Beyond The Commons

Beyond The Commons

Aaron Wherry covers all the goings-on in and around Parliament Hill. Follow Aaron on Twitter: @aaronwherry

'To them I say: rise above petty politics'

by Aaron Wherry on Tuesday, September 21, 2010 1:20pm - 0 Comments

The Finance Minister is, at this moment, delivering the following speech to an audience at the Chateau Laurier. That sound you hear is a great gnashing of teeth in the capital at this hour.

To wit.

Thank you very much for the invitation to be with you today.  It’s a pleasure to address this well informed and distinguished group of opinion leaders.

Merci de m’avoir invité à me joindre à vous aujourd’hui. Je suis très heureux de prendre la parole devant un tel groupe d’éminents leaders d’opinion.

The fall session of Parliament has just started.

It’s a good time for some serious, frank talk.

We have some important choices to make.

Choices that have consequences.

An extraordinary time

We’ve gone through an extraordinary time the past two years.

A synchronized recession, the deepest since the Depression.

A global storm which, though it has eased up, has not yet passed.

We’ve all been affected.

Business owners working hard to avoid layoffs.

Families working hard to make ends meet.

Individual Canadians looking for work in what was initially a bleak employment landscape.

That’s why our Government’s main focus has been – and will continue to be – the economy.

To keep Canadians working, to create good new jobs, and to secure our recovery.

Through the G-7 and especially the G-20, the world has pulled together.

And from the beginning, the world has looked to Canada – first in admiration, increasingly for guidance and leadership.

We’re punching above our weight – far above our weight.

And now the heavyweights are coming to us for lessons.

Proud to be a Canadian

In my travels, at international meetings, I hear it

again and again.

Leaders of the world, looking at Canada and our economy with envy.

Saying “We want to be a Canadian.”

Every time I hear it, I think “ what a time to be Canadian.”

Quand je suis en voyage et quand j’assiste à des réunions internationales, j’entends très souvent le même message.

Les leaders du monde sont envieux du Canada et de son économie.

Ils disent qu’ils aimeraient être canadiens.

Et chaque fois, je me répète qu’il est bon d’être canadien de nos jours.

You’re familiar with the reasons Canada stands out – now, more than ever.

Low, increasingly low taxes.

The lowest debt burden of the major advanced economies – by far.

Rock-solid banks.

A major – and effective – stimulus program.

Almost 430,000 new jobs since July 2009 – more than were lost during the recession.

And a balanced budget on the horizon.

These are huge accomplishments.

Accomplishments that Opposition politicians choose to ignore.

Opposition politicians who talk down our economy for political gain at every opportunity.

To them I say: rise above petty politics.

At an uncertain time, join us in working to strengthen Canada and promote that strength around the world.

Do your job as critics. Criticize this government as you need to. But don’t tear down our country for short-term political gain to do it.

We all have the right to celebrate our performance during the deepest economic crisis since the Great Depression and the world leading strengths of our economy..

But even more, we have the responsibility to appreciate.

To appreciate that Canada’s advantages are rare and valuable.

That they are not an accident.

And they are not guaranteed.

They are the result of the choices we have made.

And they depend on the choices we will make.

Our top priority

Tax rates, deficit projections, debt-to-GDP, jobs numbers – they’re impressive, but abstract.

Where they matter is in the lives of Canadians – our families, our businesses, our communities.

Our quality of life, the future of our children and grandchildren.

That’s what’s at stake.

That’s what our government is focused on.

That’s what will remain our top priority.

We cannot and must not be complacent.

Yes, Canada has outperformed during the global recession.

But still too many Canadians are looking for work.

For every one of them, a job isn’t just about putting food on the table.

It’s about using their talents, making a contribution.

It’s about their dignity.

Other Canadians are anxious.

They’re working flat out to pay the mortgage, and wondering if they’ll make it this month.

They want to sign their kids up for hockey, but don’t have the money to spare.

The recession isn’t their fault.

They look to us for leadership, so we can get through it together.

And that means our government’s work must continue.

We must stay on course.

We must implement our stimulus plan fully, and keep helping those who need it.

We must return to balanced budgets, and protect our Canadian advantage.

Nous devons assurer la mise en œuvre intégrale de notre plan de stimulation, et nous devons continuer d’aider les gens qui en ont besoin.

Nous devons rétablir l’équilibre budgétaire et conserver l’avantage du Canada.

The risks we face

But there are risks ahead, serious risks.

The global economy remains fragile.

In Europe, several countries are struggling to maintain control of their finances, with implications well beyond their borders.

In the United States, our main export market, the unemployment rate remains a full point-and-a-half above ours.

Around the world, the growth we saw earlier this year has slowed.

And beyond the economic risks, there is, I regret to say, a political risk.

That is the risk of an unnecessary election, an election that would jeopardize our economic recovery, just as we enter the home stretch.

Canadians don’t want an election.

Our government isn’t seeking one.

But the opposition coalition – the Michael Ignatieff-NDP-Bloc Québécois coalition – has been consistent in one thing, if only one thing.

From the beginning of the global economic crisis, they have put their own self-interest above Canadians.

Par contre, la coalition de l’opposition – celle de Michael Ignatieff, du NPD et du Bloc québécois – a été constante à un niveau, si ce n’est que le seul.

Depuis le début de la crise économique mondiale, elle a agi dans son propre intérêt plutôt que dans l’intérêt des Canadiens.

More than once, when they’ve thought they had a shot at seizing power, they’ve threatened to force an unnecessary election – knowing it would put Canada’s recovery in jeopardy.

I’ll come back to this risk in a few moments.

For now, to appreciate what’s at stake, let’s look at our recent history.

Real benefits, strong leadership

We are proud of our record.

Just five short years ago, Canada was led by a weak, dithering, and directionless government.

Support for Quebec sovereignty was on the rise.

And our ability to defend Canada’s sovereignty was on the decline.

Waste, mismanagement, and corruption were rampant on the inside.

And regular Canadians – the people who work hard, pay their taxes, and play by the rules – were left on the outside.

Today, our government is strong.

Our federation is united.

Canada is standing up for its sovereignty and interests on the world stage.

And Canadians have received real benefits that deliver real support for the real world:

cutting the GST;

introducing the $1200-per-year child care benefit;

delivering the Tax-Free Savings Account;

we did all this and more, while protecting health care and pensions.

But most important, we met the challenge of the global economic crisis head-on, with our world-leading Economic Action Plan.

First we took preventative action.

We paid down debt when times were good.

We strengthened our already strong banking system.

We injected tax cut stimulus into the economy before the crisis.

And we rejected Michael Ignatieff’s proposal for a job-killing carbon tax.

Once the crisis hit we didn’t panic.

Instead we went to work.

We listened to Canadians in one of the largest pre-Budget consultations in history

We fast-tracked our Budget – the earliest in Canadian history.

We delivered further tax cuts.

We enhanced EI benefits for those hit hardest by the global recession.

And we made job-creating investments in roads, bridges, buildings, and other infrastructure that will leave a legacy for future generations.

The risk of an unnecessary election

Ladies and gentlemen, an unnecessary election would put all of this at risk.

Not just Canada’s amazing accomplishments in recent years.

Mesdames et messieurs, une élection inutile risquerait de tout compromettre.

Et je ne parle pas seulement des impressionnants accomplissements des dernières années.

Not just our hard-won, world-leading status.

But also our long-term growth and prosperity.

The ability to invest in the priorities of Canadians.

The quality of life of our children and grandchildren.

Throughout the recession, the Ignatieff-NDP-Bloc Québécois coalition has demanded we raise taxes.

Demanded we take more money from the pockets of hard-working Canadians.

Their leader has vowed to reverse tax cuts for job-creating businesses.

He refuses to rule out raising the GST back up to seven percent.

He refuses to rule out a carbon tax – an idea he came up with, a job-killing tax on everything, rejected by Canadians in the last election.

He even supports a new tax on iPods.

Under an Ignatieff-NDP-Bloc Québécois government, nothing would be safe.

No part of our economy would be spared.

No taxpayer would avoid the hit.

What’s the supposed benefit?

The coalition promises massive, new, permanent entitlement programs.

Programs we can’t afford.

Programs that would make more room for government, and less room for growth.

We can’t afford such risky economic management

The costs are too high.

It’s not just in the coalition’s across-the-board tax hikes.

It’s not only big government reaching into your pocket for more and more of your hard-earned money.

The real cost of these reckless promises is in the lives of Canadians, our families, businesses, and communities.

Experts estimate the Michael Ignatieff-NDP-Bloc Québécois tax hikes would kill almost 400,000 jobs.

Coincidentally, that’s virtually the number of jobs Canada lost, but has since regained, during the recession.

Behind those 400,000 jobs are real Canadians, real families.

They deserve better than a Liberal leader who would risk their jobs, their livelihood.

I know he’s been abroad for a long time.

But here in Canada, you don’t tell people what to worry about.

You listen to Canadians and they tell you.

They are worried about their jobs.

The economy.

They’re worried about political agendas that will mean more spending paid for by their hard-earned tax dollars.

That’s a night-and-day difference from our Conservative government under Stephen Harper.

The record shows we take a principled, practical, and prudent approach to leadership.

The coalition led by Mr. Ignatieff has its own agenda – power, power, power.

While their leader is untested and unready, their ideas are not.

They have been tested – and they have failed.

Bigger and bigger government.

Endless red tape.

Higher and higher taxes.

Any coalition that would give the NDP access to taxpayers’ wallets should strike fear in regular Canadians.

What’s more, any coalition that would give a veto on national policy to a party dedicated to the breakup of our country is unacceptable .

A clear choice

Canadians are tired of political instability.

They are tired of elections every two years.

And they know we need a stable government, to ensure our economic recovery and long-term growth.

Les Canadiens sont fatigués de l’instabilité politique.

Ils sont fatigués des élections aux deux ans.

Et ils savent qu’il nous faut un gouvernement stable afin d’assurer la reprise économique et la croissance à long terme.

There is going to be an election, sooner or later.

The coalition may make it sooner.

Regardless, when it comes, Canadians will face a stark choice.

The outcome will be a majority government, one way or another.

A stable, national majority under Stephen Harper’s leadership.

Or the reckless coalition of Michael Ignatieff, the NDP, and the Bloc Québécois.

Of course they deny they’ll officially join forces.

But they did it before.

They’ll do it again.

And that is the choice we will face.

That is the risk we must avoid.

The consequences are just too great.

In the global recession, the ship of state has had a difficult voyage.

But we can see the harbour lights.

And that’s just when a would-be captain and his ragtag crew are trying to storm the bridge.

If they seize the wheel, ladies and gentlemen, they’ll have us on the rocks.

And that’s not how this voyage should end.

The Ignatieff-NDP-Bloc Québécois tax hikes would not only jeopardize our recovery from the global recession.

The coalition’s policies would also squander our Canadian advantage, and limit our long-term prospects.

They would set us on the same downward spiral other countries are now trying desperately to escape.

Heads and hearts

On that happy note …

Of course we know how the coalition will try to frame our government.

Because we won’t make promises we can’t keep, they’ll say we’re harsh and mean.

But not spending beyond our means – not raising taxes on hard-working Canadian families – that’s not about being harsh.

It’s about keeping us safe.

It’s about ensuring Canadians can provide for their families.

That their government can provide the priority services they need and expect.

That their children and grandchildren can look forward to a great future in the best country in the world.

That we can be ready to meet a crisis, and come out of it even stronger.

Families get this.

Small business owners get this.

Canadians get this, and that’s why they get what our government is doing.

That’s why they can trust us.

That’s why they know Stephen Harper’s leadership is the kind of stable, responsible leadership our country needs.

The opposition coalition will say we should be warm and fuzzy.

I admit I’ve been known to get into a scrap, if it’s something I really care about.

Well, seeing up close for two years what our country has been through, what the world has been through;

seeing how Canadians have handled themselves, how our country has distinguished itself in the world;

and knowing what’s at stake for our economic recovery and our long-term prosperity;

I’m willing to enter the fray.

As for the need to be warm and fuzzy, I think our fellow citizens expect more than sentiment from their government.

Canadians don’t separate their heads from their hearts.

We need the prudence of the former to achieve the aspirations of the latter.

Our history shows we’re willing to work hard, to work together, and to make tough but balanced choices when necessary, for the sake of our achieving our shared goals.

L’histoire montre que nous prêts à travailler dur, à collaborer et à prendre au besoin des décisions difficiles mais équilibrées, dans le but d’atteindre nos objectifs partagés.

A country as great as Canada couldn’t have been built any other way.

And our Conservative government under Stephen Harper wouldn’t do it any other way.

Thank you, ladies and gentlemen.

Bookmark and Share
  • Emily

    Flaherty's been into the beer again.

    • hollinm

      Emily….I am sure you were right beside him enjoying that brewsky.

      • Emily

        Nope, never drink beer. I'm an elitist, remember?

        • ChrisWPG

          Then wipe that popcorn off your chin :P JK!

          • Emily

            I'll have you know that's a cracker with brie! LOL

        • hollinm

          Emily….glad you admit it. However all of us who read your comments on this board already knew you were an elitist. No need to state the obvious :-)

          • Emily

            I've never tried to hide being the best hollinm, whyever would I?

          • sea_n_mountains

            can you pls define elitist Hollinm?

        • Dave

          Not even microbrewed in limited editions?

      • burlivespipe

        Well, we know who was brewing the koolaid. Time for a new look, hollimn…

  • ChrisWPG

    Somebody is posturing for an election…..

    When if ever will the Con Gov't learn they are there to represent all Canadians, not just the 30% who elected them?

  • Jan

    Did people actually sit through this?

  • Holly Stick

    Time to kick the bums out.

  • Richard_S_Argent

    Was support for Quebec sovereignty really on the rise when they took power?

    • tedbetts

      No.

      And if you don't believe me than, as the surest proof that the opposite must be true, look who said it.

      • Richard_S_Argent

        I *guess* you could argue that anger in Quebec over Gomery meant that support for sovereignty was one the rise – but you'd be stretching the truth, to say the least.

        • tedbetts

          I think I've figured out what he must have meant.

          If you contort the meaning of his actual words to equate "rise of separatism" with "rise of separatist leaning parties and their leaders" then even though separatism was pretty steady throughout that time, then he almost makes sense.

          Consider that:
          - the Bloc (a separatist supporting party) was revived due Liberal misfortunes and won more seats
          - Harper (a proto-separatist believer in firewalls and who said he didn't care if there were 1 or 10 separate Canadas) won more seats

    • Orson Bean

      Well, that's a spin, of course, but the fact is that the sponsorship scandal was raging when the Tories took power, and that anger at the sponsorship program was highest in Quebec (or at least among those who didn't benefit from the graft). As a result, Liberal Party fortunes were way down, and so, correspondingly, support for sovereigntist parties was on the upswing. But it sounds way punchier on the rubber-chicken circuit to say what Flaherty said.

    • Mark R

      hey look a poll from 2005

      A new poll shows support for sovereignty among Quebecers has surpassed 50 per cent, the highest level in the province in seven years.

      Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2005/04/27/soverei…
      http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2005/04/27/soverei…

      • Richard_S_Argent

        Thanks, I guess his argument could be made then.

        cheers.

  • Standing By

    Hmmm. What would Harper and Flaherty say to this:

    Brewers brilliant analysis makes clear that the drastic increase in Britain's military involvement (and success) in Europe and the expansion of her commercial and imperial interests would not have happened without a concurrent radical increase in taxation, along with a surge in deficit financing and the growth of a substantial public administration.
    http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0674809300

    • Orson Bean

      Great, so if we conquer India, Malaysia and vast swaths of the New World and plunder them, we can then afford significant tax increases, more deficit financing and further increases in our federal bureaucracy. Thanks for that.

      • Standing By

        Taxes made the Empire possible, not the reverse.

        • Orson Bean

          It's a lot more complex than that. I suggest you read That Sweet Enemy, an excellent comparative history of England and France, by Robert and Isabelle Toombs. One of the things that's comprehensively compared in the book is the English and French taxation systems, and why the former was comparatively functional and the latter comparatively dysfunctional. A lot of it had to do with English parliamentary supremacy, as established around the time of the Glorious Revolution in 1688. That ensured that the British merchant and banking class "bought in" to the British tax regime, because the merchant and banking class had a say in how things were run — unlike in France, where tax collection was arbitrary and rife with favouritism and corruption. It's estimated in the book that the cost of capital for running their respective wars was 5 times higher in France than in England.

  • LdKitchenersOwn

    I too wish that the power-obsessed coalition, under whom "Nothing would be safe. No part of our economy would be spared [and] No taxpayer would avoid the hit" and who, even now, are plotting a mutiny to storm the bridge of the Ship of State and crash it on the rocks, would rise above petty politics.

    If the opposition weren't so obsessed with destroying Canada, maybe they'd see the opportunity that Flaherty is so kindly offering them to set aside their divisive ways and move the country forward by doing whatever the Tories say we should.

    • Holly Stick

      You might get into the National Post with that, but for the Sun you need to froth more.

      • ahm

        "I too wish that the power-obsessed coalition of b!tches and losers, under whom "Nothing would be safe. No part of our economy would be spared [and] No taxpayer would avoid the hit" and who, even now, are plotting an evil mutiny to storm the bridge of the Ship of State, murder the captain and crew, and crash it on the rocks, would rise above petty politics. But they can't, as they are a bunch of filthy immigrants and Canada-hating socialist pinko commie separatists.

        If the stupid opposition of Toronto latte-swilling elites and Montreal terrorists weren't so insanely obsessed with destroying Canada, maybe they'd see the opportunity that Flaherty, that intelligent and honourable and wonderful man, is so kindly offering them to set aside their divisive ways and move the country forward. I guess they hate the troops."

        Froth added. Results may vary.

      • Dave

        And use words that are more smaller.

      • LdKitchenersOwn

        Rest assured that if I'm going to write for the Sun, it'll be the captions to my SUNshine Girl pics.

  • Jan

    If they would just abandon this 'working together' nonsense and embrace one-man rule.

  • dave

    Assuming, for the moment, that this was how it was distributed to the media I can understand the perceived need to keep the original formatting. That said, for the love of god can you please reformat that mess into paragraphs? It's simply painful to read as is.

    Countdown until: "and wait until you get to the content" joke begins now…

    • ChrisWPG

      not to mention the excessive number of times I need to hit page down to get to the comments each time I visit…. :P

      for those of us tortured enough to follow the text while he spoke will note that even with the spacing, he butchered it.

      • Holly Stick

        So who wrote the speech?

        • ChrisWPG

          It has a certain, oh I don't know, Kory T ring?

          • Kevin

            No, it's the smooth cadence of William Shatner.

        • burlivespipe

          Don't know who wrote it but i bet Keith Richards spoke it first in that pirate film…

    • http://dougsamu.wordpress.com doug_rogers

      Paragraphs? Sentences!

  • tedbetts

    No, they don't want to have an election.

    Just because their candidates are already taking out election ads is just a coincidence.

    And just because senior Conservatives are telling each other that they are planning and preparing for an election possibly as early as October 1 is just good prudence.

    You think Harper took a vacation in July? No. He was planning the fall election campaign they want.

    • Mike R

      They tell their candidates that every year. They also make "emergency" requests from donors around this time of year. This all happened last year about the same time. It's a means of keeping their powder dry just in case there is an election. It isn't a sign that there is going to be one. That won't happen until the gap between Liberals and Conservatives reaches a consistent 10% or so in the polls.

    • Orson Bean

      I saw that Deb Meredith sign the other day. I kept looking at it with furrowed brow, because it just struck me as really weird. It's just like an election sign, but there's um . . . no election going on. I honestly think whoever created the thing kind of overlooked that fact.

      • Orson Bean

        . . . and in any event, after this summer's census shenanigans, etc., I don't see the CPC taking Vancouver Quadra next election. Quadra is mostly a Blue Liberal/Red Tory riding, and Harper seems convinced that he can freely alienate red Tories at whim. Which is why I don't think he's ever going to get a majority.

  • Richard_S_Argent

    They really are going all in with the painful "It's either a stable majority of prudent, wise and humble Conservatives or a scarrry coalition of traitors, socialists, wimps, and seperatists" election theme eh? Do they really think that this rhetoric holds as much sway? I mean we're seeing coalitions in our two closest parliamentary cousins, and they haven't collapsed into anarchy yet. Not to mention the niggling little point that many people who responded negatively to "The Coalition" had issues with Stephane Dion as PM, not with coalitions in general?

    So what happens if the election returns less than 154 Conservatives? Will he step aside for the coalition majority he's run against?

    • hollinm

      Richard_S_Argent….you are trying to re-write history here. Dion was a problem but the real problem was the fact that all three opposition parties had to team up, six weeks after the election to try and defeat the government. However, the biggest issue was the need to have the Bloc support to make the coaltion work.
      I know you guys don't want to hear about the coalition argument but the fact remains Canadians will not accept a coalition if the Libs do not win more seats than the Conservatives (that's unlikely) or if the Bloc is included in any shape or from. There is also some question that they want Layton and his gang anywhere close to the federal treasury.
      So unfortunately you can rail against the coalition talking points but ordinary Canadians who do not follow politics will see it is a solid rationale.

      • Richard_S_Argent

        I'm sorry, I forget – how many cabinet seats were the Bloc Quebecois promised in the proposed coalition?

      • Emily

        It was quite a legitimate move I'm afraid, one Harper tried himself.

        However, Harp is campaigning against phantoms since no coalition exists.

        Of course, what you're actually saying is that Harper can safely lie about it, and Canadians will be too stupid to catch on.

      • Jan

        It's amazing Canadians concern for the coalition ( accordig to you) doesn't reflect in Harper's polling numbers, hollinm. Can you explain that?

        • Blue

          That would be an interesting poll result to see.

          Assuming the Party seat counts would be similar to what they are now and If the only two choices on a poll were to have a Conservative government or a three-way-coalition between the Liberals, NDP, and Bloc. what would Harper`s polling numbers be ?

      • Anon Liberal

        Harperite desperation to turn the next election into a referendum about coalitions only indicates how little Cons have to offer themselves.

        • Holly Stick

          Basically what they are saying is: "Unlike the Liberals, NDP, Bloc and Greens, the Conservative Party is incapable of cooperating for the good of the country! This makes us better than them because… ummm… shut up!"

  • Standing By

    You ask "So what happens if the election returns less than 154 Conservatives?"

    Easy, Harper will step down as leader of the Opposition, and he will be off to Washington to be an elder conservative statesman, a think-tank thinker, a tea party supporter, a Fox talking head, and a lobbyist for the tar sands.

    Later on he can be the ambassador from the Republic of Alberta.

    • Emily

      I certainly hope so.

    • Dave

      Harper is not going anywhere as long as he leads the largest party in the commons.

      • hollinm

        Dave…..they cannot fight him and win so they distort, malign and attack the man personally. They want him to leave because they cannot beat him politically. Even during the worse economic recession, all of the faux scandals the Libs tried to invent, the Mulroney/Schreiber affair and of course the attacks by Elections Canada the Libs have not been able to overtake the Conservatives in the polls. They think their tactics work. However, while they focus on tactics, strategies and process Harper speaks at the United Nations, increasing foreign aid and lowers taxes for all Canadians. So they will continue to play their games and Canadians watch as the government continues to govern.

  • Dan

    How much did all those elites at this so called "Chateau" you mention have to pay in order to listen to this wonderful piece of prose?

    • Holly Stick

      More than they wanted to probably. John Ivison says some members were unhappy at Flaherty breaking tradition with such a partisan speech. (Then Ivison goes back to spouting Conservative talking points.)

  • Dave

    "To them I say: rise above petty politics"

    By "them", I really hope he means Pierre Poilievre, John Baird, Shelley Glover, LaVar Payne, Jason Kenney, Pierre Lemieux, Steve Blaney, Garry Breitkreuz, Jeff Watson, Dean Del Maestro, etc., etc., etc., etc., etc.

  • Phil_King

    We must rise above partisanship you traitorous sons of an unmarried woman!

    Okaaaaay then Jim.

  • Style

    "In 2008, Mr.Harper didn't believe there was a recession. He thought the most pressing economic issue facing Canada was politcal party financing. Something changed his mind, but it wasn't him listening to the voices of Canadians. It was him, sitting at the Governor-General's residence, wondering if he'd get a second chance. He brought in an acceptable budget. But what's he done since then? What's he done to help Canadians that the opposition parties didn't force him to do? He's thrown away Canada's credibility at every turn, played silly partisan games and refused to show Canadians a plan for getting back on track following the recession. So, it's the Fall session. We're waiting. Canadians are waiting. And if he misses the point again, if he goes off on a silly political tangent again, my party will work with the other opposition parties to make sure Mr. Harper hears the voices of Canadians. We've done it before, we'll do it again, and if it takes an election to get him to listen, there'll be an election."

    • Kyle

      Actually in 2008 Stephen Harper promised that if we elected him Prime Minister, Canada would steer clear of recession.

      I'm not sure if he thought he could actually deliver on the promise or if he was just lying through his teeth. But when he said it, that was the first time I'd ever thought of any Canadian Prime Minister as a clown.

      • Dave

        Actually, in 2008, Harper stuck his fingers and his ears and sang LA LA LA LA THERE IS NO RECESSION I CAN'T HEAR YOU LA LA LA LA I AM SO GREAT LA LA LA LA.

    • Blue

      I always thought the reason for the Coalition-Coup in late 2008 was because of the vote-subsidy thingy, but I`ve been corrected ( sometimes in a rude manner ) by some of the more vociferous Liberal Supporters here that the real reason was because Harper was not prepared to massively increase Gov`t spending to combat the recession.
      So the past year and a half one would think these Supporters would be estatic, because Harper has been out there spending like a combined Liberal-NDP-Bloc drunken sailor. He was even close to building a hockey rink for some millionaires until he finally took a step back.
      But depending on the day we still hear complaints from the opposition—Spend more here—stop that stimulus there–Increase gov`t jobs here—more taxes here……It`s confusing, I don`t know what the opp wants…..maybe they are confused too.
      Maybe I was right all along…..It was probably that vote subsidy thingy after all.

      • Style

        It's pretty straightforward – Canada needed economic stimulus, it didn't need a Conservative advertising program. I think the Conservatives have done an adequate job of implementng the opposition's agenda, but why can't we cut out the middle-man? If Mr. Flaherty agrees that the opposition was right to demand an early budget that delivered economic stimulus, he should cross the floor and caucus with them.

  • danby

    For Heavens Sakes! Liberals and NDP, embrace a coalition as a natural offshoot of modern political reality; as an example of cooperation begetting good government. Yes, run on your own platform, but note that in the event of a minority government, consensus is a step forward, and that putting an end to bickering and wedge driven politics is simply a better way of doing business.
    Serve Mr Harper his "coalition" on a silver platter, and in doing so, let the bogeyman out of the bag and deflate the entire conservative strategy. Will Stephen Harper's desire to smash it out of the park will impel him to overplay his hand? Probably.
    Message that there is no formal coalition, but that the wedges of a divided country will never accomplish what Canadians working together could. Build bridges, not tall, steel fences. Call for an end to confrontational politics. Minority governments around the world are finding ways to work together, so can Canada.
    The tired politics of endless confrontation must come to an end, and those obsessed with "my way or the highway" are looking to become KING, not Prime Minister.
    Canadians have had enough of the bickering and want a voice of calm reason – and when they hear it, all this fear mongering will be revealed for the posturing it is.

    • Blue

      I want danby for the new Coalition leader—-it`s exciting !

      • danby

        (Excuse me while I get up on my soap box)

        But there is no coalition, per se.
        I'm running a separate platform from the other parties. Though I aim to earn your trust and persuade you that my policies are the best way forward for Canada, given the political climate of today, another minority government is a distinct possibility.
        Vote for me and I pledge to end the politics of childish bickering and division. Consensus and cooperation can build bridges into tomorrow. The politics of division have erected tall steel fences, but that's not what Canadians want.
        It's time to grow up. If we work together, there is nothing Canadians can't do. The future is ours to build.

        • brooster

          "Huzzah!" the crowd shouted in unison, "huzzah, and onward to Ottawa. We have found our leader!"

    • Mike T.

      Something like

      "Harper has burned way too many bridges with Canadians in hte past few years, leaving us Liberals as the party most likely to come out of an election with a majority. That's definitely what we're aiming for.

      If Harper – broken promises and all – gets another minority, we'll try and put aside differences and work with the other parties. ALL the other parties. That's what Harper DIDN't do in the days just after the next election. He wrote up a bunch of new bills – bills he was too frightened to campaign on, bills that hurt women's entitlement to equal pay for equal work, bills that hurt working Canadians. We couldn't accept it, and we did what was necessary to make him turn tail and run.

      So a coalition is an impossibility. Unless Harper makes it a possiblity. "

  • Phil_King

    Seems to me there have been hundreds of votes in this minority parliament since 2004, yet things have been ticking along without the disaster predicted here.

    That didn't happen without multiple party support did it?

    Didn't think so.

    And what's with the separatist boogeyman anyways?

    Are the CPCers really suggesting they'd stand aside with the one hundred or so seats they'll still have and let the BLOC do something the CPC would characterize as treasonous?

    Or are they simply reaffirming their inability to work with others?

    Yeah that's a great message: Vote us a majority because we're inable to consider multiple points of view.

    There's a winning strategy for ya. (eye roll)

    • ChrisWPG

      It's funny the Cons are happy to take the bloq's support when it means passing bills….

      • Amateur Hour

        Shhhhhhh. You'll wake the sleeping sheeple.

        • Dave

          No you won't.

      • Blue

        Do you think there might be a difference between working with one of the three opp. parties on occassion in order to make gov`t work and entering into a formal coalition with a separatist party complete with an Agreement-signing, Hand-shaking, Picture-taking, Group-huggy thingy ?

        • ChrisWPG

          In the long run, no. You can't call the Bloq the enemy and then beg for there support when it's convenient, well I guess you can, but it really does leave you looking the fool.

          • Blue

            I don`t think the Bloc is being called the enemy and I don`t think Harper would beg for " their " support, however, don`t you think the fool would be one who would enter into an agreement requesting continued cooperation from a Party whose ultimate goal is to make things so uncooperative that they would achieve their goal of separation ?

          • Mike T.

            I don`t think the Bloc is being called the enemy and I don`t think Harper would beg for " their " support,

            ***
            past decade or so to the contrary?

          • Blue

            At the risk of being " Miked " ( called a liar on the way out of an argument ) , I would like to ask you to expand on that statement.

          • ChrisWPG

            How Harpocritical… On one hand you say the Bloq isn't the enemy but then on the other you explain why they are.

            Furthermore this coming from the Con party that wrote the book on how to disrupt committee business. How rich…

  • Jenn_

    I couldn't actually read the whole thing. I skimmed a couple of the lines and some of it was really good (it IS a good time to be a Canadian, but when is it ever not a good time to be a citizen of this great country?) But when I got to the rising above petty politics followed immediately by a bunch of stuff about how the Conservatives dragged the opposition parties kicking and screaming into the economic stimulus, I realized he wasn't actually talking about the Canada on THIS planet. I wish that other planet's Canada all the success in the world, err, universe, of course, but its political situation isn't really any concern of mine.

    • Mike T.

      Minister Flaherty also made clear we had always been at war with Oceana.

    • guest

      then maybe you should read the whole thing before coming out with a blatant misinterpretation like this.

      • Jenn_

        No, you thumb-downers, guest is absolutely right. I SHOULD have read the whole thing. I SHOULD have risen above petty politics.

        But I don't like to play alone. And I thought the game was blatant misinterpretation. :)

  • Mike T.

    Hit the macro:

    If there was an evil coalition bent on taking power, it woudl be ruling now. Or in 2004, when harper himself proposed it.

    Reading the first bit of that speech, all anyone can say is "thank God for Paul Martin, and imagine the disaster we'd be in if harper had been PM!"

  • Dave

    CPC MP Tilly O’Neill-Gordon, today in the House of Commons Members Statements:

    We urge all members to work with us during the parliamentary session to show we can work together to deliver for Canadians.

    CPC MP Deepak Obhrai, just moments before:

    Our generosity to international assistance and our rapid response to international disasters such as the recent flooding in Pakistan should make all Canadians proud.
    Sadly, the Liberal leader ignores all of this and chooses to try to score cheap political points on the opening day of Parliament when he claims he wants to be productive.
    This shows yet again that the Liberal leader is not in it for Canadians. He is only in for himself.

  • Phil_King

    "…To them I say: rise above petty politics…"

    Ohhh I get it. If you vote them a majority then there can be no "petty politics" because the government can just ignore everyone!

    And here I thought he was talking about building consensus. Silly me.

    …Or does he just mean that all politics are petty?

    I'd certainly agree with him there.

    I don't know though, is Flaherty suggesting that the stimulus, oh excuse me, the "action plan" would've happened if the opposition didn't strong arm them into it?

    Oh damn, now I'm so confused. I need some coacoa.

    Please Uncle Flaherty, tell me the one about the evil coalition again? LOL

  • McC_

    what a barn burner… uh oh, is that the fields catching fire too?!

  • Mike T.

    If Canadians start examining the veracity of these claims, what on earth will the CPC have left to run on? When your main points go that deep into obfuscation, aren't you just asking for your bubble to burst?

  • peter

    The usual supsects beaking off with the same old OLO talking points. Here's a summary: under CPC guidance Canada is the Economic envy of the world (for further support for this idea see the G&M's Sept biz mag feature on Flaherty). The very programs you clamor for are the specific reason most of the G8/20 nations we work with and compete against are having problems in their economies. The very ideas you accuse the CPC of ignoring are the expilcit reasons the other industrial countries are suffering. The other coalitions you reference are babes in the woods and only required because of failed policies you want this government to emulate, (see Tony Blair). God help us if this comment board is a true representative sample of Canada, but I doubt it is.

    All in all I despair for my country after reading these comments…economic ignorance I can understand, but willful idealogical stupidity based on faulty assumptions cultivated by self interested parties for an uncertain future based on a misunderstood past makes for a toxic brew of stupid soup.

    • brooster

      "economic ignorance I can understand, but willful idealogical stupidity based on faulty assumptions cultivated by self interested parties for an uncertain future based on a misunderstood past makes for a toxic brew of stupid soup."

      I know, I know…and the country has suffered profoundly in the last four years as a result. The Cons have a lot to answer for.

From Macleans