What Harper gov’t accomplished in 16 months!

Figleaf · June 9, 2007

So far, the Harper government has:
Passed the [watered-down toothless] Federal Accountability Act;

Introduced legislation to crack down on street racing;

Introduced the Universal Child Care Program; [a stupid waste of $$]

Extended the Afghanistan mission; [is that supposed to be a good thing?]

Established a formal role for Quebec at UNESCO; [i thought he was supposed to be the prime minister OF CANADA]

Instituted tax fairness, [fair to who??]

...income splitting for seniors;[after kicking the crap out of seniors (and others) by reneging on his promise on income trusts]

Reduced the GST by 1%;

Increased democratic reform and expanded voting opportunities; [WHAT?]

Improved marine security; [easy to say]

Improved border security; [easy to say, but did they do anything?]

Passed the 2007 budget — which; Restored the fiscal balance, [ :lol: You can't be serious. the fiscal imbalance was a lie and the budget just shipped piles of cash to Quebec]Gave tax relief to low income working families, [not net]

Allotted funds for more debt reduction, [you mean maintained the Liberal allotment]Provided a working tax benefit,

Added a registered disability saving plan,

Allotted funds for the environment, [additional funds? new funds? adequate funds? a descriptive word would let us know if it were bad or good]

Alloted more funds for health care; [more than what?]

Alloted more funds for farmers. [pay off to a special interest, meanwhile dismantling the wheat board]

Introduced a workable environment Green Plan; [workable, except for helping the environment.\]Redressed the Chinese head tax; [a terrible mistake. they came voluntarily.]

Redressed the Hep C compensation;

Reduced the landing fee for new immigrants;

Introduced the Sidney Tar Pond initiative;

Centralized the cancer register;

Expanded the Pacific Gateway;

Negotiated the softwood lumber treaty with the U.S; [a total sell-out]

Increased funding and resources to the military.

Who's Doing What? · June 9, 2007

Harper should have accepted Casey's vote and held him up as an example of how the CPC actually is different from the LPC and how CPC members have integrity( a word we haven't heard since the election)

Why?

It would have merely been interpreted as a sign of weak leadership.

Kinda like Joe Clark bowing to Gordon Towers when he wanted to represent Red Deer in 1979.

A leader leads.

You won't see Harper dither about. Different style. After the last minority Government Canadian's craved that.

Why? How about saying that the CPC wouldn't do such a thing.

Weak leadership? Jeezus. With all the spinning the CPC has done already, spinning the idea of an MP standing up for his constituents shouldn't have been too hard.

Yes a leader leads. So are you suggesting Harper ordered the confinement of Casey?

No he didn't dither on income trusts or the environmemt. He flip flopped without any dithering at all.

Michael Bluth · June 9, 2007

No he didn't dither on income trusts or the environmemt. He flip flopped without any dithering at all.

The times changed and there was a need to change policy on those two issues.

He made a decision and has moved on.

No that wasn't dithering. Better than naming 56 priorities, isn't it?

geoffrey · June 9, 2007

It certainly wasn't my first choice to happen. However, there is no guarantee that May will make it to the end of the month.

That's a rather ominous thing to say.

Who's Doing What? · June 9, 2007

No he didn't dither on income trusts or the environmemt. He flip flopped without any dithering at all.

The times changed and there was a need to change policy on those two issues.

He made a decision and has moved on.

No that wasn't dithering. Better than naming 56 priorities, isn't it?

Sure sure Ricki. Whatever you say.

Sorry to tarnish your golden boy, but the fact is he isn't perfect.

Michael Bluth · June 9, 2007

Sorry to tarnish your golden boy, but the fact is he isn't perfect.

I never said he was perfect.

But he's a hell of a lot better than all the options were in 2006. He's a lot better than all of the options out there now.

Who's Doing What? · June 9, 2007

I never said he was perfect.
But he's a hell of a lot better than all the options were in 2006. He's a lot better than all of the options out there now.

Sure sure. Yup whatever you say.

jdobbin · June 9, 2007

Maybe if they picked a leader that spoke a similar language to us, that had been to Calgary before his political career or knew anything about our economy and the way we do business here.
Then maybe. Unlikely.

Kevin Taft is a little more right wing than the Paul Martin's of the Liberal party. Dion is further left than our NDP guy. He's not ever going to win in Calgary. Calgary has depised the Liberals and their treatment of us since we last elected one in the 60's. Why do you think a carbon taxing, barely audible guy from Quebec is going to change that?

I can tell you Dion doesn't get it out here.

And yet Dion was warmly received in Calgary this week. He has a lot of work to do but it isn't like people in Alberta are not seriously pissed with Harper over a variety of issues.

Do you have the Calgary Herald online? This is from their website just in case someone doesn't believe what provincial Liberal support is now at in Calgary.

http://news.google.ca/news?hl=en&q=Liberal...m=1&sa=N&tab=wn

Liberal support in Calgary is at 26 per cent, which is higher than their 25-per-cent support in Edmonton, the party's traditional base...

jdobbin · June 9, 2007

That's a rather ominous thing to say.

I think she is preparing to quit the race.

geoffrey · June 9, 2007

And yet Dion was warmly received in Calgary this week. He has a lot of work to do but it isn't like people in Alberta are not seriously pissed with Harper over a variety of issues.

You'd expect someone to be warmly received by a mostly Liberal group.

That said, Harper is sometimes even applauded when speaking to people in Toronto. Doesn't mean a thing. Sometimes people are just polite.

--

Stop dwelling on provincial Liberal support in Calgary... it's because Stelmach has taken a real dump on Bronco's parade and Calgarians are a little upset. They'll get over it. It's not like anyone here actually wants to support Taft... we'd never even know what he stands for, he's just against things.

Not to mention the provincial Liberals are in millions of debt while the Tories hold the biggest campaign fund out of all parties in Canada, Federal and Provincial.

There is no chance of a Liberal break through.

Keep dreaming.

jdobbin · June 9, 2007

You'd expect someone to be warmly received by a mostly Liberal group.
That said, Harper is sometimes even applauded when speaking to people in Toronto. Doesn't mean a thing. Sometimes people are just polite.

--

Stop dwelling on provincial Liberal support in Calgary... it's because Stelmach has taken a real dump on Bronco's parade and Calgarians are a little upset. They'll get over it. It's not like anyone here actually wants to support Taft... we'd never even know what he stands for, he's just against things.

Not to mention the provincial Liberals are in millions of debt while the Tories hold the biggest campaign fund out of all parties in Canada, Federal and Provincial.

There is no chance of a Liberal break through.

Keep dreaming.

I don't see any federal breakthroughs in Alberta. They will be the last place to vote any party other than Tory, I would think.

As far as the provincial party goes, I have no idea what will happen. We'll see what the result of the byelections are next week.

Michael Bluth · June 9, 2007

You'd expect someone to be warmly received by a mostly Liberal group.
That said, Harper is sometimes even applauded when speaking to people in Toronto. Doesn't mean a thing. Sometimes people are just polite.

--

Stop dwelling on provincial Liberal support in Calgary... it's because Stelmach has taken a real dump on Bronco's parade and Calgarians are a little upset. They'll get over it. It's not like anyone here actually wants to support Taft... we'd never even know what he stands for, he's just against things.

Remember Bronco is a Liberal. Got crushed by Rob Anders in 1997.

The Conservatives are probably going to lose both by-elections on Tuesday.

I wouldn't be surprised to see a *poor* showing for the Conservatives in the provincial general election next year. I could see them dropping down to 50 or seats.

Still a massive majority but it will be enough to get Stelmach turfed.

geoffrey · June 9, 2007

Let's end the hijack with this, but Drumheller is for sure PC (if it goes anything else, it's Alliance). This is the riding that has the creationism museum and if you've ever been there, isn't known for it's progressive attitudes.

Calgary-Elbow is near where I live. I'm about to head over to a bar there in 15 minutes actually. It's essientially one of the richest and most influential areas of Calgary, if not Canada. Oil and gas execs dominate the residences there, many multi-million dollar homes (hence why I live near there, and not there). I'd be seriously suprised if the Liberals won there. It's as haughty professional/exec as it gets in Calgary. If it were Varsity or somewhere in the East, I'd agree with you. But not Calgary-Elbow.

MLS Search of the homes for sale in this riding.

Link: http://www.mls.ca/PropertyResults.aspx?Mod...3fAreaID%3d6401

Michael Bluth · June 9, 2007

Let's end the hijack with this, but Drumheller is for sure PC (if it goes anything else, it's Alliance). This is the riding that has the creationism museum and if you've ever been there, isn't known for it's progressive attitudes.

That's what I think will happen. Elbow - Liberal and Drumheller - Alliance.

I've had Conservative types tell me the 62 out of 83 seats the PCs won in 2004 was a "disaster".

normanchateau · June 9, 2007

The list of Conservative accomplishments in the past 16 months fails to note that they raised the personal income tax rate on July 1, 2006 for all Canadians though it had the greatest impact on those in the lowest tax bracket.

There were are a few other missing "accomplishments":

# Program Spending up 7.9% in 2006/07 and projected to rise by 5.7% in 2007/08

# Three dollars of spending for every dollar of tax relief in fiscal ’07

Federal government spending on all programs increased from $175.2-billion to $189.0-billion in 2006/07, this represents the third largest increase in percentage terms at 7.9% and the second largest jump in dollars since the budget was balanced in 1997/98. Program spending is budgeted to jump another 5.7 per cent in the upcoming year fiscal 2007/08 to $199.6-billion.

"Rather than reduce the overall tax burden, the Conservative government opted to spend down the federal surplus,” said CTF federal director John Williamson. “Program spending is up 7.9% as a result of the finance minister wildly overshooting his original 2006 budget target of 5.3% an astounding 50%. As such, there is little reason to believe Mr. Flaherty will hit next year’s budgeted spending boost of 5.7%.”

When the 2006 Budget was tabled in May 2006, Williamson observed, “If the government is capable of reducing spending in its non-priority areas and holding growth in others, the Conservatives will be able to offer broadly-based income tax relief in next year’s budget.” Today, he notes, “The government tabled a budget that dramatically increases the size of the state. As a result, the tax relief is neither broad-based nor all inclusive.”

The 2007 Budget limits tax relief to low-income Canadians, families with children, and it reaffirms already announced tax breaks for seniors, including pension splitting. The Conservative government opted against a broad-based personal income tax cut.

Source:

http://www.taxpayer.com/main/news.php?news_id=2515

sharkman · June 9, 2007

Ah yes, the tax increase the Liberals keep moaning about. Wasn't that concerning a small tax decrease by Martin that Harper reversed before it even had an effect?

Of course spending is up, we have been in the hottest economy for a few years now. And in certain programs, like Employment Insurance, spending is down. Big deal. And what was the most recent federal surplus again?

What does that mean exactly, spend down the federal surplus. Isn't the correct phrasing to spend down the federal debt?

Topaz · June 9, 2007

You forgot some things Harper's has also done... the biggest military spending ever! Sure, we need equipment but isn't best to go slow so you don't over spend?? We'll be out of the war by the time the equipment is ready, broken more promises than any other PM, this government is the most rude, misbehaved group I've ever seen! THe CPC may have more money than any other parties, but what good is money if you turn off the voters and that is what Harper does when he opens his mouth! I'm ready for an election any time but Harper doesn't dare call one, because he's going to lose several front bench ministers and some back benchers! I guess you could call him a half-as PM which goes with his powers!

sharkman · June 9, 2007

It was the Liberals who upped spending on the military, if Harper had cancelled this we'd have liberals complaining about it, and rightfully so. Chretien slashed military spending and closed bases starting in the early nineties, making our soldiers hitch rides to their destinations on American forces jets and by other means. They've also had to wear uniforms not correct for the regions they have been in, making them stick out nicely for snipers. So, context is everything, isn't it?

And of course, the helicopters and other broken down machinery they've had to risk their lives operating have made spending on the military an overdue priority. This is one area where most on both sides of the aisle will agree.

It will take some time to correct the various messes the previous Liberal governments have done, but increasing the military budget is a good start.

jdobbin · June 9, 2007

Ah yes, the tax increase the Liberals keep moaning about. Wasn't that concerning a small tax decrease by Martin that Harper reversed before it even had an effect?

It was in effect. It wasn't something just cancelled on paper.

capricorn · June 9, 2007

I agree with Sharkman. On military spending, isn't it about time Canada stopped relying on the US for its defence? This reliance has gone on for too long and does nothing to assert our sovereignty as an independent nation.

Liberals complain that Harper is too cozy with the US to the point of calling him Bush's puppet or lap dog on every issue. Yet, when Harper tries to distance Canada from US dominance and dependency, he is attacked for taking the necessary measures. I think defence is key.

Buying military equipment is not strictly for Afghanistan. After we pull out, we will still need the equipment purchased regardless of the delivery date. That is, unless there is a change of government and we revert back to relying on the US to keep us safe.

jdobbin · June 9, 2007

I agree with Sharkman. On military spending, isn't it about time Canada stopped relying on the US for its defence? This reliance has gone on for too long and does nothing to assert our sovereignty as an independent nation.

I have no problem with an increase in military spending to outfit the troops properly.

I do have a problem when the procurement process becomes politicized under the guise of "national security" like it has been recently. This just allows that Quebec Senator Fortier to try and hijack all of the spending towards Quebec.

This is an old Tory trick that the Liberals had put in place a law to make sure that politicians couldn't do what he has been underhandedly doing these last several months.

sharkman · June 9, 2007

Chretien did much worse with the purchase of helicopters to replace the Sea Kings. First he cancelled the contract signed under Mulroney, then was promply sued by the military manufacturer. Almost a decade went by, with Sea Kings dropping with alarming frequency. Then when Chretien finally was pressured into doing something about it, they manipulated the bidding process so that the favoured French design would win the bid. This was because the best copter out there would have been the one Mulroney had chosen, and Chretien was too proud or stubborn to realize it.

jdobbin · June 9, 2007

Chretien did much worse with the purchase of helicopters to replace the Sea Kings. First he cancelled the contract signed under Mulroney, then was promply sued by the military manufacturer. Almost a decade went by, with Sea Kings dropping with alarming frequency. Then when Chretien finally was pressured into doing something about it, they manipulated the bidding process so that the favoured French design would win the bid. This was because the best copter out there would have been the one Mulroney had chosen, and Chretien was too proud or stubborn to realize it.

You won't hear me defending Chretien on the helicopter deal.

However, if you are championing Mulroney as defender of the Armed Forces, most experts will say he failed to deliver. Ask today's military who sold the heavy lift helicopters to the Dutch.

hiti · June 10, 2007

Steve's "other" accomplishments which are on his agenda if he manages to gain a majority...

1. Stephen Harper does not respect the Supreme Court of Canada, and undermines the Canadian Charter of Freedom and Rights in a biased manner. Harper will change the Supreme Court system to his liking if elected.

Canadians for Equal Marriage - Is Harper saying gays and lesbains have no human rights under the Charter?

Toronto Star - Harper unveils plan to change judiciary

Politics Canada Webpage - Harper agenda includes changes to Supreme Court

2. Warnings from handful Conservative Party members about Harper's unknown agenda due the merge of the left wings gave no time for internal policy debate and Harper's ambivalent, intolerance and discriminating attitudes on hot-button social policies (such as same-sex marriage).

CTV News - Ex-Tory MP warns of party's 'unknown agenda'

Globe and Mail - Ex-Alliance official warns on social agenda

3. $11 billions of deficit will be resulted from Conservative proposed budgets.

Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives - Can they pay for what they say?

4. 22 Canadian mayors are warning voters that a Conservative victory in the upcoming election would mean big trouble for the country's municipalities. The group of mayors described the Conservatives as "the barbarians are at the gate".

CTV News - Mayors warn against Conservative victory

CTV News - Metis leaders slam Harper, endorse Martin

5. Regressive approach towards minorities (women's rights, and First nations rights)

CBC News - Women's rights at stake if Harper wins: Morgentaler

CTV News - Metis leaders slam Harper, endorse Martin

6. Homophobic and hostile attitudes towards gay and lesbian Canadians. (Larry Spenser, Cheryl Gallant, Frank Luellau, Conservative MPs)

Canwest News Service - Tories will tweak hate-crime law

Globe and Mail - How far would he go to stop gay marriage?

7. Harper's Conservative Party of Canada is not the same as the Conservative Party of Sir. John A. MacDonald at all. Harper's Conservative Party is really just the old Canadian Alliance becomes larger. Harper has a secret plan to fight the social order from the left.

CanWest News Service - Harper essay warned of sliding social order, need to fight left

8. Non-supportive of Canada heritage of bilingualism.(Scott Reid, Conservative MP)

CBC News - Conservative language critic resigns

9. Return of death penalty to Canada (Tom Jackson, Conservative MP)

10. Increased involvement in warfare and military spending, which is not a Canadian peacemaker value. (Stephen Harper, Conservative Leader).

http://bp1.blogger.com/_wAK2AbRU4ds/Rmq7zC...ow_bush_GIF.gif

nbguyca · June 10, 2007

Yes that Universal Child Care Program is fantastic. Although I did find out that once my son turned 6, he didn't need child care anymore and what was thgat other thing.... og ya... the bemefits that we did receive were taxable.

Yup, it's a good program.