Effective Opposition

[madmax]

This is my poll creation.

I would have added Garth Turner as a choice, but he went Liberal.

[jdobbin]

I think the Bloq has been mostly absent from the House these last months.

The NDP has stumbled over Afghanistan with its immediate pull-out policy as well as propping up the Conservatives when clearly they don't believe in Kyoto. I think Jack Layton sometimes forgets that the Conservatives are in power because he is still running against the Liberals. Even his own supporters have said he needs to target them more or he will lose votes to the Liberals who are running against the Tories.

The opposition from the Liberals was extremely weak while their leadership campaign was on. It is a little more focussed now. I think we need to see more of what the front benches of the Liberal are like in their critic portfolios. The Liberals need to find other issue aside from the environment for Dion to put the Conservatives on the defensive. I'd say the budget if it includes income splitting should be that focus.

[geoffrey]

Iggy's questions are good, I like him. He's a little unresponsive and just reads scripted follow ups, but oh well, what can you do? His arrogance towards the other members is funny, he's an enjoyable character.

I'd like to see Dion have his follow up in English, unscripted. That should provide a hoot... prepare him a little for his defeat in the English leaders debate (I think Duceppe will look better).

The BQ has been effective to some degree, some decent questions. But really, they fear election like nothing else, so they won't bother too be too aggressive.

The NDP has actually gotten some things done, but Layton's questions are terrible, no one really cares about a word out of his mouth. He needs to be more practical and talk about issues actually affecting people.

Does anyone know where one can watch QP without the damned translations, they are so annoying but that's all we get out here? Is there a webcast without the stupid translators?

[madmax]

The opposition from the Liberals was extremely weak while their leadership campaign was on.

I'd say the budget if it includes income splitting should be that focus.

I also remember the Liberals being very weak during the leadership race. The NDP and Bloc shared alot of the spotlight during this period. I haven't seen alot of action from Dion, only because I have been too busy.

I don't know what any opposition party can say against income splitting. It is a populist idea, supported by many people. Yes it will remove cash from the coffers, but it puts money back in families hands. The only thing I could see any working party doing is putting a CAP on the split, such as $30,000 or $40,000 diverted to the spouse as "income". I could see the Liberals supporting income splitting regardless of its cost on government revenues, and allowing it for all the rich and famous to benefit from.

Income splitting is a political winner. Don't know where the BQ would be on this.

Income splitting in my mind, is a tough one for opposition to be critical of.

[newbie]

From what I've seen re question period, it seems like Harper still thinks he is in opposition.

[madmax]

Iggy's questions are good, I like him. He's a little unresponsive and just reads scripted follow ups, but oh well, what can you do? His arrogance towards the other members is funny, he's an enjoyable character.

I don't know if I am lucky or not. I have heard of his ability to pose a question, but haven't seen him in question period either. He does make for good CPC ADDS on TV though.

I'd like to see Dion have his follow up in English, unscripted. That should provide a hoot... prepare him a little for his defeat in the English leaders debate (I think Duceppe will look better).

Does Dion ask questions soley in French?

The BQ has been effective to some degree, some decent questions. But really, they fear election like nothing else, so they won't bother too be too aggressive.

Amazing how a little poll can silence the separtists. The seem to operate on polls alone. Remember how during the dead period heading into christmas, they threatened to bring down the government over Afghanistan at the earliest opportunity.

The NDP has actually gotten some things done, but Layton's questions are terrible, no one really cares about a word out of his mouth. He needs to be more practical and talk about issues actually affecting people.

I have not been as impressed with their results this time around. I really haven't seen as much progress or leverage from them. Layton has always been portrayed as a Grandstander before the cameras and a pragmatist behind. A guy whom likes to work the numbers. The NDP was unseen for 10 years prior to his arrival, and their have always been solid guys like Bill Blaikie around.

While Stephen Harper has sounded far more moderate once he got the big chair, he certainly didn't hesitate to state that he appreciated the NDP for stating their positions regardless of whether he agreed or not, he knew where they stood.

But the NDP has been silent while the moneys appear to be moving toward Quebec. Actually everything appears to be Quebec Oriented.

What opposition party speaks out against this bias, prior to a budget?

Does anyone know where one can watch QP without the damned translations, they are so annoying but that's all we get out here? Is there a webcast without the stupid translators?

That's a good question that I would be interested in getting an answer to as well.

[jdobbin]

Income splitting is a political winner. Don't know where the BQ would be on this.

Income splitting in my mind, is a tough one for opposition to be critical of.

Income splitting is terribly unfair to individual tax payers. This is how the Liberals should approach it.

They are also proposing something different on the income trust front.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...?hub=TopStories

* Repeal the planned 31.5 per cent tax on income trusts and replace it with a 10 per cent tax, refundable to all Canadians residents; and,

* Maintain the moratorium on new income trusts, while considering representation from sectors for exception.

[madmax]

They are also proposing something different on the income trust front.

* Repeal the planned 31.5 per cent tax on income trusts and replace it with a 10 per cent tax, refundable to all Canadians residents; and,

* Maintain the moratorium on new income trusts, while considering representation from sectors for exception.

This is where I think the Liberals have some movement, regardless of the small numbers of Canadians affected by the CPC decision.

[Keepitsimple]

They are also proposing something different on the income trust front.

* Repeal the planned 31.5 per cent tax on income trusts and replace it with a 10 per cent tax, refundable to all Canadians residents; and,

* Maintain the moratorium on new income trusts, while considering representation from sectors for exception.

This is where I think the Liberals have some movement, regardless of the small numbers of Canadians affected by the CPC decision.

I saw John McCallum on Newsworld giving his pitch - pleading that it would help get all the money back for the people who lost money. Baloney. Let's get one thing straight....at this point in time, the only people who actually lost money are those people who sold their income trust shares.....and no plan can help them. Those people who were wise enough to hang onto their shares are still being paid "distributions" as they were before - and in most cases, those distributions are about the same as before - because really, nothing has materially changed in the company itself, and won't until they convert to a non-trust company....and everybody has 4 years to plan for this. Until they sell, any "loss" is strictly on paper. So McCallum's plan doesn't really help "the little guy" - but of course it would give new "buying" opportunities to all the big investers....and of course, CBC never asked any simple questions that would have exposed this charade. The real sin is with the investment advisers who gave advice to Seniors to put most of their eggs in one basket. I'll bet many of them followed that sin with another one - "advising" them to sell so they could make even more commissions. Sad.

[jdobbin]

I saw John McCallum on Newsworld giving his pitch - pleading that it would help get all the money back for the people who lost money. Baloney. Let's get one thing straight....at this point in time, the only people who actually lost money are those people who sold their income trust shares.....and no plan can help them. Those people who were wise enough to hang onto their shares are still being paid "distributions" as they were before - and in most cases, those distributions are about the same as before - because really, nothing has materially changed in the company itself, and won't until they convert to a non-trust company....and everybody has 4 years to plan for this. Until they sell, any "loss" is strictly on paper. So McCallum's plan doesn't really help "the little guy" - but of course it would give new "buying" opportunities to all the big investers....and of course, CBC never asked any simple questions that would have exposed this charade. The real sin is with the investment advisers who gave advice to Seniors to put most of their eggs in one basket. I'll bet many of them followed that sin with another one - "advising" them to sell so they could make even more commissions. Sad.

There were other networks and newspapers in the room. You act like the CBC was the only one there.

See what some of the financial writers and the market thinks of it tomorrow. At the moment, there were some favourable words about the announcement. I'd like to see some more analysis first.

Sad , however, was the Conservative promising to not tax the trusts and then going ahead and doing just that. And to make the matter worse, they threw in income splitting despite the unfairness and expensiveness of the promise. They'd probably lose less tax money with income trusts.

[madmax]

The real sin is with the investment advisers who gave advice to Seniors to put most of their eggs in one basket. I'll bet many of them followed that sin with another one - "advising" them to sell so they could make even more commissions. Sad.

If investment advisers gave advice to go heavy into income trusts, this advice would have increased significantly after the Conservative Party were elected.

The sin is the CPC giving a green light on income trusts and then doing a complete reversal.

The Liberals have wiggle room.

The NDP were firm.

The CPC are responsible for their actions.

[Saturn]

The NDP has stumbled over Afghanistan with its immediate pull-out policy as well as propping up the Conservatives when clearly they don't believe in Kyoto. I think Jack Layton sometimes forgets that the Conservatives are in power because he is still running against the Liberals.

I've heard that many times but I still haven't seen any evidence that Layton is propping up the Conservatives in any way. Can you clarify this for me?

[Saturn]

Does anyone know where one can watch QP without the damned translations, they are so annoying but that's all we get out here? Is there a webcast without the stupid translators?

Your TV should give you the option to switch to the floor mike on CPAC (play with your remote control). It's not that much better though because that way you end up hearing a lot more yelling and background noise.

[Saturn]

I don't know what any opposition party can say against income splitting. Income splitting in my mind, is a tough one for opposition to be critical of.

It's not very tough at all because it shifts the tax burden to working couples and single-individuals who form 80+% of the population and it's nonsense policy on the economic front. I don't expect the opposition to be able to explain that to the general population though. The business community is the actual opposition on this one and there is no way Harper can implement it over their heads. The Conservatives may talk about income-splitting and may propose some weak form of partial income-splitting spinning it as major tax cuts for everyone but that's a difficult task.

[Figleaf]

This kind of poll is a waste of time. There are so many posters here who have been brainwashed to believe the Liberals are the root of all evil that their assessment is basically meaningless.

[madmax]

This kind of poll is a waste of time.

I thought it was a waste of my time, about 7 hours after I created it, there were no votes posted.

There are so many posters here who have been brainwashed to believe the Liberals are the root of all evil that their assessment is basically meaningless.

I don't think there is any bias to this poll. Right now as of my reply, it is a 3 way race with the BQ leading and the LIBS and NDP tied. If I had created this poll during the period the Liberals had no leader it would have been heavily skewed away from Liberals being an effective opposition.

This is a fair poll of the opposition parties.

[madmax]

It's not very tough at all because it shifts the tax burden to working couples and single-individuals who form 80+% of the population and it's nonsense policy on the economic front. I don't expect the opposition to be able to explain that to the general population though.

I am not certain how it shifts the burden. Many people I work with whom are single earners in their family believe that they are carrying a heavier tax burden working 16 extra hours a week to help meet the needs of the family only to be taxed more heavily then a family of 2 income earners. The dual income homes aren't having their taxes increased, just those of single income are to have theirs reduced.

I understand that the revenues will go down, but I don't see how this increases the burden on working couples any more then a tax cut to corporations does.

The business community is the actual opposition on this one and there is no way Harper can implement it over their heads. The Conservatives may talk about income-splitting and may propose some weak form of partial income-splitting spinning it as major tax cuts for everyone but that's a difficult task.

Why is business against income splitting?

[geoffrey]

Your TV should give you the option to switch to the floor mike on CPAC (play with your remote control). It's not that much better though because that way you end up hearing a lot more yelling and background noise.

That is pretty neat, what you can do with TV's these days. Your right though, the floor mike is hard to follow too.

I suppose that's the choice, crappy French translators or the floor mike.

[Figleaf]

I don't think there is any bias to this poll.

Certainly true. The question in itself it not a problem.

[jdobbin]

I've heard that many times but I still haven't seen any evidence that Layton is propping up the Conservatives in any way. Can you clarify this for me?

I think the Clean Air Act support is the main the culprit here. The Conservatives reject Kyoto. If the NDP doesn't vote non-confidence when they time comes, they are propping up the government.

[madmax]

I think the Clean Air Act support is the main the culprit here. The Conservatives reject Kyoto. If the NDP doesn't vote non-confidence when they time comes, they are propping up the government.

The NDP and BQ supported the Kyoto Bill put forth by the Liberal. That doesn't appear to be propping up the government position in this case. But it can't bring the government down, as no money is involved.

The next budget should discern whom is propping up the government.

Since it hasn't been seen yet, it could end up being the BQ, the Liberals or the NDP.

The Clean Air Act is being blocked in committee by Liberals and Conservatives from what is being reported on Mike Duffy Live.

Putting a Bill that was DOA back to committee isn't propping up a government. Even with todays passage, of the Kyoto Bill, it is all plans and talk and no action.

The Clean Air Act can put some teeth behind the environment with the help of the Liberals and the Bloc and the NDP. Otherwise it will die in committee.

[geoffrey]

The NDP and BQ supported the Kyoto Bill put forth by the Liberal. That doesn't appear to be propping up the government position in this case. But it can't bring the government down, as no money is involved.

Tell that to industry or the taxpayers who are now metaphorically loading their paycheques on ships bound for Russia.

[madmax]

Tell that to industry or the taxpayers who are now metaphorically loading their paycheques on ships bound for Russia.

I understand what you are saying. But Kyoto has been signed, and the Government did not abandon the treaty. Either we meet the treaty obligation through GHG reduction or the cashbox. I didn't write the damn thing or sign it.

And now for something really important. I have Emoticons Enabled and no similie faces on my page? Where did they go???

[madmax]

The BQ has been staying ahead in this poll. Is the current catering towards Quebec a result of an effective BQ Opposition or the need to nullify it as a political force? Or is this Catering designed to weaken Federal Liberals in Quebec?

[geoffrey]

Tell that to industry or the taxpayers who are now metaphorically loading their paycheques on ships bound for Russia.

I understand what you are saying. But Kyoto has been signed, and the Government did not abandon the treaty. Either we meet the treaty obligation through GHG reduction or the cashbox. I didn't write the damn thing or sign it.

Funny how most of those that say we MUST do Kyoto because we signed it (though it has no benefit to Canada, worldwise CO2 has skyrocketed) are some of the first to say we should run from our NATO obligations in Afghanistan.