Poll: Canadians Disappointed With All Parties

While the new Nanos poll told us that the Conservatives and NDP were in a statistical tie, that doesn’t mean that either party was particularly liked and when it comes to choosing between the major parties to form a government, Canadians are dragging their feet.

In a poll conducted on April 13 and 14, 1002 respondents were asked to assign one word to each political party.

“We basically asked people to role-play and assume that each of the federal parties was a person and to use one word to describe their personalities,” pollster Nik Nanos explained to The Globe and Mail. “Envision a social gathering at your home and the federal parties are there and they are people. This is how, as the host, you would probably feel about them.”

The results proved that this social gathering would have many unwanted guests.

In short, the survey found that Conservatives are untrustworthy, New Democrats are socialist, Liberals are incompetent, Greens eco-friendly and Bloc Quebecois useless.

“A lot of people had swear words and very rude words for all of the parties,” Nanos said. “We put them under ‘bad/incompetent.’ So that particular category also includes swear words and things that we thought were too rude to put in a data table.”

The Conservatives were also described as conservative, bad/incompetent, good, trustworthy, controlling, and arrogant. Roughly half of the responses were negative.

The NDP were described as caring, bad/incompetent, good, new, innovative and trustworthy and a bit less than half of their responses were negative

The Liberals only got endorsements out of 4 of the top 15 responses. Bad/incompetent, untrustworthy, good, competent, progressive, powerful, and arrogant are terms that have been used to describe them.

However, it can’t get worst than the Bloc who was described as narrow-minded, aggressive, boring, incompetent and useless.

“What is lethal for a party is the perception that it is irrelevant,” Nanos said. “There is a difference between people not agreeing with your party or not liking your party and [your party] not being relevant. ... It is obvious that for a significant number of [Quebecers], they just don’t see the Bloc as a relevant political option.”

The poll doesn’t have a margin of error but the firm believes that the final batch of data best describes Canadian opinion at the time of research.

“It would be fair to say that these questions are bad news for everyone in one way or another,” he said. “And I think that, if any of the parties want to break away, it is clear that they have to deal with their underlying brand and the level of cynicism and disappointment and anger that is out there amongst average Canadians.”

These results are of no surprise to me where a lot of people I know don’t have a positive outlook over any of the existing parties, or their members. Considering low turnout and increasing apathy in the past elections, it is clear that people aren’t inspired by any of their options and don’t see their relevance. If a party was truly inspiring and truly did give off a positive vibe, Canadians would have embraced said leader/party and would have come out in large numbers to get that choice. The reality remains that they didn’t in the past elections and as things continue to get grim in Canadian politics, we will see how many will show up in the next one.

How do you feel about your political options? Do you think Canada needs a new political party? Follow us and leave your feedback: Facebook,Twitter,Google+.

Kent: Muzzling scientists “established practice”

Environment Minister Peter Kent defended his government’s disdain and censorship of scientific facts claiming it was an “established practice.” This comes as the government plans to axe Environment Canada and cripple environmental assessments in their effort to quickly push forward the keystone pipeline project.

The entire practice of sending Environment Canada scientists an email telling them that they need government approval to present data at a recorded conference on polar issues reminds me of how George W Bush dealt with similar tactics in the United States – even having former oil company executives in the environment department.

“There is nothing new in the email that was sent to attendees,” Kent said.

“It is established practice to coordinate media availability. In fact, many of our younger scientists seek advice from our departmental communications staff.”

The award-winning broadcast journalist also stated that the media was to blame for causing problems when they forced scientists to answer inappropriate questions.

“Where we run into problems is when journalists try to lead scientists away from science and into policy matters,” Kent said. “When it comes to policy, ministers address those issues.”

NDP Environment Critic Megan Leslie rejected Kent’s approach and suggested the government was trying to assign “babysitters” to scientists as a means of harassment.

“Why is the minister putting a gag order on scientists?” she asked.

“A senior Environment Canada expert called the new media guidelines unethical and enormously embarrassing to our country on the world stage,” Leslie said. “Will the minister explain how interfering in media access to our scientists fits in with the government’s so-called open government approach?”

This isn’t the first time Kent has come under fire. I am sure no one can forget the time when he failed to explain what the Ozone Layer was to Liberal MP Justin Trudeau.

In an open letter addressed to Kent in Embassy Magazine, a group of science writers and the head of a labor union questioned the hypocrisy of the minister.

“While we can accept that some members of the Conservative cabinet might not agree with our stand on the muzzling of government scientists, we are shocked that you with your long and distinguished career in journalism would not just appreciate why we have taken a stand, but vigorously support it,” they wrote.

The letter also noted Kent’s resignation as anchorman on CBC’s The National in 1978 when he petitioned the CRTC to hold back its renewal until its management “created procedures and protocols to prevent political interference in editorial decision-making.”

“What we did expect, given your distinguished and extensive background in journalism, was that when a reporter questioned you about the present muzzling of federal scientists by the Conservative government, the 2012 incarnation of the man who was recipient of the 2006 President’s Award from the Radio-Television News Directors Association of Canada would have said that not only are you against it, but that if the muzzling doesn’t stop, you will be submitting your resignation to the Prime Minister,” said the letter.

However, let us not forget the tight control Harper has on his ministers and let us not forget the fact that Harper is affiliated with pro-oil groups and right-wing organizations and let us not forget Harper’s own hypocrisy when it comes to foreign policy.

Considering this, in principle, why hasn’t Kent resigned? Is the pension, benefits and salary too good to lose? Or perhaps, Kent doesn’t believe in freedom of speech after all? We want to hear your answers! Follow us and leave your feedback: Facebook,Twitter,Google+.

Double Standards and a Deteriorating Environment

A picture is worth a thousand words.

While Harper criticizes Cuba’s communist regime and human rights policies, he has meanwhile made deals with the Chinese to form a trade relationship which would see Chinese companies flock to Canada to extract oil from Alberta’s Tar Sands.

Meanwhile, the United States has vetoed our oil and an American organization launched an ad campaign against the Tar Sands in the past. Environmentalists and activists are in an uproar and are consequently being slammed as radical extremists being funded by Americans. Let us not forget, however, Harper’s links to Ethical Oil and Sun Media (proponents of the project) and of the funds he received from American oil lobbyists.

Environmental assessments have been cut deliberately to speed the process of the destruction and sale of the oil sands which are situated near countless green spaces which include wildlife that will become endangered and extinct with the deforestation project and various consequences of placing a pipeline between Alberta and British Columbia.

Let us not forget the Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico when we decide to place an oil pipe in a heavily sensitive region.

The oil sands are getting a negative response in Europe and Former Cuban President Fidel Castro came out publically criticizing Canada’s environmental record which The UK’s The Guardian stated was “mired in thick black tar” during the Copenhagen summit in 2009.

“A pathetic 3% cut on their 1990 emissions levels by 2020 – an offer mired in thick black tar.”

The Guardian, November 2009

If Canada is willing to trade with China, a country which Harper himself criticized when first taking office in 2006 for the same reasons he criticized Cuba at the last Americas summit, why does it apply this double standard, even when the two countries traded in the past during a US embargo? Follow us and leave your feedback: Facebook,Twitter,Google+.

Albertans Give Provincial Tories Majority

In what could have been a historic shift in Alberta that some warned could have put the unity of our country at stake, Albertans gave the ruling Progressive Conservatives another chance at governance.

 

	Seats	Share of Vote
	59	44%
	21	34%
	4	10%
	3	9%

Alison Redford has been elected in her riding of Calgary-Elbow and declared Premier for another term.

Redford will be facing a Wildrose Official Opposition lead by Danielle Smith who was elected in her riding of Highwood.

These results are not final but what is is that the Progressive Conservatives won a majority government in what will be a historic election.

The results completely contradict the polls preceding the election which suggested a major shift was coming to Alberta’s political landscape favoring more rightwing party Wildrose which has Reform tendencies.

How do you feel about Alberta’s choice? Follow us and leave your feedback Facebook,Twitter,Google+.

Bev Oda: 5 Star Waste of Taxpayers’ Money

Whether Bev Oda paid her cost overruns or not, what gives her and other elected officials the right to put their hands in our piggy bank? You can hold my word for this: If I had been her boss (Prime Minister) she and many of her colleagues would have been fired for taking Canadians on a financial free ride. This isn’t a matter of ideology, this is a matter of principle, accountability and fiscal discipline.

International Co-operation Minister Bev Oda wasn’t satisfied with the Grange hotel that was provided to her in London so she went to the Savoy which is favored by royalty and spent more than double the cost she would have spent at Grange. She also spent $16 for a glass of really good orange juice!

Eight hours after the damaging news broke, Oda’s spokespeople went into damage control trying to cover her tracks by stating she repaid the difference and cancelation fees to taxpayers.

Official Opposition Leader Thomas Mulcair pounced at Oda claiming her reimbursement wasn’t sincere.

“The money for the hotel was only paid back when it was about to become public information. So there doesn’t seem to have been any sincerity in the reparation effort,” he said. “It seems to be more damage control than an honest application of the rules.”

NDP ethics critic Charlie Angus also took a swing at the news.

“Is someone over there not embarrassed by her behavior?” he asked of the Conservative caucus. “Will someone stand up and apologize to the hard-working Canadian taxpayers? She is living like a queen off their backs.”

Conservative House Leader Peter Van Loan rushed to Oda’s defense saying that the matter was settled and taxpayers were refunded.

“Our government believes very much that all ministers must respect taxpayer dollars,” he said. “The minister, of course, has repaid the costs in question.”

Perhaps Van Loan is forgetting about the gazebos and and Defense Minister Peter Mackay when he made that statement…

Liberal Deputy Leader Ralph Goodale accused Oda of only caring about herself, claiming the reimbursement wasn’t good enough.

“Especially is Ms. Oda’s case,” Goodale said, “because this is now the third or fourth incident of this kind of excess that indicates a minister far more interested in herself than interested in her clientele and her clientele include the poorest of the poor in the world.”

“I want her to stop staying at five-star-plus hotels. I want her to start being a minister who actually believes in her file that says the world’s poor need our attention, not some high-flying aristocracy,” said the NDP House Leader.

With all due politics aside, we shall add Oda’s waste to our collection of the mounting case against this Conservative Government.

The bill for her stay at Savoy was $665 per night and cost $1,995, plus $287 for the hotel she refused to stay at.

As if the hotel fiasco wasn’t enough, Oda needed fancy chauffer service too. The luxury car and driver cost $1,000 per day and wasn't not necessary – at all. There is no indication if she reimbursed us on this spending spree.

“If she had stayed at the hotel, the five-star hotel” Liberal House Leader Marc Garneau said, “there wouldn’t have been any limousine costs.”

When will government become accountable? Mark my words, if I would have been her boss, I would have fired her on the spot and that is just the beginning. But then her boss, Prime Minister Stephen Harper isn’t exactly innocent of this himself…

It is amazing to see our MPs treat themselves while they attack our pensions and our services and it is even more amusing to watch replacement governments beg us for tax hikes when they arrive to an empty piggy bank.

When will we be able to borrow from our piggy bank? It is we who funds it collectively and it is they who believe they can borrow from it for their personal affairs.

What do you think of Oda’s fussy standards and what would you have done to her if you were her boss? Follow us and leave your feedback Facebook,Twitter,Google+.

Marijuana Stances Taken By Federal Parties

Today is ‘weed day’ and whether you celebrate it or not, the issue of cannabis has been approached by all three main political parties. Lets take a look at their views. Protests are taking place around the country and 4/20 is heard in many youth-dominated areas.

Conservatives

Official stance: Possession and Sales of Marijuana is a Criminal Offense

Despite Harper’s recent announcement that getting tough on drug crimes ‘wasn’t working,’ he is still acting to bring in laws to further criminalize cannabis and impose sentencing measures that are stricter than those given to convicted pedophiles.

However, while the Conservative government has decided to copy the failed American tough on crime agenda – as confirmed by Texas Republicans in the United States, one of his senators, Pierre Claude Nolin has stood on the side of legalization of marijuana back in 2002 when a senate committee made a study into the effectiveness of Canada’s drug laws.

In the summary of the report co-authored by Nolin, we find on page 36 that he wrote:

“The Commission was also concerned that legalization would mean increased use, among the young in particular. We have not legalized cannabis, and we have one of the highest rates in the world. Countries adopting a more liberal policy have, for the most part, rates of usage lower than ours, which stabilized after a short period of growth. Thirty years later, we note that:

• Billions of dollars have been sunk into enforcement without any greater effect. There are more consumers, more regular users and more regular adolescent users;
• Billions of dollars have been poured into enforcement in an effort to reduce supply, without any greater effect. Cannabis is more available than ever, it is cultivated on a large scale, even exported, swelling coffers and making organized crime more powerful; and
• There have been tens of thousands of arrests and convictions for the possession of cannabis and thousands of people have been incarcerated. However, use trends remain totally unaffected and the gap the Commission noted between the law and public compliance continues to widen.

It is time to recognize what is patently obvious: our policies have been ineffective, because they are poor policies.”

CANNABIS: OUR POSITION FOR A CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY
REPORT OF THE SENATE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON ILLEGAL DRUGS
Chaired by Pierre Claude Nolin.
September 2002,
Page 36

In an address made in Quebec City in 2001, Nolin placed a great deal of doubt on the prohibition approach to dealing with public policy surrounding cannabis.

“I will close by stating that, should the Special Senate Committee on Illegal Drugs uses as its starting point that the current prohibition-based public policies are a failure, this is not a sign of lack of objectivity or rigour. On the contrary, this very statement is what imposed upon us the objective we set ourselves: to carry out an in-depth examination of the issue. The individual and societal damage done by drugs and by public policies relating to drugs are sufficiently significant to make us realize that the time has come for such an examination; this alone must direct the public debate.”

Pierre Claude Nolin, August 16, 2001, Quebec City

---

Liberals

Official stance: Marijuana should be legalized and regulated

In the January convention, over 77% of Liberals voted to legalize marijuana which would make way to saving $1 billion in the current cost of maintaining our prohibition approach to cannabis and would regulate and tax it as a product similar to alcohol and tobacco.

The Liberals started the move toward decriminalization in the 1990s as they allowed medical use of marijuana to become legal on prescription.

Liberals hope the new stance on marijuana will gain them ground among center-left wing youth.

“Mr. Mulcair would continue to punish pot smokers, would continue the Harper war on drugs _ a war even Mr. (Prime Minister Stephen) Harper now admits is ‘not working.’ … Only the Liberal party will take Canada in a new direction and end Mr. Harper’s failed war on drugs,” said Samuel Lavoie, president of the Young Liberals.

---

New Democrats

Official stance: Use of Marijuana should not be legal, but consequences of possession and sales should be minimized.

NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair’s spokesman George Soule released a statement confronting questions floating around Mulcair’s view of marijuana policy.

“But be very clear that Thomas Mulcair does not believe that anyone should be going to jail for possession of just a small amount of pot. Criminalization is not the answer for any area of social policy.”

However, on Global TV, shortly before winning the leadership race, Mulcair said decriminalizing marijuana would be a “mistake because the information that we have right now is that the marijuana that’s on the market is extremely potent and can actually cause mental illness.”

---

Where do you stand on Marijuana policy? Follow us and leave your feedback Facebook,Twitter,Google+.

Firm misdirected Northern Ontario voters says former employee

A former employee of the Responsive Marketing Group, hired by the Conservatives during last year’s election campaign, says she wrongly informed votes in a northern Ontario riding. In a sworn affidavit by Annette Desgagne she states that she called voters in the riding of Nipissing-Tamiskaming to tell them to vote at a place other than what was indicated on their election card.

Desgagne said that she made the calls off of a script given to her by the company that had been making calls to identify Conservative voters for numerous Conservative candidates.

“I talked to many people all over Canada over the three days in advance of the election, reading from the change of address script,” Desgagne said in the April 13, 2012 affidavit.

The document was given to Federal Court to support a motion to overthrow last years election results in 7 ridings. Only one of which, Vancouver Island had a legitimate polling change.

Ridings Being Overthrown:

• Don Valley East in Ontario, won by Conservative MP Joe Daniel by 870 votes.
• Nipissing-Timiskaming in Ontario, won by Conservative MP Jay Aspin by 18 votes.
• Saskatoon-Rosetown-Biggar in Saskatchewan, won by Conservative Kelly Block by 538 votes.
• Vancouver Island North in B.C., won by Conservative John Duncan by 1,827 votes.
• Winnipeg South Centre in Manitoba, won by Conservative MP Joyce Bateman by 722 votes.
• Elmwood-Transcona in Manitoba, won by Conservative MP Lawrence Toet by 300 votes.
• Yukon won by Conservative Ryan Leef by 132 votes

Nipissing-Tamiskaming was one of the ridings with the closest outcomes where the Liberal incumbent Anthony Rota lost by a mere 18 votes to Conservative Jay Aspin.

The affidavit also states how a supervisor named Stephanie ignored Desgagne’s concerns and told her to keep making the calls according to script.

“There was a general feeling of confusion amongst the callers as the supervisors walked the floor and repeated ‘stick to the script.’

Our concerns were ignored and we had to keep reading and repeating the same scripts about changes of address for polling stations made by Elections Canada.”

Desgagne said in the affidavit

The court challenge was presented by the Council of Canadians in the name of individuals in the affected ridings that were mislead and have claimed to be contacted fraudulently.

This is the first court action since the news of Robocall broke and is acting on 7 out of 200 ridings which Elections Canada said were effected in the last election.

The Conservatives denied wrong doing and knowledge after having Dean Del Mastro defend them while stating different positions and often stating that the entire fiasco was nothing more than a smear campaign.

Conservative lawyer Arthur Hamilton said that he will try to get the court order thrown out as he says it is “flawed” and he characterized it as a “publicity stunt.”

But no one could have been more public than the Republican-linked firm that touted its aid for the Conservative campaign and may have broken section 331 of the Canada Elections Act leading to consequences of a $2000 fine or 6 months in prison if intention is proven.

Read more about it here: Tories got Republican Helping Hand Last May?

Are you surprised to hear the latest news about the affidavit confirming illegitimate calls were made? Feel free to follow us and leave your feedback Facebook,Twitter,Google+.

Tories Got Republican Helping Hand Last May?

The robocall scandal is taking new directions and each of which spell trouble for the Conservative Party. In light of the robocall scandal, Republican-linked firm Front Porch Strategies, which the Conservatives hired in 14 of its campaigns, admitted that it sent American campaigners to at least two Conservative-won ridings that are being investigated for election irregularities.

If this isn’t bad enough, the Vancouver Observer found that the company’s CEO Matthew Parker had advertised that he was in Assistant Defense Minister Julian Fantino’s campaign office during the 2011 election.

However, Parker would not be the only American campaigning for a Canadian MP, director of Front Porch Strategies PJ Wenzel was found helping Conservative MP Rick Dykstra, the parliamentary secretary of Immigration Minister Jason Kenney.

Considering the public approach to announcing this information, the Conservatives are left contradicted over the claim that the company only conducted phone calls.

To continue adding insult to injury, on April 20, the company tweeted that it had sent ground troops in Dykstra’s riding.

So what is wrong with having Republican campaigners come up to Canada? According to the Canada Elections Act Section 331, it is illegal for non-residents to participate directly in Canadian election campaigns. Based on this, the Conservatives may have broken election law by having American strategists mobilize to try to get a Conservative win.

“No person who does not reside in Canada shall, during an election period, in any way induce electors to vote or refrain from voting or vote or refrain from voting for a particular candidate unless the person is (a) a Canadian citizen; or (b) a permanent resident.”

Canada Elections Act Section 331

If proven to be intentional, the Conservatives will face the consequences, including a $2,000 fine, 6 months in prison, or both.

“They were in Ontario for a day and a half (in April), for the purpose of acquiring new clients. They knocked on doors for roughly an hour with Rick, traditional canvassing to identify support. While waiting for a delayed meeting they made roughly 30 minutes worth of phone calls for Minister Fantino, again to identify support,” political consultant for the company, Jim Ross said.

“Other than teleforums, brief incidental volunteerism as described above over the course of a day and a half that was mostly spent trying to acquire new clients. There was no other involvement.”

Well, that isn’t entirely true, on May 2, election day, the company announced it was on the ground as “Conservatives are taking over Parliament.”

The company denied allegations that they masked illegal calls from Ohio. Ross stated that the calls were “malicious and illegal,” but “sound like errors interpreted as intentional misdirection.”

However, contrary to their remarks, a group challenging the election results of 7 ridings affected by robocalls argues that there were no changes to polling stations in 6 of the ridings affected.

"I am advised that [Vancouver Island North] is the only electoral district in the seven involved in these applications in which a change of polling station took place," Barbara McIsaac said.

Elections Canada won’t directly comment on the case, stating that it will receive and go through complaints and consider the circumstances of the event.

Do you think the foreign presence during the last election campaign was intentional? Feel free to follow us and leave your feedbackFacebook,Twitter,Google+.

Thirty Years of Freedom: Tories Don’t Care

Today marks the thirtieth anniversary of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. While other countries that used it as a model for their own freedoms and rights may be celebrating, along with every person who cares about their freedom, the Conservatives aren’t and have openly criticized the charter.

"In terms of this as an anniversary, I think it's an interesting and important step, but I would point out that the charter remains inextricably linked to the patriation of the Constitution and the divisions around that matter, which as you know are still very real in some parts of the country," said Prime Minister Stephen Harper in a statement.

While national unity may be Harper’s recent criticism of the charter, this isn't the first time Conservatives have criticized it.

"If the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is going to be used as the crutch to carry forward all of the issues that social libertarians want, then there's got to be for us conservatives out there a way to put checks and balances in there," said former Conservative MP Randy White during the 2004 election.

So do the Conservatives believe in free speech? It is thanks to this charter that we are all allowed to express our views but when it comes to opposition views, the Conservatives have done everything in their power to oppress them. Those who are concerned about the environment have been muzzled and should they attack the oil sands project, the Conservatives will respond with audits, smears and law suits.

Harper’s Conservatives are the same Conservatives who wanted to ban gay rights and reopen the abortion debate. Whether you believe in, pro-life or pro-choice, do you really want a government dictating who is right?

The Conservatives have demonstrated on multiple levels that the only values that are acceptable to Canadian society are the ones they share and based on Harper’s rant on getting a majority government, it appears his tolerance for differences is minimal.

Despite the Conservative failure on the front of freedom and rights in the spiritual and applied realms, people are celebrating the fact that we have rights and freedoms in this country and despite having the most controlling government in history, at least we still have that.

The charter’s co-creator as Justice Minister under the Trudeau government and former Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chretien has been vocal in his celebrations in what is one of the world’s greatest achievements.

“It is a Canadian accomplishment. The government of the day was a Liberal government. The negotiations with the provinces [were] long and we had to debate that in the committees of the House of Commons and the Senate, and we had to go to London. It was a lot of work,” Chretien recalled.

Canadians have a lot to be proud of with our charter and our identity and it is a shame that while Harper has the money, resources and will to celebrate the war of 1812, he doesn’t have the money, resources or will to celebrate a charter that has not only shaped Canadian culture, but has also impacted many countries around the world who used us as a model to establish a foundation of freedom and human rights of their own.

Considering Stephen Harper’s unwillingness to celebrate the charter, disdain for gay rights, and utter demand for power, does he really care about our freedoms and rights? Feel free to follow us and leave your feedback Facebook,Twitter,Google+.

Tory Cuts Endanger Canadians

For a government that touted its record on public safety, this budget shows that its priority is anything but. Instead of cutting the bureaucrats they added when elected in 2006, the Conservatives took a direct assault on services Canadians need.

More than 1,100 people were cut at the Canada Border Services Agency, making it easier for escaped convicts and terrorists to get into Canada and endanger Canadians – but the Conservatives didn’t think about that.

“These cuts fully contradict the government’s supposed commitment to improved border security and completely undermine the announced emphasis on intelligence-led border security in the Canada-U.S. Beyond the Border Agreement,” said president of the Customs and Immigration Union, Jean-Pierre Fortin.

Cuts to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency include 600 people where 100 food inspection jobs are going to be wiped out putting the safety of our food into midair. In 2008, listeriosis struck Maple Leaf meats and it was proven that the contaminant took advantage of the plant due to lessened inspection. During the outbreak, more than 22 Canadians died because they ate what they thought were safe meat products.

“Now we’re back to square one,” NDP MP Malcolm Allen said. “It’s not a good day for consumers.”

The Conservatives say they are building a leaner government.

“What we are doing is eliminating waste and unnecessary duplication – and leaner, more affordable government is in the interest of all Canadians,” Treasury Board spokesperson, Jenn Gearey said.

If the Conservatives truly wanted a leaner government, they would and could have done the following:

• Reformed the electoral system to represent Canadians and cut the House of Commons down to 100 seats (instead of adding 30 seats in areas where Conservatives have good prospects)
• Abolished the senate and transferred these powers to the people
• Halved MP salaries and stripped perks for high-end bureaucrats
• Slashed golden MP pensions – including that of the Prime Minister (instead of attacking Canadian pensions)
• Fired a great bulk of the PMO which they built to be the largest in history.
• Cut spending in the propaganda department
• Not go ignorantly into an expensive F-35 contract when Americans even tell you it’s a bad idea
• Use facts instead of cutting and crippling Statistics Canada to base your decisions off of
• Based on these facts, realize that while Texas warns you their system doesn’t work, crime rates are at an all time low and we don’t need a $13 billion prison project to be offloaded onto the provinces.
• Get rid of useless ministries like the new Office of Religious Freedom

The above is only a sample of things they could have done to cut the massive deficit that they created and slim down the government that they made the biggest in our history. And not to mention all of the waste that the government has been committing to over the years.

But while Canadians are put at risk, we can always be reassured that the Prime Minister and his staff will be safe – and they will be in luxurious conditions too.

The government will build barricades around Parliament Hill for $9 million and build a glass dome up-top the House of Commons for $42 million.

Now, for the Tory attack room, considering you chose glass to build your new home, maybe it isn’t a good idea to throw rocks at the opposition anymore, you never know when that glass house of yours may break!

What do you think, how should the government have dealt with wasteful spending? Feel free to follow us and leave your feedback Facebook,Twitter, Google+.

Government Waste Rampant Under Tory Rule

For a government that claims to be good economic managers, they sure can afford to waste a lot of money during rough economic times. Having increased spending by over 40% when they initially took office in 2006, the Harper Conservatives managed to get Canada into deficit before the World’s economic crisis ever happened. In fact, if the economic crisis wouldn't have happened, the Conservatives would have been exposed as the worst economic managers in history – even beating Mulroney when the deficit struck $56 billion.

The reality is: 13 years of debt repayment under the Liberals was squandered in a couple of years of Tory rule and as we look at their spending decisions and the way they decided to manage taxpayer money, we see that they have spent an excess on themselves and things we don’t need.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper had a lot of fun at a baseball game in Manhattan during the Labor Day weekend last fall, and it cost us at least $45,000. Documents obtained by CBC under Access to Information reveal only parts of the trips cost. The use of the challenger jet cost $34,633, the four staffers that joined the private family trip cost $11,026. When did taxpayer money become free spending money for the Prime Minister and his staff? There are still costs that are unknown. RCMP officers joined but as usual, the RCMP and PMO stay quiet on how much it cost. The RCMP cited a security breach as the reason it refuses to hand over the costing documents for that trip.

The PMO at the time stated that the Prime Minister paid back the expenses. His spokesperson Julie Vaux said, "Prime Minister Harper makes it a practice of reimbursing the government for personal travel. As the prime minister is prohibited from flying commercial for security reasons, he also compensates the government for the cost of an equivalent commercial flight. In this case, he compensated for the flight for himself, his daughter, and guests at the cost of a commercial fare for each."

The cost of a commercial flight is less than the cost of taking the Challenger Jet.

This isn’t the first time the Prime Minister did this, do you remember the hockey game?

Meanwhile, where do the PMO stand on luxury expenses?

"Are travel/hospitality/conference expenses being provided at the lowest possible cost?" Privy Council Staffer Todd Pilon’s answer: “No. Normally yes with the exception of the selection of hotels as this is decided by the PMO."

"Are economical and efficient alternatives being considered such as teleconferencing, videoconferencing, or any other?" Answer: "No. This is not up to us as we respond directly to PMO request for trips."

No Prime Minister or MP or staffer should ever be allowed to run their costs on the tab of the taxpayers.

Defense Minister Peter Mackay is guilty of wasting our money on his personal expenses, and so is our top Military Officer. Tony Clement got Gazebos out of a Border Security fund at the cost of $50 million. Labor Minister Lisa Raitt liked her expensive lunches and perks too when she was a bureaucrat.

The list of Government Waste is getting long, here’s a sample:

• Harper’s Hockey Game
• Gazebos cost us $50 million
• Peter Mackay and his staff take our money for a ride
• Bureaucratic decisions that don't put efficient money management first
• Lisa Raitt and her expenditures as a bureaucrat
• Canada's top soldier is entitled to spending our money on his trip to the Bermuda's?

It is time to crack down on Government Waste. As this government announces cuts that will harm food safety, border safety, the environment, pensions and so many other fields, it is about time that we start taking a look into their expenditures and make it our mission to hold them to account for every penny nickel of our money that they waste.

What do you think, should we hold governments to account for their waste? Feel free to follow us and leave your feedback Facebook,Twitter, Google+.

MacKay Admits Government Mislead for 2 Years on F-35

Defense Minister Peter MacKay admitted today that the government knew for two years that the F-35 contract would cost $10 billion more than was said to Parliament and the Canadian people.

Auditor General Michael Ferguson released his report slamming the military for hiding this information and echoing the initial whistleblowing of Budgetary Watchdog Kevin Page. The issue caused the last election as the Harper government was placed in contempt of Parliament and consequently won a majority win while illegal activity took place in 200 confirmed ridings.

“I can’t speak to individuals who knew it, but it was information that was prepared within National Defense, and it’s certainly my understanding that that would have been information that, yes, that the government would have had.”

Auditor General Michael Ferguson

MacKay admitted that he knew the cost of the F-35 project was pegged at $25 billion but dismissed the extra $10 billion as the cost of staff and operation,

"Yes, and it was explained to me just that way, that the additional $10 billion was money that you could describe as sunk costs, that is what we're paying our personnel, and the fuel that is currently being expended in CF-18s, jet fuel, maintenance costs, what we are currently spending. So not part of a new acquisition," MacKay said.

The opposition has called for resignations which MacKay dismissed.

MacKay argued that no money was spent on the project.

"This money has not been spent. No money is missing," he said.

But before MacKay admitted to wrong doing, he claimed that the $10 billion difference was caused by “accounting.”

“There’s a different interpretation in the all-up costs at arriving at $25-billion,” Mr. MacKay told CTV’s Question Period. “And that information goes back to the year 2010. Those figures are there for all to see.”

Pundits have used the sponsorship scandal to compare the situation where the government purposely mislead Canadians over misspent money. However, the difference is that sponsorship dealt with millions of dollars and the F-35 scandal deals with billions.

“I have a very direct question,” Liberal Interim Leader Bob Rae told Harper in the House of Commons. “When was the Prime Minister first aware that the true cost of the proposed aircraft was $25 billion? On what date was he aware of this fact?”

Harper responded, “I understand the honorable member’s in need for attention these days Mr. Speaker.”

Harper then tried to downplay the issue claiming, “there are no consequences to this point because the government has not spent any money on the acquisition of aircraft.”

Considering that Harper has led the most controlled and coordinated government in Canadian history, even renaming it to the Harper government, it would be shocking if he really didn’t know and if this response was nothing more than an attempt to dodge the question and an attempt to dodge accountability.

The opposition is calling for resignations and for a matter that costs $10 billion of taxpayers’ money, they have every right to.

What do you think, should Defense staff and the Prime Minister resign over the F-35 scandal? Feel free to follow us and leave your feedback! Facebook,Twitter, Google+.

Tory Pension Reform: People First, MPs Later

Flaherty’s new budget outlined the increase of retirement age from 65 to 67 but meanwhile the golden pensions of MPs remain in tact and will only be discussed this fall. Again, the Conservatives put ideology ahead of the wellbeing of the population, but don’t count on the opposition to provide a real alternative.

Government sources say that changes will be made to the age of entitlement and benefit levels of MPs though none of the changes will take effect until after the 2015 election campaign.

In the meantime the only change that was addressed happened to make MPs contribute on a 50/50 model rather than the 23/1 model that had us paying 96% of their pensions.

"The fact that they put their own bank accounts ahead of the country at the same time as they are asking others to sacrifice, it's really disappointing," said Gregory Thomas, the federal director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation.

MPs start collecting their pensions at 55 and receive benefits including 75% of their salary. Unlike Canadians’, MP pensions are immune from any disruptions to the stock market and are indexed to inflation.

MPs aren’t the only ones with benefits and golden pensions. In 1992, Progressive Conservative Prime Minister Brian Mulroney brought in a special allowance for prime ministers who served more than four years which can be collected from the age of 65 or when they cease being an MP.

This allowance gives retired Prime Ministers two thirds of their salaries. Harper will receive $104,000 per year.

“Mr. Harper proposes raising the age of retirement to 67,” Liberal MP Justin Trudeau said. “We propose he does the same thing for his special pension.”

The NDP opposition, while saying that the matter should be handled by an independent body, aren’t very supportive of cuts to their pensions. Take Newfoundland MP Ryan Cleary as an example.

“I work my butt off,” Cleary said. “Would I deserve a pension of $28,000 after six years? Probably not. It should be more than that.”

MP pensions are not the only piece of government waste. There is also MP salaries, the senate and a great bulk of unneeded bureaucrats. The Conservatives added them, and the opposition won’t get rid of them. Let’s be crystal clear, we are footing the bill for these expenses and these expenses are not only unnecessary and wasteful, they are unacceptable.

To top it all economists have stated that Old Age Security doesn’t need to be cut.

Where is our alternative? Seems it doesn’t exist. How unfortunate. Regardless who forms the government, Canadians won’t get a break.

Feel free to follow us and leave your feedback! Facebook,Twitter, Google+.