‘Not serving Canadians well’


Former Liberal MP Michelle Simson apparently has some concerns she will be airing in a book form.

“It was a bit of shock to me, to see exactly the lines that are drawn along partisan lines,” she said.“A lot of times I was extremely uncomfortable, because I don’t believe that . . . just because I say I’m a Liberal, I agree with (the party about) absolutely everything, or that my constituents do. There should be a little bit more freedom (and) a lot more free votes.”

… Simson is also concerned that MPs are ignoring their responsibility and not giving bills proper study — especially relating to costs associated with particular pieces of legislation. “It was like, ‘Doesn’t matter! Doesn’t matter! Doesn’t matter. You’re either for it or against it.” “People are just not being heard or taken seriously,” she said.


‘Not serving Canadians well’

  1. This shouldn’t come as a surprise to people, but it probably does.

  2. “Simson received national attention last spring when she became the first MP to publicly disclose her detailed office expenses. It was a move that ostracized her from her colleagues, she said.”

    Ms Simson is my new hero ….. I wish you were in my riding Ms Simson, I would voted for you in instant. 

    To me, it seems like chattering classes, which include pols from all three major parties, are entirely self satisfied and think everything is brilliant in Canada.

    It is all about politics to elite, no thought of economics. And if anyone ever thought of economics, they would realize they are harming the people they are supposed to be serving, not helping. 

    Thomas Sowell : The first lesson of economics is scarcity: There is never enough of anything to satisfy all those who want it. The first lesson of politics is to disregard the first lesson of economics.

    Hayek ~ To be controlled in our economic pursuits means to be controlled in everything

    Friedman ~ Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself

    Steve Pinker ~ But the newest research is showing that many properties of the brain are genetically organized, and don’t depend on information coming in from the senses.

  3. Why does it make sense to make Mr Cogswell work twice as hard as everyone else so he can pay for bureaucrats and other assorted barnacles. 

    When will our Government and chattering classes care about Mr Cogswell?

    William Graham Sumner: “The type and formula of most schemes of philanthropy or humanitarianism is this: A and B put their heads together to decide what C shall be made to do for D.

    The radical vice of all these schemes, from a sociological point of view, is that C is not allowed a voice in the matter, and his position, character, and interests, as well as the ultimate effects on society through C’s interests, are entirely overlooked. I call C the Forgotten Man.

    ….. they leave out of sight the first fact to be remembered in all social discussion — that the state cannot get a cent for any man without taking it from some other man, and this latter must be a man who has produced and saved it.”


    Tony Clement: “Governments are doing their part. Universities are doing their part. Where’s business? When is business going to do its part?


    In 2002-2003, the average salary of workers in the core public service was $53,000, increasing to $73,400 when factoring in benefits.

    “For me to make that amount of money, I would have to work twice as much time,” tradesman Tim Cogswell told CTV News .In the private sector, the average salary was $38,885.

    But civil servant Shannon Steele said she earns her pay

    .”Of course I get more benefits and stuff, but I think I deserve them,” she said. “I do a lot of work, and it’s stressful.


    • Stop plagiarizing.

      • Instead of worrying about plagiarism – hahahahahahaha – why don’t you present argument, and some data for once, that shows why I am wrong. 

        Thanks for laugh, Colbert Report.

        “Gary Becker – discrimination will be less pervasive in more competitive industries because companies that discriminate will lose market share to companies that do not. He also presented evidence that discrimination is more pervasive in more-regulated, and therefore less-competitive, industries.”


        While Canada routinely ranks in the top ten of the United Nations Human Development Index (HDI) – a quality of life indicator based on income, education and life expectancy applying the same criteria to Canada’s aboriginal population reveals some striking figures. Registered Indians living on reserves are ranked approximately 68th, somewhere between Bosnia and Venezuela, while off-reserve Indians are ranked 36th.


        Reagan ~ The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’

        PJ O’Rourke ~ Every government is a parliament of whores. The trouble is, in a democracy, the whores are us.

        Locke ~ All mankind… being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty or possessions.

        • So you think it’s perfectly fine to steal other people’s words then. Got it. Fine upstanding citizen you are(n’t)

        • “why don’t you present argument,”

          Most of your posts make no argument at all. You copy and paste news clippings without comment. It’s basically just noise.

          • “Most of your posts make no argument at all. You copy and paste news clippings without comment. It’s basically just noise.”

            Andrew_notPorC our brains work entirely differently apparently because I would write this about you:

            “You have to remember that I don’t agree with your opinion that I am an idjit. You write your opinion without providing data or anecdote. Most of your posts make no argument at all. It’s basically just noise.”

          • Writing an argument without providing evidence is still an argument. Evidence (of what?) without argument is just noise (and plagiarism). I don’t just post opinions, I do make arguments.

            Evidence is not necessary when discussing logic. Logical arguments that are internally sound and do not need to rely on outside appeals. You can dispute the premises if you want.

            Remember that I called some statistics into question about propensity to donate (challenging the premise), and you just called me names in response. I wasn’t impressed.

          • These are stats produced by StatsCan, not partisan social conservatives. You don’t get to decide what is accurate and what isn’t. 

            If you are all about logic, tell me this. 

            Why are you more concerned about people who donate time and money to churches that help unfortunate – lets get revenue canada after those outrageous religious people, who do they think they are! – but have no comment at all about how atheists are not contributing towards society? 

            What ‘logic’ are you following exactly where you give the do-gooders a hard time about helping homeless but have no comment about the self-centred who don’t volunteer or contribute to charity? 
            Last summer, Statistics Canada released a survey on Canadians and their charitable habits. While less than one in five attend church regularly, those who do are far more likely to give to charities, and are substantially more liberal in the size of their gifts to both religious and non-religious organizations.

            The average annual donation from a churchgoer is $1,038. For the rest of the population, $295.

            With respect to volunteer effort, two-thirds of churchgoers give their time to non-profit causes while only 43 per cent of non-attendees do likewise. And churchgoers put in twice as many hours volunteering.

      • Quoting and supplying attribution is certainly not plagiarizing, it’s called research. You should try it some time.

        • Try learning what plagiarizing is. You obviously have no clue (here, as always)

          When you take somebody’s words, even if cited, and do not add anything to them. You’re not doing research. You’re copying — you’re using their words for your benefit.

          Fair use only applies when you’re using somebody elses words as evidence of your own point, or in order to demonstrate a constrast, or construct satire/parody. Simply parroting other people’s writing is plagiarism, illegal, and wrong.

          • To be clear, are you saying that taking someone’s words and attributing (citing) them to that person, is considered plagiarism?

            I would assume that citing/attributing them to that person would not be considered plagiarism.

            Copying them, and not doing research, sure. But not plagiarism.

  4. This is an excellent point. Our MPs are legislators, not ombudsmen for the Government of Canada.  All the vaunted constituency work is not really something MPs should be doing, but it’s something they do because it gives them something to excel at when their effectiveness as legislators has been nearly entirely stripped from them.

    We’d be much better off creating 308 ombudsmen positions to deal with the concerns of people in their constituencies, and let MPs work on legislation, rather than have bills be formed entirely outside the institution of Parliament, then introduced on a take-it-or-leave it basis.

Sign in to comment.