The Commons: Why is Stephen Harper smiling?

It is surely not because of what has played out in the House over the last three weeks


The Scene. Not typically one to acknowledge a question from anyone without the rank of party leader, Stephen Harper stood only too happily to answer Francoise Boivin’s provocation.

“I would simply put it this way, I thought yesterday was a great day for law-abiding Canadians,” he said of last night’s vote to eliminate the long-gun registry. “If the NDP really believes and the Liberal Party really believes in the long gun registry, then I challenge them to come here in the House every day from now until the next election and tell Canadians they will bring it back. We would be happy to take them on.”

The Conservatives present found this delightful, leaping up to express their triumphant joy. “Hear, hear!” sang a beaming John Baird. “Whoops!” mocked a voice on the government side. “Ouch!” yelped Mr. Baird. “Ouch!”

The Prime Minister seemed positively giddy for most of his hour in the House this afternoon. He smiled to the point of beaming. He chatted up his seatmates and chuckled at the displays of various opposition members. He seemed to be having something like actual fun.

But why exactly is this man smiling?

It is surely not because of what has played out in the House over the last three weeks. Indeed, ever since Davos, Mr. Harper’s side has seemed to struggle to live up to its own hype. Those major transformations? Erm, yes, maybe something at some point, but surely nothing to worry about. Those fighter jets necessary to stave off a Russian invasion? Yes,  sure, there will be planes, but only so many as can fit within the budget. The legislation that was to determine who stood with angels and who stood with child pornographers? Poor Vic Toews was left today to stand and defend the righteousness of a bill that is being sent off to committee to be fixed.

Across the way for all of this is something of a work-in-progress, but one that has seemed to enjoy itself of late. As official opposition, the Liberals assumed a vaguely Victorian air. They seemed regularly besmirched. They pleaded for reason. They were last heard begging for everyone to come to their senses. (As the third party, they’ve flipped two successive unpoliticians for a man who has spent his entire life revelling in this stuff.) But there is a different feel to this new official opposition. The NDP is a bit more excited for the fight. Or a bit less encumbered by shame. Or a bit of both. They have also happened upon the utility of asking actual questions. And so they have piled up several dozen demands for a yes or a no and with each failure by the government to answer directly there has seemed more reason to ask.

All of which has made for an interesting few weeks. And all of which has left various cabinet ministers periodically sputtering about fearmongering and misconstrued facts. (Sounding, in other words, just a bit like the last two opposition leaders they happily pounded.)

Today’s trouble was the aforementioned matter of the F-35. Peter MacKay was only too happy to stand and preen and flex and sing of supporting the troops. “NDP really means no defence party,” he happily declared.

The NDP’s Matthew Kellway attempted a rejoinder. “Mr. Speaker,” he ventured, “of course on this side of the House we support our troops.”

His next sentence was better. “Mr. Speaker, in fact, our commitment to our pilots would be to procure planes that actually work.”

The New Democrats presented enjoyed this and Mr. Kellway now exploited the opposition’s newfound advantage on this file. “Let us talk about budget for a moment,” he offered. “The chief financial officer of the U.S. department of defence released new numbers on the cost of the F-35. These planes will be rolling off the line at a cool $200 million. That is more than double what the Conservatives have been claiming. With production delayed by several years, taxpayers have the right to know, how many planes will the government buy and how much will each one cost?”

The Defence Minister had no answers for these questions. “Mr. Speaker, who is sounding defensive now?” Mr. MacKay attempted to beg instead.

Mr. Kellway pressed harder. “Let us talk about what the chiefs of staff have told the government,” he proposed. “They have said the CF-18s need to be replaced by 2020, and they have said we need at least 65 new planes. However, basic math tells us we are getting far fewer and much later. Yesterday, the minister said he had a plan B, just stay tuned. Then we learned from DND that in fact there is no plan B. With respect to the F-35, we know that the minister has serious problems with managing his department, but does he also have a problem with basic math?”

Now it was Peter Julian, the gawky NDP finance critic seated in the front row, who looked giddy.

“Mr. Speaker,” lamented Mr. MacKay, “no, what I have a problem with is the blind partisan criticism that comes from the uninformed member opposite on this program.”

There was laughter from the NDP side.

All that aside, one imagines Mr. Harper now looks forward to a week away from this place with the same sort of serenity he has projected while seated here of late. Leaning back in his chair one imagines he knows and understands two things: he is still the Prime Minister and it will be, if he so chooses, for another three years. And so, for all the fussing over other things, he still gets to do things like what he did last night.

The Stats. Military procurement and immigration, six questions each. Online surveillance, firearms and government spending, four questions each. The environment, employment, bilingualism and affordable housing, two questions each. Pensions, aboriginal affairs, science, sealing, asbestos, Bahrain and freedom of the press, one question each.

Vic Toews, seven answers. Peter MacKay and Diane Finley, six answers each. Stephen Harper and Jason Kenney, four answers each. Ted Menzies and Dave Anderson, two answers each. Michelle Rempel, James Moore, Lisa Raitt, Gerry Ritz, Gary Goodyear, Gerald Keddy, John Baird and Gail Shea, one answer each.


The Commons: Why is Stephen Harper smiling?

  1. Old saying….’never let em see you sweat.’

  2. I expect he’s smiling because they managed to fulfill a campaign promise, thus doubling their previous record.

    • Firsts are always exciting.

    • Just watch ’em. They are now on a roll.

      • Just watch ’em. They know I’m a troll.

        • Like all true lefties the only way is to try and shut the opposition parties up. Whether you or anybody else on this blog like what I have to say I reserve the right to say it.

          • I’m not trying to shut you down. I’m not a leftist. I wasn’t calling you a troll. I was just attempting to answer the question “Why is Steve Harper smiling? Just watch ’em. They know I’m a troll.”  It was a silly attempt to use your words to slap back at Steve.I meant no offence to you as I don’t come here to personally attack anyone who comments. I’m sorry if I offended you.

          • I am not sure what point you were trying to make but here is the definition of a troll.

            Here is the definition of the a troll In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussionIn Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion

          • I know the indention of a troll. I was making a point about Harper — you seemed to think it was directed at you. I apologized for that. I pointed out that I’m not here to be malicious or stop anyone from expressing their opinions. You called me a leftist.I pointed out that I’m not. I have no political allegiance — I pretty slag ’em all if they deserve it. Big misunderstanding?

          • “try and shut the opposition parties up.”  Do you want to edit that?

          • Probably not worded very well. What I was trying to say was the left wants everybody (opposition) who doesn’t agree with them to shut up.

          • I think it’s a wonderful freudian slip that points so much to the “victim” mindset of the conservative supporter.  They still haven’t figured out they’re the governing party yet.  That’s why hollinm keeps repeating that there’s no need for anybody to complain because they’ll get their chance in 2015.. he’s still having trouble coming to terms with it.

  3. Finally Wherry acknowledges that despite the attempts of the opposition to put forward credible opposition there is one thing that is certian. Harper is Prime Minister of Canada for at least another three years and nothing they say or do will change that reality.

    • And that, hollinm, is pretty much all you can say on behalf of this bunch of arrogant, feckless know-nothings: the sad reality that we’re stuck with them in the short run.

      Just keep reminding us. It’s all you’ve got.

      • freckless, nothings? You got to be joking. Lets talk about the new immigration legislation, new copyright legislation, internet snooping, onmibus crime bill and my favourite the long gun registry.

        I think you are talking about feckless and do nothing you must be talking aobut the Liberal party. They did nothing with their three majority governments once they covered the deficit other than invent adscam.

        • Nothing like elimintate the deficit and start paying down the debt.

          Nothing like lowering income and corporate taxes (once the budget allowed for it).

          Nothing like the Clarity Act.

          Nothing like keep the country out of Iraq.

          Etc. etc. etc.

          • You really don’t quite get holinm yet. See, the way this game goes you got to praise the govt’s many fine policies and achievements; he gets to trash the liberal achievements he can’t stand – which is pretty much all of em. Easy peasy eh! Heads he wins, tails you lose.
            * Oh, and then hecomes back at you all bent out of shape cuz you aren’t being as reasonable, non partisan and open minded as he is.

          •  lets never forget about these great accomplishments:

            1 out of 4 dollars of total canadian debt has Stephen J’s face on it (about 4k per canadian)

            Destruction of a century of census data continuity.

            Hiring of almost 100k civil servants – what do you think the pension expense on this will be?

          • Yes lets not forget the $500 billion in debt the country has been carrying as a result of the spend thrift ways of  Trudeau/Chretien (as his finance minister).
            Lets not forget the dismantling of our military where they send our soldiers into battel under equipped.
            Lets not forgot Jean Chretien broke major promises i.e. tear up free trade, kill the GST
            Lets not forget adscam and the stealing of $150 million of taxpayers money.
            Lets not forget the long gun registry that wasted $2billion on a computer system to track law abiding citizens.
            Lets not forget that Harper faced the virtual collapse of the world wide economy and was encouraged by the hapless opposition parties to spend money.
            Lets not forget that the Conservatives made the debt down by $40 billion after they were first elected.

            You see two can play the same game.

        • You’re boasting about that legislative record? (BTW, you forgot the unfoldingF35 fiasco.)

          For a government that rails against intrusive government, wasteful spending, and ballooning government debt, they must have to wade through knee-deep hypocrisy just to get in and out of their caucus meetings.

        • Well, other than the gun registry, they haven’t actually done those things yet. And for some of us, some of the proposed changes aren’t accomplishments as much as crimes against the citizenry.

          The intentions of this government, with the Lawful Access Act, is on par with that of the soldier they are currently prosecuting for spying for the Russians. Maybe they should have just recruited him to implement their new law instead.

          The new copyright legislation is the equivalent of the proposed laws that were just 86’d in the States.

          The recent Ontario decision re minimum sentences proves how lunkheaded many of the sections of the omnibus crime bill are; they too will get tossed as unconstitutional – at great cost to taxpayers.

          And speaking of that gun registry, can you please explain the cognitive dissonance that allows this government to, on the one hand, toss all that data as being invasive, yet on the other hand decide it wants the ability to spy on its citizens without having to first show just cause? Because it seems pretty obvious to most of us that “dissidents” (i.e. those of us who dare speak up against their policies – or worse, run against them) will be the real, primary targets. Even you admit it’s snooping, not law enforcement – and you seem proud of that.

          Then again, why am I surprised; you also agree with Toews that torture is A-okay…

    • It is an obvious fact that Harper is Prime Minister until 2015 (or sooner if he decided to leave or call an election or something like that).  However, while part of democracy is accepting the results, another part is not over-interpreting one’s mandate.

      Democracy does not end with an election.  And the horrible policies that Harper is proposing for the country can be opposed DEMOCRATICALLY by Opposition M.P.s arguing their case in the House and Committee and by galvanising the public outside of Parliament.

      Harper will be PM for the next few years but there is plenty we can still do during that time.

        • #TellVicEverything seems a good grassroots start. Outrage tempered with humour will go a long way toward bringing this government down next election. More “successes” like the Lawful Access Act will make these guys look like Mulroney II. Pity the Kim Campbell who steps in when Harper runs away to his oil company directorships…

          • ahem. Should that transpire however unlikely, i’ll predict Peter plays the bridesmaid….or if we’re really lucky Vic himself. 

          • Look, this nonsense didn’t work when Harper had a minority, so what makes you think it’ll work when Harper has a majority?

          • Simple; this time they’ll actually have to pass their boneheaded ideas instead of introducing them, proroguing, and blaming the inability to pass them on the Opposition. That little game is over; they now have to play for keeps to keep their base supporters happy – and the outcome will be so unpalatable to the rest of us that even the laziest will get off their butts to vote against them.

            Assuming they don’t outlaw elections in the interim…

          • Kumbayah!

    •  It’s sad that this is the only defenced of Harper. “WE WON NEENER NEENER NEENER!!”

      How childish.

      • What in the world does this mean. I never said what you alledge.

        • Nice Toews imitation – you really are funny.

  4. The prime minister is smiling because, like most of Canada, he doesn’t read this knee-jerk attack blog of yours. lol

    If you were to read only this space for the past number of years, you’d wonder why Canadians have yet to storm the gates at 24 Sussex and shoot Harper dead where he stands.

    Instead, Canadians are happy, and Harper is happy, while Wherry and Co. can’t stand it for a second. It’s such a tough world, isn’t it.

    • A minority of Canadians are happy. It’s a big difference. 

      • Oh, I think you, Wherry and Co. are the overwhelming minority. I mean, who gets this angry over nonsense 24/7?

        • Spying on its citizenry and trying to gloss over it by saying they are doing it to protect children should outrage anyone who isn’t braindead.

          • True….I don’t like the bill either, hopefully they are serious about allowing amendments to it, and the opposition is serious and competent in their input.

          • Like most people I have not read the bill and I suspect there is a lot of spin going on here in the media. However, if it is as the critics have said I agree. It is snooping and the legislation needs to be changed.

            I suspect if the opposition is serious and simply isn’t trying to kill the bill there will be changes made.

          • I’m sorry, but normal people don’t get outraged at every little thing Harper does. They have lives. Wherry and Co. obviously don’t.

          • And here’s the fatal flaw in your logic: this isn’t a “little thing.” This is an attack on the basic freedoms of Canadians.

            And yet, when the tables are turned on dear ol’ Vic and his own behaviour is subjected to scrutiny, he is quick to call it underhanded and move to shut down the site. The heights of hyprocrisy. Wants to dish it out but can’t take it.

            Was Vikileaks nasty? Yes. But no less than the legislation Vic and the CPC is trying to foist upon this nation. I’m normally against actions like Vikileaks, but this time it was a well deserved act of civil disobedience. Totalitarianism must be opposed.

          • Perhaps you should read the column in the Citizen today which shows the powers that Toews is proposing is already included in the anti Terrorism legislation passed by the Liberals after 9/11.
            Toews is a minister of the crown. As such he proposes legislation. Parliament considers it and decides if it is appropriate. To attack him personally is outrageous and not called for.

          • Vic personally attacked every single Canadian who opposes this bill with his ludicrous “standing with the pedophiles” comment. If he chooses to slander us then we have an equal right to question the morality of his behaviour. He opened the door to these attacks himself.

          • Nobody supports what Toews said. It was a ridiculous comment to make and he should be denounced for what he said.

            However, to go the one next step and to attack him personally hiding behind the internet is really going way too far. He did not slander you personally or anybody else. By the way this same intrusive legislation was passed by the Liberals in their anti terrorism bill right after 9/11, Read the Citizen today and see for yourself.

          • If it’s the same, what is there to introduce?  The most invasive parts of the post 9/11 act the Liberals brought in to fight terrorism was sunsetted but Harper renewed them.

      • There have been years of Liberal majority rule after winning less than 50 %, even less than 40% of the popular vote.  Why was this not such a big issue then.  The constitutional legislation does not mandate a minimum vote %age.

        • Of course there have been years of parties getting less than 50% of the popular vote. However, as long as the “right” party wins i.e. Liberals then it is perfectly fine. As soon as a majority Conservative government is elected suddenly we have to change the system and they must have more than 50% of the vote to be considered a legitimate government.

          Lets remember that the Libs have governed Canada for 80 of the last 100 years and the current system has been quite fine with them. Not so much now because they are faced with a party that is giving them a run for their money and they don’t like it one little bit.

        • You’re right. However, this is the first, so far as I’m aware, election of a majority government where the elected government was the *last* choice of a majority of the voters.

          Now, admittedly, the last time I saw that poll done was several years ago.. ’08 I think it was. So perhaps things have changed, but logic suggests not — because Liberals I’ve spoken to seem to feel that even an NDP government would be preferable to the CPC one.

          • Last choice of a majority of voters? I know this is not my thread but just to put a finer point on the issue. 80% of voters wanted nothing to do with the Libs and 70% wanted nothing to do with the NDP. Wise up and quit with the semantics. Our voting system has been in place for a couple of hundred years. Just because your guys lost quit trying to justify why the one that won shouldn’t have won.

          • I’ll agree that 80% didn’t want the liberals first, and that 70% didn’t want the ndp first, but there is a difference between who people didn’t want first, and who they wanted last. That’s what I’m getting at and what you seem to be incapable of understanding.

      • Its a five party system, of course a miniority of Canadians are happy – did you ever take math as a child.  A majority gov’t is voted in by the minority, approx 40%.  just like PM JC got when he was king.

        • The difference is that when JC got in, most conservatives preferred him to the NDP.  So he wasn’t their first choice, but he wasn’t their last.

          Harper is the choice that most people actively don’t want in, as well as the choice that a plurality of people wanted in.  

          That this matters is obvious, because even the CPC rules have their own party leaders elected by run-off votes.. so that the person who the most people don’t like doesn’t get in simply because those people can’t agree on who they like best.

  5. LOL amusing that Cons think they’ll endear themselves to the public by saying ‘we rule, neener neener’.

    Or that they think they have a guaranteed 3 years.

  6. Cheshire Cat, lol   He is just enjoying the victory. 

    “NDP really means no defence party”  Ha, ha

    Wonder if Toews will file a complaint about Vikileaks30 now that they know it is coming from the HoC from a user that posts pro NDP info on Wikileaks. 

    • Not unless he wants to see pix of himself cavorting in the nude on youtube. LOL

      • Oh god don’t go there, please don’t go there.    lol

        I’d even rather be forced to watch reruns of Ignatieff threatening to mess with Harper if Harper messes with him.

        • LOL Scary thought isn’t it?

          But somehow, somewhere….somebody has photos.

      • I thought that the emperor already had no cloths. It’s a disgusting thought, nudie-Vic — ugh!

    • God, I hope he does! And I want to see him raging about it in the HofC.  Nobody does red face, neck veins popping like our Vic. He hasn’t done a really good display of outrage since he had to defend the G20 spending. 

  7. I think he’s smiling because he thinks #TellVicEverything is hilarious too!

  8. He could be smiling for the same reason I’m smiling:  because a wasteful intrusion into the privacy of law-abiding citizens has been eradicated.

    Well, that and how irritated it makes the left.

    • So you’re saying they plan to drop the Awful Access Act? Because on orders of magnitude, the Long Gun Registry is amateur hour in comparison…

    • Eradicated?  At the moment, it’s entertaining amendment ideas.  Cons never let committees do anything constructive, so this would be a first, if they work with the others and reach some sort of compromise. 

      • So you yell that the government never considers amendments or works with the opposition and when it happens you still aren’t happy.

        Lets see if the opposition is prepared to work with the government to improve the bill rather than trying to kill it.

        • The word “co-operation” doesn’t appear to be in Harper’s dictionary.

          • First of all the party’s who oppose him are left wing with a big tax and spend agenda. Second of all the opposition are not interested in cooperation. There agenda is to filibuster every piece of legislation versus making constructive suggestions which would improve legislation versus killing it.

            I would remind you that the opposition had 5 years where everything went there way. However, to suggest he survived for five years without some form of cooperation is to simply spouting talking points and belies the reality. No minority government could survive without cooperation of some sort.

          • Excuse me??? Who wrote the f’ing book on disrupting committees? Our Glorious Leader and his Cora brunchfast minions from the PMO. 

  9. “Leaning back in his chair one imagines he knows and understands two things: he is still the Prime Minister and it will be, if he so chooses, for another three years. And so, for all the fussing over other things, he still gets to do things like what he did last night”

    Fess up Aaron, PWs wrote the last para for you didn’t he, he very easily could have?

    Great piece of writing , loved it.

  10. The arrogance of power which inevitably gets smacked down. 

  11. I think it’s gas.

    That, or he’s looking forward to the nice long crap he’s gonna take once he can finally get away from the place. 

    • Nice and as usual very intelligent. You and the dauphne of the Liberal party should talk.

  12.   #TellVicEverything must be embarrassing to Harper, if not, then I think he underestimates the people of Canada.

    • Our Glorious Leader believes he knows all — I think that he truly thinks he’s the smartest person in Canada.

      • Compared to what he is up against he is!

        • Hubris get him in the end — it always does.

          • Where is the hubris. He very seldom talks to the press and when he does he speaks with not the slightest sound of hubris at all.

            Lets not mix the party shenangins with the PM. I know the left thinks he is all knowing and all seeing and runs the government by himself and that is a great feat if he could but sorry to say he doesn’t.

            Trouble is the left go over the top in their criticism which causes Canadians to simply ignore what they are saying.

          • No — but he’s very full of himself. Trouble is, the right will bend over for any shyster.

          • Any shyster? That’s why the Liberals love the dauphne (Justin Trudeau). As he smugly stands up and derides anything that does not meet his value system. I thought Scarlett O’Hara was going to jump out from behind the curtain. You want a shyster there is one.

            Once again why is he full of himself. He is the Prime Minister of Canada and he runs the country as he sees fit. Canadians will make the determination in four years whether he deserves to be re-elected. Not the opposition or the lamestreet media. Ordinary hardworking Canadians who support many of the policies of the government.

          • Tell your boss you need new talking points, you’re as boring as Kelly Leitch. 

          • I have no boss. However, if you want to defend that idiot Trudeau go ahead. Have at it.

          • Are you admitting this is your own crap?  I’ll give you a minute to edit that last post…

    • No it is the opposition who underestimates the people of Canada. Look at the results of the May 2nd election for confirmation. The opposition thought they had the government over a barrel and trumped up a contempt charge as a reason to force an election. Well the people of Canada showed the opposition parties and gave the government a majority. It is the opposition and the lamestreet media who underestimate the people of Canada.

      • Of course, in Harper’s version of abstract number systems, 39% > 61%.

        • Once again I don’t recall you decrying the Chretien majority with a 39% vote after the ’93 or ’97 election. He would have lost if there had been a united opposition. Even with the opposition divided back in their hey days they could not get past the 50% mark. This type of argument is facile. Now there is a united Conservative party and the Libs have lost for the foreseeable future.
          Once again to point out the obvious Harper won a majority government based on our electoral system and has a right to implement his agenda. Canadians will decide in 015 if they agree or not.

          • Did the Macleans blogs even exist in 93/97?  I’m not sure you could know what any of us were saying then…

          • Probably true. Of course you wouldn’t be talking like this because your guys were in power and everything would have been considered sweetness and light.

          • I quit voting for Chrietien when he cancelled the Somalia Inquiry.I do pine for a balanced budget, though.

          • Actually I was complaining a whole lot about JC (and I voted Liberal back then) but I wasn’t commenting on these fora. I’m not sure if they existed back then. I’m not sure how you’d would have recognized me as I don’t tend to stand on the corner of Bloor and Yonge with a bullhorn deriding politicians I don’t like.

          • Me too. I actually voted PC in opposition to JC and what the Libs were becoming, last time ther was a PC party to vote for. But there’s a huge gulf between the PCs of old and the CPC party – a gulf I’m not willing to cross.

  13. Have you forgotten the Cotler amendments to the crime bill?  Too pig headed and stupid, the government refused to consider them, until the last minute and then they realized they were necessary. What are the chances they will accept suggestions from the opposition on this one?

    • irwin cotler. that great defender of human rights, unless you are candian, then its dont waste my time.

      • Feel free to flesh that one out.

        • great defender of human rights, if there is a photo op ..but if you are canadian  dont call me .. whats so hard to understand.

          • You will have to be more specific.

          • Oh, that’s rich! lol

          • Tinfoil hat on today I see.

  14. cos he is an arrogant and self-centred You-Know-What!!!!

  15. The reason our PM was smiling was because he finally managed to get rid of all his built up gas.

    • I think he sold a bag of gas to the Chinese.

  16. Is it just me, or is that really a picture of The Joker?  Harper is even creepier when he attempts to smile.

  17. Pensioners say Harper is “not sustainable”……pensioners age requirements is 67 now,  because of Harper…..sending thousands of people to welfare……Expert economists including Kevin Page, the official Parliamentary Budget Officer said that this age change is “not necessary” and that the pension plans are “fully sustainable” with no changes needed……Harper will not win the next election…Pensioners “always” vote.

    • Good luck with that. If you think that $100 billion  a year being paid by fewer people in the workfoce in the future is insignificant is silly. Whether it represents a small percentage of GDP is a false comparison. Moving from $38 billion to $100 billion is a pile of dough. Unless you and Kevin Page have a crystal there are going to be many demands on the money in the future. In order to manage healthcare for example the provinces are going to have to increase provincial taxes to pay for it. The changes will not take place for maybe 20 years. No senior or about to be senior is going to be impacted. Getting all riled about something that is not going to happen for 20 years is really asinine..

      You are probably not a supporter of the government but answer me this. Why would the government take this position. Do you honestly believe Harper wants to tick off seniors? Perhaps we should congratulate him for being proactive and managing the country properly.

      • You must be counting on a public pension.

        • No Jan I worked for many years and saved for my own retirment so that I was not dependent on government.
          However, yelling about something that is going to take place in 20-25 years is counterproductive in my opinion.
          Afterall you guys have the internet snooping bill, the elimination of the long gun registry and so many more things to scream about these days. There is lots for people like you to complain today rather than worrying about something that is 20 years down the road.

          • So what are you investing in that produces growth with little risk – that is the challenge, isn’t it?  And nobody’s yelling. h, stop exaggerating.

          • Nobody is yelling? Have you not read the newspapers and watched the media and of course the fearmongering of the opposition parties. Yikes!

  18. Spoken like a true Opportunist!

  19. The only reason he scraped the long gun registry is to divert attention from other issues he doesnt want canadians to pay to much attention to ,so you see you give them something they want divert attention then you can pass whatever new bill you want to ,like new jet new jail bill c30 new tougher laws maybe next thing you know hel declare war with Syria or Iran before you know people around the world will dislike canadian as much as they dislike american.Thank you harper for changing our country in to a communist country

    • You know you really need to step outside and take a deep breath of that fresh Canadian air. You sorely need it.

      The fact is the Conservative government has opposed the long gun registry since it was introduced and more so since we found out it cost the country $2 billion to implement so that it can try and track honest, lawabiding citizens.

      To talk about communism is an insult to every Canadians who supports and voted for the party in the last election. You should be ashamed of yourself. When Harper starts outlawing the media, disbanding opposition parties then maybe we can talk. Quit being a Drama Queen.

      • How can you possibly think registering a weapon is intrusive and this bill isn’t? 

    • serge ..my apologies, but you have no idea what communism is.  you need to be like every other lemming out there and say fascist/nazi.. you know get in lock step with your brothers.

  20. Hello,, note to Macleans.. i prefer political commentary from someone who is actually out of knee pants…and dont try and say that he is just reporting what happened..not with such personal comments as giddy or lamented. 

    • I take it you don’t watch Question Period. 

Sign in to comment.