|
the Fuhrer comment was out of place, I put my foot in my mouth and I admit it, I apologize completely.
here's the rest as I see it.
| quote: |
“The Conservative Party of Canada is a broadly based and balanced political party. It includes conservatives of all stripes: economic conservatives who stress lower taxes, less debt, and more efficient government; red tories who emphasize a sustainable environment, responsible social programs and important national institutions; social conservatives who want to strengthen our families and make our communities safer; and democratic reformers, who believe government must be responsible to the people rather than to the Prime Minister’s Office. |
http://www.conservative.ca/english/index.asp
some questions arise from this statement
1) how does a government pay down the debt, have responsible social programs, and lower taxes?
Its a ticky equation that I for one do not have the answer to, thats for sure. Last time I checked in macroeconomics pretty much the major income for the Fed is through taxes. Is it not resonable to have doubt on whether the conservatives can deliver on their promises to pay down the debt, have sustainable effective programs, and lower taxes?
Lets use Ontario as an example on this particular policy. In its eventuality didnt Ontario cut so many social programs and education spending so that it didn't have to raise taxes? I'm not talking about the defecit thats in place, but just the general programs that were cut, the cut in healthcare, the hospital closures, so on and so on.
Which then brings us to what exactly is a sustainable effective program?
If we're talking about healthcare will we see something akin to Alberta's healthcare?
| quote: |
The CBC reported yesterday that Premier Klein said that Health care is not sustainable. Suggestions the Premier (of Canada’s richest province) made are to implement the use of the private sector, user fees and delisting (removing from public funding) some health care services presently paid for.
Calling health care is no longer sustainable sounds strangely familiar. These are very words used by Belinda Stronach in describing her position on health care although Stronach diverges from Klein on user fees and delisting services, inasmuch that can be determined in the absence of a formal CPC platform on the issue.
It is likely the Conservative Party of Canada (CPC) wishes Klein had not injected a controversial statement leading up to an election call. It focuses attention on an issue that Alliance was forced to continually defend distracting them from attacking the Liberal record.
The last published health care position from Alliance did not exclude user fees. It remains to be seen what the CPC will ultimately adopt however it is a safe bet that no party would want to run on Klein’s recommendations.
Most parties are advancing privatizing some health care services where the costs are fully funded by the province. While considerations must be made to improve efficiency and lower costs privatization does not necessarily lead to improvement so much as it lowers cost. Solutions in public health must come from studies and informed judgement not casual political rhetoric.
Klein has stated that he does not support any one leadership candidate although Stronach originally indicated she had Klein’s support. When Klein was asked about Stronach’s position on same-sex marriage Klein said it may be a “deal-breaker.”
|
http://www.canadawebpages.com/pc-ed...ews&editorLink=
| quote: |
Alberta and Ottawa head for confrontation on healthcare
RED DEER, ALBERTA - Premier Ralph Klein says he will challenge the Canada Health Act to make Albertans pay for more health care.
Klein told a P-C party policy conference on Saturday that the current health system is too generous. He says Alberta is already spending about one-third of its budget on health care.
He said, "Health spending threatens to squeeze out important spending in other areas such as education, justice, policing, environmental protection to name but a few." Klein maintains the Canada Health Act was never intended to cover all health care services for everyone.
A report done by the Premier's Advisory Council on Health Care is expected later this month. Klein says he'll act on the recommendations "immediately."
|
http://calgary.cbc.ca/regional/serv...me=health011111
Ralph Klein is absoloutly right, healthcare isn't sustainable. (I personally am vehemetly against any sort of user fees) How do we pay for healthcare without raising taxes? If we introduce user fees is that not the begining of a two tier system?
| quote: |
McDonough attacks Liberals on health care
Last Updated Tue, 24 Oct 2000 19:13:48
TORONTO - NDP Leader Alexa McDonough says Liberal health policies are killing people.
Campaigning in Toronto Monday, McDonough said cuts to health care brought about by the Liberals are causing some people to die unnecessarily.
McDonough is calling for a massive federal investment in healthcare
"I don't think there's any question that there are people who are dying unecessarily or dying terrible deaths because of the massive cuts to our health care system," she said.
McDonough couldn't say how many people she thinks may have died because of the Liberal cuts. But she says she has heard many stories of patients being turned away from overcrowded emergency rooms or being forced to wait for desperately needed cancer treatment.
|
http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2000/10/23/mcdonough001023
If cutting spending to healthcare is going to "kill people" as Alexa McDonough put it, then how will we be able to afford a healthcare system without user fees, and still lower taxes, pay down the debt and have responsible social programs.
Harper himself even said that the Romanow report was not the answer which was hailed as "good" healthcare reform mainly based on more spending by the Federal government. So then what is the answer on healthcare?
| quote: |
Martin said the Ontario situation was caused by the tax cuts brought in by former Conservative premier Mike Harris. And then he lumped Harris and Harper together as politicians who will sacrifice essential services for the sake of tax cuts.
"Stephen Harper is essentially saying, 'Cut taxes now and face the consequences later.' That's what Mike Harris said, and we see what happens."
But Martin didn't comment on what the opposition parties in Ontario say is significant: that the Ontario Liberals broke a campaign promise to hold the line on taxes. Many in Martin's camp worry that voter anger over that decision will bleed over to the federal Liberal party in the coming federal election.
Later, the Liberals invited reporters to a hastily-arranged news conference on Harper's ties to the National Citizens Coalition, a right-wing lobby group he used to head. Liberal candidate Richard Mahoney released a thick binder filled with press clippings about the NCC and Harper.
"To know the NCC is to know Stephen Harper," said Mahoney. "It's an American-style, anti-government lobby group."
Harper was travelling and unable to respond, but Conservative MP James Moore defended his boss. "Paul Martin is engaging in ugly, desperation politics. We're going to advocate new and better ideas for governing in Canada: smaller government, lower taxes and a better health-care system.
"We'll push those ideas, but we'll be damned if we let Paul Martin lie to Canadians about what the Conservative party is all about."
|
http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2004/05/1.../liberals040519
I'm not commenting on this article, just on what what James Moore said. Conservative idealogy; lower taxes, smaller government but if we have a smaller government does that mean that we're going to sell off a lot of our programs to private corps to run? In Ontario we've already seen that to a large extent. The privatization and outsourcing to save money was a great experiment here in Ontario. However, using private consultants more so then having public servants on board has been more expensive in Ontario then ever. (the only proof of this I have, is that my public policy prof mentioned it, so you'll just have to take my word for it)
Using private (FOR PROFIT) corps to administrate public service just doesn't sound right to me. Private MRI and Catscan clinics are inherently for profit, who will regulate the cost of the user fees that will be involved?
| quote: |
Gov't user fees unfair, group says
Last Updated Fri Jan 8 08:19:51 1999
OTTAWA - Canada's leading business organization has called on Ottawa to review its user fees, calling the present system a government "tax grab."
The group released a study yesterday showing large inconsistencies between federal departments that charge user fees for services.
CFIB slams fees.
The Canadian Federation of Independent Business says business owners support the principle that users pay, but the situation has deteriorated into an outright government tax grab.
The coalition is asking Ottawa to adopt an action plan to fix the problem. It wants a moratorium on new or increased fees.
|
http://www.cbc.ca/stories/1999/01/08/canada/users990108
If the business community is calling the user fees a tax grab, then what happens when we privatize many programs to independant corps? Will they charge the government less to administer the program so that user fees can be lessend or even taken away out right? If their for profit somehow I don't think so.
Abortion:
| quote: |
CRACK DOWN REALLY HARD ON REDNECK ERUPTIONS.
The biggest fear of Conservative strategists is that their best-laid election plans could be blown up by dumb comments from their own candidates during the campaign. They feel that the party's image is uniquely fragile in this respect. Instructing would-be Conservative MPs to avoid inflammatory remarks can't guarantee none of them will break ranks. Potential hot-button topics: abortion (Harper says that as PM he would never hold a referendum on the subject) and homosexual rights (Harper is against gay marriage but that's about as far as his policy goes). He needs to stick to the hard line he took last fall when MP Larry Spencer said homosexuality should be outlawed: Spencer was fired as family values critic of the old Alliance party and had to leave caucus. Should a similar outbreak occur during the election campaign, the same sort of stern justice must be meted out. If Harper flinches, Liberals will exploit public unease about the Conservatives' sizable social-conservative, Christian-right base of support.
|
http://www.macleans.ca/topstories/p...503_79667_79667
really great article by the way
| quote: |
Tory platform cuts many Alliance planks: Report
OTTAWA (CP) — The Conservatives have liberally helped themselves to middle-ground Grit policies in an election platform that focuses on stable health care funding and moderate tax cuts.
Elections for vacant Senate seats, tough law-and-order measures and abolition of the $1-billion gun registry are among the only vestiges of former Canadian Alliance and Reform policies, says the document obtained by CBC News.
There is no mention of a flat tax, abortion or other morality issues that might have helped the Liberals cast the newly born Tories as extremists.
The platform says MPs would be free to vote their consciences on everything but budgets and main estimates. That includes same-sex marriage, which Conservative Leader Stephen Harper personally opposes.
He has vowed that the issue would be decided by Parliament — not the Supreme Court of Canada — if he becomes prime minister. Moreover, he has said he'll use the notwithstanding clause to override the Charter of Rights and Freedoms if needed.
|
I do not believe that social issues such as abortion and marriage should be left to parliament. It should be upheld or struck down through the Supreme Court.
using the notwithstanding clause to overide the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (in my opinion)is too drastic. The argument can be made that where would it stop?
| quote: |
"The Conservative Party believes that Parliament, not unelected judges, should have the final say on contentious social issues like the definition of marriage," says the platform.
It promises to cut tax rates by more than 25 per cent for middle-income Canadians. A taxpayer earning $50,000 a year would save about $1,000 once the plan is fully implemented over four years at a cost of $6.2 billion, the platform says.
The Conservatives say they'll fund such initiatives by reining in Liberal spending of $150 billion a year. Those savings would help speed payments on the national debt of $550 billion, but the platform stops short of specifics.
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Co...d=1084572618463
|
some other interesting articles
http://www.theinterim.com/2002/feb/01alliancerace.html
lastly, we all saw Chretians Red Book full of all his promises to change things, to not add any new taxes, and what happend? GST and the like came about. McQuinty and the provincial liberals made the same sort of promises and couldnt deliver. I understand all you guys aprehension on the liberals, but in my opinion, i believe that conservative cutting of government and privatizing is not a better option.
the general conservative view point on socials issues, on the need for cutting taxes, when there is no clear solution to the healthcare problem other then user fees and other social programs doesnt make me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.
let it be clear Liberals do not have the answers at all either. I read the scandals and so on, i'm a taxpayer too, it galls me to see my hard earned money being wasted.
anyways thats it, i've spent entirely way too long on this. I won't comment on the "you don't deserve to vote" stuff cuzz honestly that won't solve anything.
cheers!
___________________
http://www.travelninja.com
------------------------------------
Last edited by drgoodvibe on May-20-2004 at 02:53
|
Nathan Fake - Outhouse (Valentino Kanzyani Remix) 
