International investors also know. It's why our dollar is nearly same as US dollar. Up from 62 cent Chretien's dollar.

[Smallc]

Liberals INCREASED the debt, while robbing U.I., pensions, and GST. And GST was put in place specifically to pay off the debt. Only Chretien benefited from GST, that he promised wouldn't be there under his government.

[ToadBrother]

Liberals INCREASED the debt, while robbing U.I., pensions, and GST. And GST was put in place specifically to pay off the debt. Only Chretien benefited from GST, that he promised wouldn't be there under his government.

Oh bullcrap. The UI fund robbing is true enough, but it's not like it stopped under the Tories, and nowhere am I aware of that Chretien's government increased the debt. They killed the deficit and began paying down the debt.

Yes we do, only you don't. International investors also know. It's why our dollar is nearly same as US dollar. Up from 62 cent Chretien's dollar.

Our dollar is high (and the Euro is high) because of weakness in the American dollar. I used to think you only read the headlines, now I think you only read the first word of the headlines.

[Smallc]

Our dollar is high (and the Euro is high) because of weakness in the American dollar.

I will defend the Conservatives here. They have stopped taking from EI. Right now, EI is taking from general revenue. As for the above, there are some other reasons that our dollar is high, not the least of which being the strength of commodities and the fact that Canada did not experience the recession to the level of most western democracies.

[Saipan]

Oh bullcrap. The UI fund robbing is true enough, but it's not like it stopped under the Tories

Liberals crewed it up for good, putting it into general revenue. So Paul Martin can use his magic book cooking.

and nowhere am I aware of that Chretien's government increased the debt.

True, you're not. But you should be. Check the debt when Chretein took over and when he left.

They killed the deficit and began paying down the debt.

Part of the Smoke and Mirror accounting. Deficit was less than one year worth of interest on the National debt. Big deal.

Our dollar is high (and the Euro is high)

Actually Euro took a big tumble. You didn't do your homework.

I used to think you only read the headlines, now I think you only read the first word of the headlines.

I don't read any headlines. As an investor I can't afford to read what happen ALREADY or watch TV yesterday's "economic advice".

[Smallc]

True, you're not. But you should be. Check the debt when Chretein took over and when he left.

If the debt was higher, it was only because of the first two years that were spent cleaning things up. It takes time to pay off something like that. The Liberals, under Chretien, sent us in the right direction financially.

[Saipan]

If the debt was higher, it was only because of the first two years that were spent cleaning things up.

Things were dirty? Like Sponsorgate?

It takes time to pay off something like that.

Well over a decade - and the debt went up!

[nicky10013]

Liberals crewed it up for good, putting it into general revenue. So Paul Martin can use his magic book cooking.

Proof?

True, you're not. But you should be. Check the debt when Chretein took over and when he left.

Proof?

Part of the Smoke and Mirror accounting. Deficit was less than one year worth of interest on the National debt. Big deal.

It's still not fiscally responsible. Above you're making unfounded claims that the horrible Liberals added to the debt (which we know they didn't) yet when faced faced with the fact that the Conservatives did it before stimulus and it doesn't matter? Make up your mind.

Actually Euro took a big tumble. You didn't do your homework.

The euro did take a hit but no where near as much as you're claiming. Even then, the Euro, despite the financial problems in Southern Europe is recovering nicely. At first glance the Euro is trading at about where I bought euro for when I went to Paris last year.

I don't read any headlines. As an investor I can't afford to read what happen ALREADY or watch TV yesterday's "economic advice".

:lol: :lol:

[Smallc]

Well over a decade - and the debt went up!

No, it didn't, you aren't understanding. For the first couple of years, the Liberals ran deficits. It was a continuation of what had been done by Trudeau and Mulroney. After that, they ran surpluses. Surpluses continued all the way to the 2008 - 2009 fiscal year when the first deficit in a decade was incurred. The amount of the first two Liberal deficits may very well outweigh the dept repayments they made between 1997 and 2003....but the debt was going down from 1996 - 1997 to 2007 - 2008.

Edited October 11, 2010 by Smallc

[Saipan]

Proof?

Proof?

1) Public domain information.

2) Are you denying it? Yes, No?

Above you're making unfounded claims that the horrible Liberals added to the debt (which we know they didn't)

Yes we know they did. It's knowledge in pubic domaine.

http://blogs.usask.ca/the_bolt/archive/2006/12/canadian_debt_gdp.html

http://www.optimist123.com/optimist/2007/06/international_d.html

The euro did take a hit but no where near as much as you're claiming.

How much am I claiming?

At first glance the Euro is trading at about where I bought euro for when I went to Paris last year.

Oh yes, we remember when that was.

[Shakeyhands]

and.............. let the spanking begin.

You do realize that a high CDN to US dollar actually hurts us right Saipan..? No... didn't think you did.

[Smallc]

Those debt to GDP numbers are off by a great deal. The debt to GDP ratio for Canada (federal) is about 30%.

Here are the real numbers from 5 years ago (they were much lower in 2008 and they are probably getting closer to the same as the chart again).

See this article for more:

http://www.vancouversun.com/health/Canada+cash+economic+malaise/3340011/story.html

Edited October 11, 2010 by Smallc

[Saipan]

You do realize that a high CDN to US dollar actually hurts us right Saipan..? No... didn't think you did.

So G.W. Bush did well to lower their dollar

Who'd want to invest in Canada at 62 cents a dollar?

How did Canada survive when our dollar was US$2.65 in late 1800's???

Why did EURO took such a fall?

And why is Canada doing now far better than Europe?

And why do you think our food is now cheaper than during Chretien's 62 cents era??