Priorities

[Who's Doing What?]

Ofcourse this comes from the new CPC ad about Dion. But let's examine this for a minute.

Is it easy to set priorities?

Perhaps for yourself. Maybe for your family too. As the head of a small company you would be required to set some. Maybe you would find that easy too. But let's think bigger.

Put yourself in a situation where there are 1000 distinct groups, and to help one group you do a dis-service to another, how easy would it be to set priorities?

How do you decide who gets what and who gets nothing?

Are the priorities a reflection of your own personal feelings?

Are the priorities dictated by numbers?

Just how would you set and define your priorities?

[Ricki Bobbi]

Leaders set priorities.

Dion isn't a leader.

Probably gonna lose the next election. One and done. Poor, poor Stéphanie....

[tml12]

Ofcourse this comes from the new CPC ad about Dion. But let's examine this for a minute.

Is it easy to set priorities?

Perhaps for yourself. Maybe for your family too. As the head of a small company you would be required to set some. Maybe you would find that easy too. But let's think bigger.

Put yourself in a situation where there are 1000 distinct groups, and to help one group you do a dis-service to another, how easy would it be to set priorities?

How do you decide who gets what and who gets nothing?

Are the priorities a reflection of your own personal feelings?

Are the priorities dictated by numbers?

Just how would you set and define your priorities?

The easier answer is that it is difficult ultimately to set priorities. That being said, if you make the right adjustments and keep a competent staff around you, it will be easier to set priorities.

Bottom line: do real leaders admit it's never easy to set priorities? No!

[Who's Doing What?]

Leaders set priorities.

Dion isn't a leader.

Probably gonna lose the next election. One and done. Poor, poor Stéphanie....

Thought you had me on ignore.... Ah the good ole days.

[tml12]

Leaders set priorities.

Dion isn't a leader.

Probably gonna lose the next election. One and done. Poor, poor Stéphanie....

Thought you had me on ignore.... Ah the good ole days.

Seriously, though, leaders are the ones who are supposed to set priorities. If I were to give Dion anything, it would be that Martin perhaps ran one of the most uncoordinated and disorganized governments in recent memory.

[Who's Doing What?]

The easier answer is that it is difficult ultimately to set priorities. That being said, if you make the right adjustments and keep a competent staff around you, it will be easier to set priorities.

But you do agree setting priorities can be difficult.

Bottom line: do real leaders admit it's never easy to set priorities? No!

Why not?

If it isn't easy, why should they lie and say it is?

Admitting there is a tough decision to make doesn't make a person any less of a leader. Although failure to make any decision certainly would.

[tml12]

Your last point certainly illustrates Martin's tenure as PM.

Good leaders never admit their faults. The fact is, as Ignatieff makes it clear in those ads, the Liberals didn't get it done. They signed on to and promised to be everything to everybody but in the end delivered little or nothing. For Dion to literally whine: "you know nothing what you speak of" and "it is difficult to make priorities" makes him look pretty bad as a PM. Harper, meanwhile, may have been a bit strict with his team but so far they have ultimately performed admirably.

[Who's Doing What?]

Your last point certainly illustrates Martin's tenure as PM.

Good leaders never admit their faults.

I beg to differ. I think a good leader identifies himself with the common person. Which includes admitting to his faults that we all know everyone has some of.

The fact is, as Ignatieff makes it clear in those ads, the Liberals didn't get it done. They signed on to and promised to be everything to everybody but in the end delivered little or nothing. For Dion to literally whine: "you know nothing what you speak of" and "it is difficult to make priorities" makes him look pretty bad as a PM.

Wasn't Iggy in the States at the time?

Isn't it true that he was not part of the Govt and therefore quite likely doesn't know what he speaks of?

And as you have said it is true that it is hard to make priorities, how can you fault a man(Dion) for telling the truth?

He was being honest, albeit in a funny voice, but honest just the same. I am not going to hold it against any politician for being honest, regardless of how much like a chipmunk they sounded.

Harper, meanwhile, may have been a bit strict with his team but so far they have ultimately performed admirably.

Come on now. Harper basically suspended his party member's right to free speach. That is going a bit further than being "a little strict".

[tml12]

But you keep missing the point that the Liberals didn't get it done on the environment. And for a leader that swtiched to green to supposedly emphasize the issues, it doesn't look good if in response to a question about why you didn't get it done you "didn't set priorities straight."

If my boss asked me why something wasn't done right and I responded: "do you know how difficult it is to make priorities?", it probably wouldn't look so good for me at work.

[Who's Doing What?]

But you keep missing the point that the Liberals didn't get it done on the environment. And for a leader that swtiched to green to supposedly emphasize the issues, it doesn't look good if in response to a question about why you didn't get it done you "didn't set priorities straight."

If my boss asked me why something wasn't done right and I responded: "do you know how difficult it is to make priorities?", it probably wouldn't look so good for me at work.

It might not look good on you but I bet he would agree that yes it is hard to set priorities.

Which it is, when you are doing it for a large number of people.

Just out of curiosity, could explain how your job, or the one you were thinking of, would be similar to what the minister of the Environment would have to deal with.

[geoffrey]

Just out of curiosity, could explain how your job, or the one you were thinking of, would be similar to what the minister of the Environment would have to deal with.

tml is CEO of a major environmental corporation... well I suppose I'm only kidding (well, he might be?).

But seriously, it's not like Dion makes the plans! Are you crazy? John Baird is not an biologist, Gary Lunn is not an oil exec, Stockwell Day is not a cop and Tony Clement isn't a doctor. Most took Political Science in University and therefore believe they are experts in everything, but they aren't.

The job of a minister is to outline the goals of the government and set guidelines for department. If Dion can't do that, he shouldn't be a minister, let alone outlining the priorities for a nation.

He's an academic, never experienced a day in the real world outside of that, and therefore has no freaking clue how to plan strategically.

He's incompetent and clearly not someone that should be running a country. Bring Martin back or something.

[Who's Doing What?]

Dion was only evnironment minister for 18 months, just how much is he supposed to have done?

Did he accomplsh 50% more than what Ambrose has done to this point? Seriously....

In the 18 months he was in charge of the environment ministry how much of the blame for the 150+months of Liberal ineffectiveness should fall on him?

I just had to look this up because the way everyone bashes him it is like he was environment minister for 12 of the 13 years the Liberals were in power. The fact is he was in office for barely 10% of the total time and during that time he was hamstrung by a minority govt. I fail to see where it is justified that he be responsible for the failure of 3 majority govt.s to do anything significant about the environment.

[Who's Doing What?]

He's an academic, never experienced a day in the real world outside of that, and therefore has no freaking clue how to plan strategically.

So are you saying I could beat him at a game of RISK?

He's incompetent and clearly not someone that should be running a country. Bring Martin back or something.

I highly doubt that. Incompetent people don't have the amount of letters following their names that Dion does. He may be a lot of things but accusing him of being stupid is completely off target.

I think you just want Martin back to ensure a CPC majority.

[geoffrey]

So are you saying I could beat him at a game of RISK?

No... but I could.

I highly doubt that. Incompetent people don't have the amount of letters following their names that Dion does. He may be a lot of things but accusing him of being stupid is completely off target.

I think you just want Martin back to ensure a CPC majority.

Nah. I know many profs that have a million letters after their name and it doesn't mean a thing about their real world competency. Academics and real life are two very different things.

Dion was a mediocre academic. He's a terrible real world leader.

I personally like Martin, he was thrust into a terrible situation caused by the Quebec wing of the party (ie Chretien and his Quebec lieutenant Dion). I'd hate to be the one to inherit a party at the end of 13 years of rule.

Martin is a very pro-business, English, real-world connected guy. I have no issues with him running the show... maybe without the party around him, but still.

[Who's Doing What?]

No... but I could.

I dunno I'm pretty good at RISK.

Nah. I know many profs that have a million letters after their name and it doesn't mean a thing about their real world competency. Academics and real life are two very different things.

When did politics become "real world"?

From what I have heard from his contemporaries he is a very smart man.

Dion was a mediocre academic. He's a terrible real world leader.

And this is based on 3-4 months as opposition party leader?

I personally like Martin, he was thrust into a terrible situation caused by the Quebec wing of the party (ie Chretien and his Quebec lieutenant Dion). I'd hate to be the one to inherit a party at the end of 13 years of rule.

Martin is a very pro-business, English, real-world connected guy. I have no issues with him running the show... maybe without the party around him, but still.

I liked the Martin from about 4 years ago. The more pressure that was put on him to first become PM then when he was PM the more he seemed to fit his billing of Mr. Dithers. In the end I felt sorry for him as he looked frazzled and out of step during the last campaign. A different man than what used to tell the house about billion dollar surpluses in his budget every year.

[Catchme]

But you keep missing the point that the Liberals didn't get it done on the environment. And for a leader that swtiched to green to supposedly emphasize the issues, it doesn't look good if in response to a question about why you didn't get it done you "didn't set priorities straight."

If my boss asked me why something wasn't done right and I responded: "do you know how difficult it is to make priorities?", it probably wouldn't look so good for me at work.

No, you seem to be missing the point, the CPC cannot even mention the environment by way of chastizing the Liberals. How quick it seems the CPC are forgetting their miserable Clean Air Act, which was by far worse for the environment than the Liberals EPA. If not for the NDP calling them on it, they would've done nothing. Remember it was only 3 years ago Harper called Global Warming a myth. and up until 3 months ago it seemed as though he still believed it. The CPC are standing in glass houses throwing stones with this type of commentary and it won't wash with Canadians.

The very public unveiling of the useless Clean Air Act, raised the ire of Canadians across the country, they know full well if not for the NDP, the CPC would've done even less than the Liberals, moreover all Harper did when he announced the Alternative energy program as re-vitalize the Liberals plan they put out just before the Martin government fell.

Plus what kind of priorities has Harper made? Oh, that would be NONE! Don't bother yapping about the soft wood lumber deal that was a freaking sell out that Canadians had already won, say nothing of the misterious payout of millions, or maybe billions, of dollars he gave to Bush over that deal. It seems his priorities were the X 5 expansion of the tar sands.

[tml12]

Just out of curiosity, could explain how your job, or the one you were thinking of, would be similar to what the minister of the Environment would have to deal with.

tml is CEO of a major environmental corporation... well I suppose I'm only kidding (well, he might be?).

But seriously, it's not like Dion makes the plans! Are you crazy? John Baird is not an biologist, Gary Lunn is not an oil exec, Stockwell Day is not a cop and Tony Clement isn't a doctor. Most took Political Science in University and therefore believe they are experts in everything, but they aren't.

The job of a minister is to outline the goals of the government and set guidelines for department. If Dion can't do that, he shouldn't be a minister, let alone outlining the priorities for a nation.

He's an academic, never experienced a day in the real world outside of that, and therefore has no freaking clue how to plan strategically.

He's incompetent and clearly not someone that should be running a country. Bring Martin back or something.

Thanks geoffrey...in reality, I am CEO of my apartment but that's about it...

I completely agree (like I seem to be doing on a more or less every day basis) with your post. Dion is completely incompetent, running on the environment though it seems clear it's all political (naming your dog, Kyoto, etc.)

If Dion really cared about the environment, why does Canada rank 28th out of 29th in environmental ratings? Why does George Bush have a better record on the environment than the Liberals? Why did Canada's greenhouse gas emissions rise 25% AFTER signing Kyoto?

And now that Dion supposedly cares so much about the environment but doesn't know how to set priorities, how do we know that he'll make the environment a priority?

I agree with you about Martin...I actually didn't think the guy was that bad before he sold out to the NDP/East Coast/anti-American establishment.

[Remiel]

Good leaders never admit their faults? Huh? So, by that definition, Hitler was a good leader? Stalin was a good leader? Not being able to admit your faults is a good sign that you are starting to believe you don't have any.

[tml12]

Good leaders never admit their faults? Huh? So, by that definition, Hitler was a good leader? Stalin was a good leader? Not being able to admit your faults is a good sign that you are starting to believe you don't have any.

Good leaders must appear confident and strong at all times. That's what made Pierre Trudeau a good leader and what made his opponents, Robert Stanfield and Joe Clark, look bad.

It's also how Brian Mulroney dethroned a Liberal dynasty (remember the "you had a choice sir" line in the 1984 debates).

Chretien didn't appear too strong but he had a fractured opposition. Martin looked like a dithering fool.

Not admitting your faults and appearing strong is what makes a good leader. Trying to compare this to totalitarian dictators is ridiculous because the context in which they govern is completely different.

[Remiel]

Appearing strong is more about utilizing your strengths than covering up your weaknesses.

[tml12]

Appearing strong is more about utilizing your strengths than covering up your weaknesses.

That's very debatable...appearing strong is about doing both.

[Keepitsimple]

No, you seem to be missing the point, the CPC cannot even mention the environment by way of chastizing the Liberals. How quick it seems the CPC are forgetting their miserable Clean Air Act, which was by far worse for the environment than the Liberals EPA. If not for the NDP calling them on it, they would've done nothing.

The Liberal media was fixated with the Clean Air Act's date of 2050 but in fact, their plan called for short term and long term targets to be announced early in the new year. They are still on target for doing that and until they are announced - people can't really evaluate the Clean Air Act. Here's an excerpt from Rona Ambrose's speech in Nairobi from November:

We are acting immediately to ensure Canadian industry meets short, medium and long-term emission reductions targets. Our plan recognizes the importance of a long-term commitment to reducing emissions. We will continue to take into account the well-researched advice of the National Roundtable on the Environment and the Economy, and will work to reduce Canada's absolute emissions by up to 65 per cent by 2050.

But our plan also recognizes the need for urgent action so that we can finally make progress towards our 2012 international obligations. Early in the New Year, Canada will finally have short term targets and timelines for all major industry sectors.

Link: Link is at http://www.ec.gc.ca/minister/speeches/2006/061115_s_e.htm

[tml12]

No, you seem to be missing the point, the CPC cannot even mention the environment by way of chastizing the Liberals. How quick it seems the CPC are forgetting their miserable Clean Air Act, which was by far worse for the environment than the Liberals EPA. If not for the NDP calling them on it, they would've done nothing.

The Liberal media was fixated with the Clean Air Act's date of 2050 but in fact, their plan called for short term and long term targets to be announced early in the new year. They are still on target for doing that and until they are announced - people can't really evaluate the Clean Air Act. Here's an excerpt from Rona Ambrose's speech in Nairobi from November:

We are acting immediately to ensure Canadian industry meets short, medium and long-term emission reductions targets. Our plan recognizes the importance of a long-term commitment to reducing emissions. We will continue to take into account the well-researched advice of the National Roundtable on the Environment and the Economy, and will work to reduce Canada's absolute emissions by up to 65 per cent by 2050.

But our plan also recognizes the need for urgent action so that we can finally make progress towards our 2012 international obligations. Early in the New Year, Canada will finally have short term targets and timelines for all major industry sectors.

Link: Link is at http://www.ec.gc.ca/minister/speeches/2006/061115_s_e.htm

There were parts of that plan that were noble for sure...I agree with you about the Liberal media and the 2050 target though.

[Who's Doing What?]

Thanks geoffrey...in reality, I am CEO of my apartment but that's about it...

I completely agree (like I seem to be doing on a more or less every day basis) with your post. Dion is completely incompetent, running on the environment though it seems clear it's all political (naming your dog, Kyoto, etc.)

If Dion really cared about the environment, why does Canada rank 28th out of 29th in environmental ratings? Why does George Bush have a better record on the environment than the Liberals? Why did Canada's greenhouse gas emissions rise 25% AFTER signing Kyoto?

And now that Dion supposedly cares so much about the environment but doesn't know how to set priorities, how do we know that he'll make the environment a priority?

I agree with you about Martin...I actually didn't think the guy was that bad before he sold out to the NDP/East Coast/anti-American establishment.

Apparenlty you missed this post, maybe not? But it still seems like a fitting rebuttal to what you have wrote.

Dion was only evnironment minister for 18 months, just how much is he supposed to have done?

Did he accomplsh 50% more than what Ambrose has done to this point? Seriously....

In the 18 months he was in charge of the environment ministry how much of the blame for the 150+months of Liberal ineffectiveness should fall on him?

I just had to look this up because the way everyone bashes him it is like he was environment minister for 12 of the 13 years the Liberals were in power. The fact is he was in office for barely 10% of the total time and during that time he was hamstrung by a minority govt. I fail to see where it is justified that he be responsible for the failure of 3 majority govt.s to do anything significant about the environment.

The party may deserve to be bashed for over a decade of ineffectiveness, the man does not.

[tml12]

WDW,

I'd like to know exactly how you think that takes away from my earlier posts.