One Bad Apple Spoils the Bunch

Is it just me or are the semi-regular apologies being forced out of the Federal Conservative caucus wearing a little thin?

When will the people of Canada wake up and realize that the rot now being exposed among members of Parliament isn’t a problem with individuals alone. It also isn’t something that can be fixed with a forced and largely insincere apology. It’s a serious and dangerous attitude problem that is not only being condoned inside the Conservative Party of Canada but encouraged.

Today Natural Resources Minister, Lisa Raitt, delivered a teary eyed apology to the media after refusing to do so for days on end in the House of Commons. She finally apologized but only after mounting attacks from the opposition and most recently from numerous cancer patients who are rightly disgusted with her attitude and with the Prime Minister's acceptance of it.

With the support she’s been shown by the Prime Minister I’m surprised Minister Raitt apologized at all. In fact with the resounding praise heaped on her by her leader in the past two days I almost expected her to begin gunning down the elderly and infirm in the streets and hungrily lap their warm blood from the asphalt.

Seriously, it should be pretty obvious to anyone that this situation is just one more example of the rot that exists inside the Conservative Party of Canada. It's a sickness of the mind that is festering and growing with each passing day in power. The Raitt case is just the latest in a string of similarly disgusting pronouncements by Conservative Members of Parliament in recent years and I'll be very surprised if it's the last.

How many of us remember Saskatchewan Conservative MP Tom Lukiwski who turned up on a long lost video tape last year referring to homosexuals as “faggots with dirt under their fingernails who transmit diseases”.

Does anyone remember how Mr. Lukiwiski was dealt with inside the Conservative caucus? Probably not, because no action was ever taken to chastise the MP or to send a message to other members that this behaviour is unacceptable.

Once again, after a staged public apology all was forgiven and Mr. Lukiwski went back to work.

What about Conservative MP Gerry Ritz, the former Minister of Health, who laughingly joked during the listeria outbreak which caused a number of deaths across the Country, that eating tainted sandwich meats was, “like death by a thousand cuts, or should I say cold cuts”.

Ritz went on to express his hope that a newly announced death in PEI was one of his adversaries on the opposite side of the House. He was supported and backed to the hilt by Stephen Harper.

On a more recent note, in fact just this week, pit bull Conservative Transport Minister, John Baird, muttered publicly that the city of Toronto itself should “just F@#K OFF”. Once again, a quick apology seems to have satisfied the Prime Minister. No sanctions will be imposed, no resignation sought and, as a result, no message will be sent to other members of the Conservative caucus.

Is it any wonder that with the Prime Minister setting such a good example the rank and file are quite comfortable acting like self satisfied A-holes?

Consider that it was the Prime Minister himself who after bailing out GM, to the tune of more than $7 billion dollars in taxpayer money, said that anyone who lost their job in the forest industry should consider moving to Fort McMurray where there are plenty of jobs if they really want to work.

I’m not saying there aren’t serious attitude problems throughout Ottawa, regardless of which party an MP is a part of, in fact I'm sure of it, but when people work every day in an environment that condons and supports such behavior it does something to the mind. A sort of mob mentality develops and the worst behavior possible is bound to increase and spread.

I don't want an angry mob running loose in the streets of my town and I certainly don't want one running the Country.

The situation Minister Raitt finds herself in now rests as much on Mr. Harper’s shoulders as it does on her own.

Not to excuse her actions, but the comments made by the Minister, which include her musing about a potential bump to her political career and about taking all the credit for resolving a serious medical crisis affecting thousands of people across the Country, are a direct result of her environment and the attitude within it. She probably thought what she was saying was just fine based on her experiences inside the Conservative caucus.

On the tape Minister Raitt came across as quite comfortable with the shortage of medical isotopes and their effect on cancer and other diagnostic imaging tests. She seemed almost happy when referring to the problem as “sexy” because it dealt with “cancer” and “radioactive leaks”. This is not the attitude most of us expect from a Member of Parliament, but then again, it only takes one bad apple to spoil the bunch and when the worst rot of all exists in the biggest apple in the pile what hope is there for the entire crop?

Is The Mainstream Media Bias or Simply Negligent?

It’s a question I’ve been pondering more and more in recent years.

Examples of structural problems in today’s media are as easy to find these days as snowflakes on a January morning in Winnipeg.

Before Christmas television news outlets were all too willing to spoon feed the public snippets of Conservative MPs referring to a potential Liberal-NDP coalition as a “Coup” or calling the actions of the opposition “illegal” or “immoral”. They were far less willing to clarify those partisan words by informing the public that the position espoused was untrue, non-factual and an out and out lie.

The Canadian Parliamentary system is designed to permit exactly the sort of coalition that was being contemplated but unless the viewer had already informed him or herself of this fact the media was not about to take on that job.

Another example now being splashed across the front pages across Canada is the ongoing battle between Ottawa and Newfoundland & Labrador over the Atlantic Accord.

On the surface it might seem that a great deal of attention is being paid to this particular dust up but in realty very few of the facts have ever seen the light of day.

The act of ignoring the underlying facts of any news story in Canada today has become more than simply an annoying weakness of the media. It’s seemingly become a pre-requisite for every news agency and one that threatens the ability of the electorate to make informed decisions about the direction their Country takes on any issue.

With the introduction of the Harper “fiscal stimulus” package the gloves have once again come off between the Province and Ottawa. The attack dogs have been loosed on the Province’s population by Parliament Hill and predictably the Canadian media, in its never ending quest for an attention grabbing quote, even at the expense of the facts, has missed the point of the story entirely.

Every day another headline screams, “Danny Chavez is at it again”, referring of course to Newfoundland and Labrador Premier, Danny Williams. It’s a term that the media has happily adopted to compare the Premier to Venezuelan dictator, Hugo Chavez.

The fact that Mr. Williams is not a dictator at all but is in fact a duly elected leader in Canada who enjoys an 80% approval rating doesn’t seem to matter. The fact that his continued approval by the electorate means he is doing what his constituents expect him to do matter not. Instead of being depicted as a responsive leader, regardless of his approach to specific issues, he is tarred as a dictator.

The easy surface comparison sells papers. The truth doesn’t.

The television networks incessantly play clips of Mike Duffy, formerly one of their own who was recently awarded a Senate seat for his less than unbiased coverage during the last federal election, attacking two Premiers, NL’s Williams and PEI’s Ghiz for saying that the federal budget will have a damaging impact on the Province.

No attempt is made to find out if the claim is true or not. The attacks sell advertising time. The truth does not.

Pundits and editorialists are all too happy to perpetuate the biases and talking points of federal politicians as they rally to defend “all Canadians” from the greedy and demanding people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

One can only assume from their position that Canada’s 30 million souls are in extreme danger from the 500 thousand people in Newfoundland and Labrador, a place that it seems must not be a part of the Country if Canadians need to be defended from its actions.

The news media finds easy to preface every sentence related to the $1.6 Billion dollars involved in the dispute with the tag line, “according to Mr. Williams the federal budget will…”. It would be far harder and require much more effort to actually investigate whether the Province is truly being targeted by the Conservative government or not.

This approach to informing, or more accurately, misinforming the public tells us far more about the mainstream media itself than it does about any story they might be covering on a given day.

It tells us, or ought to tell us, that most reporters, editors and news managers are not in the business of reporting the facts but of producing a steady diet of ready to eat, easy to digest, fluff for the sole purpose of attracting a larger audience and, as a direct result, securing more of those lucrative advertising dollars that pay their salaries.

I challenge anyone who has followed the ongoing battle between Ottawa and the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador over the past 3 governments (one Liberal and two Conservative) to think of a single mainstream news outlet, be it the Globe and Mail, National Post, CBC or CTV that has actually taken on the task of investigating the situation thoroughly and reporting the facts behind the headlines.

It isn’t easy is it?

Personally I can’t think of a single one that has been willing to move past the political rhetoric on both sides of the argument, go directly to the bean counting bureaucrats who manage the day to day operations of both the federal and provincial finance departments and actually investigate the story as most Canadians assume reporters are supposed to do.

Not one.

Instead these so called “news” agencies now serve as little more than a venue for the regurgitation of whatever they are told by politicians with a vested interest in the situation and, in the case of national media outlets, more often than not that means providing the public with a daily diet of spin provided by partisan staffers and Federal MPs.

Recently Newfoundland and Labrador MP, Judy Foote, who was the first “uncooperative” MP to be dubbed “the Newfoundland Six” by the media for their refusal to support the budget vote, sent me an email in which she summed up the struggle taking place inside the Liberal caucus and on Parliament hill generally over the Accord issue.

According to Ms. Foote, “One of the problems in Ottawa is getting people to understand the seriousness of the situation. I can talk until I am blue in the face…”

Her words belie her frustration.

When she sent that email, which was before Michael Ignatieff gave his Newfoundland and Labrador caucus a so called “free pass”, Ms. Foote was frustrated at a situation where she had been unable to make her fellow MPs understand that the legislation they were about to pass would have dire consequences for her Province and her people and set a bad precedent across the Country.

Ms Foote’s words also convey a general lack of knowledge within federal political circles, not only over the impact of the budget in the region, but of the Newfoundland and Labrador’s place in Canada.

With the media blindly relaying the uninformed position of federal political figures, is it any wonder Danny Williams could only find one Canadian Premier, from PEI, who was willing to stand up and support his Province’s position, a move that led to the political hatchet job delivered by Senator Duffy in is maiden address to the Red Chamber.

Perhaps American comedian and SNL Alumnus, Al Franken, said it the best when he said, “The biases the media has are much bigger than conservative or liberal. They're about getting ratings, about making money, about doing stories that are easy to cover.”

Those words do not just convey a problem within the media itself but foreshadow a situation that has the potential to affect the direction of the entire Nation.

Is it surprising that the general public across Canada has so easily adopted the misguided belief that the Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador is acting as a dictator, that the people are simply greedy and that the Province wants to have their cake and eat it too?

It isn’t.

That’s a story far easier to deliver and for the public to digest than one that identifies the inequities, political games, partisanship, lies, propaganda and systemic unfairness that is an everyday reality of the Canadian federation today.

The stories making the headlines may be easy to accept and they may sell papers but do they really serve the best interests of the public who must ultimately make the decision on the direction their Country should take?

Canada’s constitutional coup: A warning to the working class

The following contains excerpts from an article that appeared on the web site "International" today and is worth a read.

It outlines the facts about what happened at the hand of the Governor General on Thursday, the postition taken by the governing Conservative party and why the combination of the two are so destructive and undemocratic.

The article presents the facts in such a way that even devout partisans of all political stripes should be able to understand the true implications of the recent events in Ottawa.

In a flagrant attack on parliamentary norms and democratic rights, Canada's minority Conservative government, in conjunction with the unelected governor-general, has shut down the country's national parliament in order to prevent the opposition parties from ousting the government in a non-confidence vote scheduled for Monday.

Never before in Canada or, for that matter, any other country that follows the British parliamentary pattern, has a government prorogued parliament for the express purpose of avoiding a non-confidence vote.

Two further facts underline the arbitrary and undemocratic character of Governor-General Michaëlle Jean's decision to grant Prime Minster Stephen Harper his request that parliament be suspended until January 26:

* In an election less than eight weeks ago, Canadians once again denied the Conservatives a parliamentary majority, giving the three opposition parties 163 of the 308 House of Commons seats and well over half their votes. A result that should have ensured the majority of opposition members were able to place limitations and controls on the actions of a minority government.

* To demonstrate that the Conservatives had lost parliament's "confidence," and in accordance with long-established constitutional practice, the three opposition parties had officially informed the governor-general earlier this week that they were committed to defeating the government at the earliest opportunity and supporting an opposition coalition government for at least 18 months.

The suspension of parliament and of the MPs' right to defeat and replace the sitting government strikes at the most fundamental democratic right—the right of the people to choose their own government.

Turning reality on its head, the Conservatives, with the support of much of the media, have mounted a vitriolic and reactionary campaign, terming the opposition's attempt to bring to power an alternate government "illegal" and branding it an illegitimate attempt to overturn the results of the October 14 election.

They have labeled the proposed Liberal-NDP government a "separatist coalition," because the pro-Quebec independence Bloc Québécois, which has previously provided the Conservatives with their margin of victory in confidence votes, is backing it.

"That is as close to treason and sedition as I can imagine," declared Conservative MP Bob Dechert.

Even sections of the corporate media that favor the suspension of parliament concede that Harper and the Conservatives have openly incited anti-Quebec chauvinism.

In a nationally televised address Wednesday, Harper vowed to "use every legal means" at his disposal to remain in power.

Given that he has declared the opposition's attempt to form an alternate government a threat to Canada's "national unity" and "democracy," and has now shut down parliament, this vow raises the question as to how far he and his fellow Conservatives are prepared to go in subverting parliamentary and democratic procedures.

Labrador Mayor Fighting for Town's Future

The Mayor of Happy Valley-Goose Bay, Leo Abbass, has made his case for 5 Wing Goose Bay at the Atlantic Mayor’s Congress during their annual meeting held in Fredericton.

Mr. Abbass won unanimous support from the Congress for his decision to pressure the federal government on living up to its commitment for the air base in the community. Mr. Abbass would like the federal government to do what they said they would two elections ago and make the base an operational military requirement going forward.

During the 2006 federal election (that’s right, 2006, not 2008) Stephen Harper promised in writing that his government would station a rapid response battalion as well as other resources at the strategically located base. Since that time both the Prime Minister and his successive Ministers of Defense, the most recent being Peter MacKay, have ducked any questions on their true intentions for the future of 5 Wing and continue to repeat when asked, that the future of the base will be addressed “at a later time”.

During the 2006 campaign while trolling for votes in Newfoundland and Labrador Mr. Harper spelled out in his election literature and in a letter to the Premier of the province, among several other promises that have not been delivered on or broken outright, that the future of 5 Wing would be guaranteed and that the battalion would be posted there if he were elected.

Considering that the Conservatives led the government for more than two years after making that promise and since then another election has been fought, it should come as no surprise to anyone that Mayor Abbass is more than a little frustrated with a situation that so deeply impacts the future of the base and his community, a situation around which all discussion is being avoided like the plague by members of the Conservative government.

It’s doubtful that the limited power inherent in the combined weight of the Atlantic Mayors will do much to shift the federal agenda but at least they are backing Mr. Abbass who is willing to stand up and be heard. That’s really all anyone can ask of him or the Congress.

It remains to be seen if even a single Conservative MP elected in Atlantic Canada will have the backbone to listen to the constituent’s wishes and to do the same inside their caucus.

If history is any example, finding an MP with a backbone inside the Conservative party will about as easy as finding a visible minority at a Ku Klux Klan meeting.

Witness to Political Suicide

With an election looming in mid October the swords are beginning to rattle and the battle is heating up to shut out the federal conservatives in Newfoundland and Labrador.

After backtracking on written promises to exclude non-renewable resources from the equalization formula, walking away from a commitment to custodial management of fish stocks on the Grand Banks and the Flemish Cap, stonewalling on a promise to station a battalion at 5 Wing Goose Bay and reportedly telling Premier Danny Williams, “…I don’t need Newfoundland and Labrador in order to win…” it’s no surprise the wheels are beginning to fall off Stephen Harper’s Conservative bandwagon in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Shortly after helping to pass the budget that is estimated to have cost Newfoundland and Labrador $10 billion in resource revenues Conservative MP Norm Doyle was the first to read the writing on the wall and quickly announced that he would be retiring from politics when the next election was called. The Conservative’s other two MPs in the Province, Loyola Hearn and Fabian Manning, were not as astute in their assessment of the impact supporting the Prime Minister would have on their careers and continued in spite of a growing wave of anger against them. This week, for one of them at least, the attempt to weather a pending storm has finally come to an end.

Before the writ has even been dropped reports are beginning to surface that long time Conservative MP and Federal Fisheries Minister, Loyola Hearn, will not be seeking re-election. No doubt the reality of his situation has finally dawned on the Minister and he now realizes that by crawling into bed with Stephen Harper, at the expense of his constituents, he has written his own death warrant and, like Liberal John Efford before him, he has hurled himself onto the political dung heap of Newfoundland and Labrador history.

With two of the three Conservative incumbents in the Province no longer running and with reports of total disarray and disorganization inside the local Conservative election team the possibility of a Conservative shutout in the Province is becoming more of a possibility every day.

With Fabian Manning, who gleefully sat by Stephen Harper’s side clapping and smiling as the PM ridiculed statements that the Province had been wronged by his decision on equalization, the only incumbent running this time around things are not looking good for the Harper team. Party organizers are now admitting that they are having trouble finding anyone to run in several ridings and that they can’t find enough volunteers to run a solid campaign.

The road ahead looks pretty bleak for anyone willing to put their name forward on a Conservative ticket this time out.

The question now is whether Fabian Manning, like Doyle and Hearn before him, will opt out of the fight and simply fade into political oblivion.

My prediction is that he will not.

Fabian Manning, unlike Doyle and Hearn, is a one term MP. He doesn’t have the ability to simply retire with a fat federal pension, an option another term would afford him. As much as Manning would likely love to move out from behind the bullseye directly aimed at his career he’s caught between a rock and a hard place.

Having hitched his future to Stephen Harper’s wagon Manning has burned his bridges on the Newfoundland and Labrador political scene, undermined those who elected him to federal office and in in doing so allowed us all to witness his political suicide.

His short time in office has left Manning with no pension to fall back on, no real influence or connections inside the party and little hope that conservative insiders, either Federal or Provincial, will even return his phone calls should he decide not to run or if he loses this election bid. Not an enviable position to be in but one of his own making.

Fabian Manning’s only hope of avoiding a future that includes regular trips to the local food bank is to soldier on in the hope that by some miracle his constituents will overlook his betrayal and give him a second term. All is not lost though and there may still be one ray of hope flickering for the Manning campaign, however dim.

With the feud between Danny Williams and Stephen Harper raging and Williams’ ABC (Anyone But Conservative) campaign moving into full gear Stephen Harper will be inclined to pull out all the stops to ensure that he is not completely shut out of Newfoundland and Labrador, a situation that would allow Premier Williams to claim victory.

Winning just one riding, Manning’s, will give Harper the ability to spin the result as a clear indication that William’s ABC campaign was a failure because his party simply lost in ridings that didn’t have experienced incumbents running.

There is little doubt this strategy is already being planned inside the Conservative election machine and that all possible resources will be poured into making it happen.

With the mood in Newfoundland and Labrador these days the possibility of this tactic actually succeeding are slim but it’s about the only hope Manning or Harper have of holding onto any kind of foothold and saving face. Then again, it may just work. Who knows how much money and how many promises will be heaped on the voters of the Avalon riding in an effort to buy them off between now and polling day.

Who knows if they’ll fall for it.

Choose Your Headline

Reports Suggest Stockwell Day Hiding Illegal Firearms at his Ottawa Residence.

Jim Flaherty Stole Funds from Toronto Banking Consortium in the 1990’s

Stephen Harper Caught in Intimate Affair with Under Age Neighbor.

None of the preceding headlines are real of course, but they say so much about the self serving position taken by Canada’s governing party when it comes to the actions of former Foreign Affairs Minister Maxime Bernier.

For very good reason there are laws against possessing illegal weapons, bank fraud and sexual interference with a minor. There are also very good reasons why laws are in place when it comes to protecting classified government documents.

Why then does the Harper government refuse to call for a formal police investigation and continue to insist that the actions of Maxime Bernier are little more than a political gaffe? Why does the PM brush aside the fact that someone in Mr. Bernier’s sensitive position had an intimate relationship with a person directly connected to organized crime figures? Why, unlike the startling headlines above are Bernier’s actions touted as a “private matter”?

Would it be a private matter if the Finance Minister were indeed found to have committed a theft in the past, the Public Safety Minister broke Canada’s gun laws or the PM took part in an illicit affair with a minor? Of course it wouldn’t. Neither is it a private matter when someone with access to sensitive documents leaves them in the home of a “connected” person for over a month. There are laws against just that sort of activity.

Between the Bernier screw up in Afghanistan, NAFTA gate, the Chuck Cadman affair, the flip flop on income trusts, Jim Flaherty’s attack on the Ontario government, Bernier’s security breach and the Conservative’s stonewalling over every last one of those situations Canada’s governing party has gone from being seen as a calculating, controlling, but focused, group to a laughing stock across the Country. A Parliamentary version of the Three Stooges or the Apple Dumpling Gang.

When the Liberal party was under the gun over the Quebec sponsorship scandal they were rightfully recognized as corrupt and manipulating but they never, not even at their darkest hour, were seen as being comedic in their ineptness. In this respect Stephen Harper has reached a new low generally reserved for the likes of George Bush in the U.S.

There is nothing as deadly for a political party than becoming a laughing stock. As the butt of countless jokes the Conservative party has entered into uncharted territory in Canadian politics and as their comedic value continues to grow any public respect they possessed will fall accordingly.

It may have taken more than two years for the true character of the federal Conservative Party to show itself but it seems the truth is finally beginning to surface, no matter how hard the PM tries to throw a cloak of silence over it.

Newfoundland & Labrador Leader’s Debate

The leaders of the PC, Liberal and NDP parties participated in an election debate at NTV studios on Tuesday evening. With two weeks remaining before voters go to the polls this was the only opportunity for the public to see all three go head to head over the issues.

The opening remarks of the three party leaders were designed to deliver a targeted message and they did just that. While NDP leader, Lorraine Michael, and PC leader, Danny Williams, both appeared calm and composed, Liberal leader Gerry Reid often stumbled over his words, looked tired and came across as very uncomfortable in front of the camera. As one viewer noted, “…he looked like he just woke up and someone hustled him behind the podium before he could wipe the sleep from his eyes”.

While Reid spoke of his party being a potential winner in the upcoming election, the NDP leader immediately positioned her party as the right choice to form a strong and effective opposition. It was a position that smartly conveyed her understanding of the realities of the current political climate and allowed her to effectively take a swipe at the Liberal party. A clear and perhaps effective move to woo voters from the Liberal camp.

The polls show Williams’ popularity in the province at well above 70% leading into this campaign, leaving him with little room to improve his standing during the debate. The leaders of the two other parties meanwhile had hoped to use the debate as a springboard to make up some much needed ground on the Tories.

During the debate Williams accomplished his objectives by holding his ground and getting his message out while the NDP leader, Lorraine Michael, came across as smooth, composed, and calm. This potentially made her the biggest winner of the evening by affording the NDP an opportunity to siphon off some support from her clearly unprepared Liberal counterpart.

During an early exchange the Liberal leader almost appeared to be reaching out to the NDP in an attempt to have Michael enter into a sort of “tag team” against Williams. Michael proved too politically savvy to fall for the tactic and instead countered by going on the offensive against Reid, proving that while she has only led her party for about a year, she clearly understands the realities of the situation. With the Tories riding high in the polls, any additional support her party hopes to gain will have to come from inside the Liberal camp. Michael’s performance, and Reid’s lack of composure, may have served to help the NDP in that cause.

At one point the Liberal leader opened himself up to attack by broaching the topic of Newfoundland and Labrador’s dilapidated schools and blaming the Williams government for the situation. His statement opened the door for the Tory leader to point out that the schools did not fall apart in the short four years the time Williams' government has been in office but rather over a much longer period of time, a reference to the fact that the Liberal party had previously been in power for more than a decade.

From a technical perspective the debate was poorly organized and the format often allowed extended periods when the leaders, primarily Williams and Reid, shouted or talked over one another making it difficult for viewers to understand what either man was saying. While this sort of exchange also took place during periods when the NDP leader was speaking, overall her exchanges were much more civilized and effective.

During the closing remarks Williams and Michael both spoke clearly and calmly. Michael focused on her party and what it could bring to the legislature while Williams stood on his record as premier and invoked the spirit of patriotism and autonomy he is most known for. Liberal leader, Gerry Reid, once again came across as being unprepared and uncomfortable while continuing to stumble over his words as he had done during the entire evening. An evening that was clearly not a good one for the Liberal leader.

There's a New Crime Boss In Town.

The scandal ridden Liberal party of Canada is trying to rebuild it’s image by suddenly re-branding itself into a bastion of propriety.

Since being unceremoniously booted from office in the last federal election they have been desperately trying to shake off their image of corruption and entitlement by moving from being the “Librano’s” to becoming Canada’s version of the “Justice League”

Today the Liberal Party went on the offensive with their Conservative counterparts by releasing the names of 129 candidates and official agents implicated in court documents as participating in an apparent scheme to violate spending limits and pad candidates' rebates in the 2006 federal election.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper has refused to release the names and instead has chosen to challenge Elections Canada in court over the investigation. A challenge that would cost the taxpayers a fortune in legal costs, in addition to the funds allegedly stolen from taxpayers by the Conservative party.

According to Federal Court documents the Conservatives allegedly funnelled over $1 million in national advertising expenditures through at least 66 of their candidates campaigns. These funds were then signed off by their official agents.

According to a Liberal press release today, the implications of the scam are two-fold.

First, if properly accounted for as part of the Conservative Party's national campaign, then the current government exceeded the $18 million national spending limit and broke the law in getting elected in 2006.

Second, scores of Conservative candidates claimed reimbursement of 60 per cent of the money at issue, money that Elections Canada ruled them ineligible to receive. If these allegations are proven, this would amount to election fraud. A complete list of the Candidates, Ridings and dollar amounts, as released today, can be viewed at:

http://www.liberal.ca/pdf/docs/070924_InOutBkgd_en.pdf

How Will You Vote in The Next Federal Election?

Speculation is already starting that Canada could be into another federal election before Christmas. The Bloc has presented the Harper government with several non-negotiable demands they want addressed in the October throne speech.

The Liberals are facing a situation where they may either have to go to an election, in order to force all their troops to fall in line behind Dion, or head into another leadership convention.

The NDP already see themselves in a position to pick up some seats thanks the the momentum the gained in a recent Quebec by-election.

Stephen Harper appears to be willing to take on the opposition parties thanks to largely consistent, if not stellar, polling numbers.

The Greens don't have a say in an election call but their new found popularity and the Canada's inaction on the environment means they must be factored into any election strategy.

If an election is called, the Question facting Newfoundland and Labrador voters is which party should they support.

All of federal parties govern by playing the numbers game, caving in to the area of the Country where they want more seats, rather than doing what's best for the public in various parts of this diverse nation. Usually this practice leaves smaller provinces like NL to fend for themselves while desperately trying to fight off federal legislation that will actually harm the them.

Deciding who to vote for is a complex issue.

Just by examining the track records of recent governments (let's put a boat load of historical grievances aside for a moment), you have to ask yourself, should I vote for the party that tried to screw us on the Atlantic Accord but didn't get away with it, the party that succeeded in screwing us on the Atlantic Accord or the ones that never had a chance to screw us?

Or is there another option?

Maybe when this election rolls around we should put aside all the past actions of the various parties and simply focus on their philosophies, political leanings and so on.

Rather than try to outline these in words, perhaps the following versions of the Canadian Flag (as sent to me by a regular visitor to Web Talk) say it better. As someone once said, "A picture is worth a thousand words".


Green Party Flag:





NDP Flag:


Liberal Flag:



Conservative Flag:


It paints a pretty scary picture doesn't it? But who knows, perhaps this time around there may be another option to consider.

The NL-First Party Flag: