This issue is quickly becoming one that needs to be addressed. Not after Christmas, not after the election -- we need to know now how this happened and who is responsible.
Hat tip: SDA
From Conservativelife: (read the whole post)
What Ralph Goodale said on November 18th
OTTAWA -- Finance Minister Ralph Goodale says he's aiming to release Ottawa's new policy governing income trusts before the end of January, regardless of a possible election campaign.
Goodale says he's been closely following public consultations on the controversial trust issue and will be ready to move soon after Ottawa's Dec. 31 deadline for input.
He told The Canadian Press that the timing won't hinge on a possible federal election early in the new year.
Five days later abnormal volumes of income trust stocks were trading on the TSE. The next day Ralph Goodale made his announcement.
4 comments:
No big deal, unless you happen to have investments in these sectors (a fairly common occurrence nowadays) and weren't privy to this information. I'm sure the people who got the info ahead of time used it in a manner that was advantageous to the entire country.
Thankfully we have Ralph there to look after the interests of the common person (who votes Liberal) and hand down perfect budgets that cannot be touched, except to buy off NDP support to the tune of 5 billion dollars.
5 billion in good programs I might say. What on earth did your party negotiate? Not much of nothing. At least one party had the balls to negotiate something fo Canadians.All Harper did was harp. Talking about a deal with the devil.It was good things to help middle class people and even PC supporters. You talk about common sense.............Harper supporters have no common sense.Where the hell have you guys been for the last 20 years? Most of you weren't born that's for sure.
Will the NDP be running on a platform of "Vote for us as we were able to extort the most money in return for propping up a corrupt gov't"? As far as "good programs" go, please enlighten me as to the nature of the funding and how it will actually make a difference. I recall it being described in the vague jargon of social spending. I am hard pressed to think of a more wasteful area of government intervention. Spending more on these programs usually accomplishes one (or both) of two things:
1) Keep people acting in a fashion that will perpetuate their problems.
2) Get more people sucked into the system by creating new areas of responsibility for the gov't.
"My party", as you chose to put it, did not make a deal with the devil to further their interests but have been working to end this disgusting regime. I hope you are proud of the fact that the NDP helped keep the Liberals in power for almost a full year longer than necessary.
As well, Mr. Layton managed to "negotiate" away several billion dollars in business tax cuts (in the unlikely event the Liberals were true to their word) which would do far more for people in need than twice that much social spending (stimulating the economy to create a few more permanent jobs for people to pull themselves out of poverty).
One last thing, you might want to check the tuning on your tinfoil hat, because at no point in my post do I use the phrase "common sense". In fact I do not use the word "sense" at any point.
In closing, Jack Layton has shown what he and his party stand for, the only thing left to determine is their price.
Taking money from the taxpayers to give to Archie will ensure that Archie continues to vote for the NDippers. Archie, leave the poor and middle class alone: you clowns have done enough damage to all with your self-righteous social experiments.
Post a Comment