The public shaming continues

NDP MP David Christopherson used his members’ statement yesterday to chide Conservative MP Lawrence Toet.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Conservative member for Orléans and the Parliamentary Secretary for the Minister of Public Works did not talk about their ridings; they talked about the official opposition. The member for Elmwood—Transcona has only made one statement in the House since we returned. What did he do with his precious, limited opportunity? He also parroted the PMO’s blatantly misleading lines about the NDP. If that member does not want to talk about his great riding, I am proud to tell the House some of the fantastic things going on in Elmwood—Transcona.

For instance, Transcona is celebrating its 100th anniversary this year. This coincides with the annual Hi Neighbour Festival, also celebrating its own 40th anniversary. These celebrations have allowed people in Transcona to reflect on the famous Canadians who have also come from the area, including Terry Fox; Olympic speed skater, Susan Auch; sports commentator, Rod Black; and of course our own Bill Blaikie. We on this side of the House take great pride in celebrating the centennial. Shame on the member for kowtowing to the PMO—

See previously here, here and here.




Browse

The public shaming continues

  1. Ok, that’s pretty clever.

  2. Instead of doing this in the house they should find a way to get this out to the ridings and let people there know that their MP is not doing their job.

    • If only there was some inexpensive way to mail partisan materials to specially targeted constituencies …

  3. I tend to prefer doing my own fact checking and after a considerable amount of time I managed to track down the NDP election platform form the last election.

    Under “Green Initiatives” the NDP clearly documented the following….

    “Cap and Trade Revenues By Year 3,600 4,300 6,200 7,400”

    By my math those revenues over four years total $ 21.5 Billion.

    How is it possible to suggest claims pointing out what is factually accurate and correct are “blatantly misleading” These claims about the NDP platform are correct and true.

    • The blatantly misleading parts are that the NDP are against jobs and economic recovery. Do try to keep up.

      • I am trying to keep up. That is why I didn’t take the Conservative claims at face value until I investigated this on my own accord and discovered the NDP campaign document that proved the Conservative claims are correct. What is alarming is that some media are actually supporting the real “blatantly misleading” comments that are coming from the NDP who are clearly trying to re-write history when it comes to hiding from what was clearly in the NDP campaign platform. Very disappointed that some media would so blatantly try to cover for the NDP.

        • So you’re doing your best to cover for the CPC as a public service then? Because the CPC claims are *not* correct, not the ones where they lie about the NDP’s reasonings.

          • I am not certain I follow you. It is not a lie to point out that the NDP called for $ 21.5 BILLION in new revenues on Carbon. We can debate the name be it a tax, a levy, a “system” or whatever else but the net point is that there was a price on Carbon. This is much is factually accurate. I have now personally viewed the NDP campaign platform and confirm it. Notice how NONE of the media who defend the NDP on this issue have posted the NDP Platform? Wonder why that it is ? The NDP numbers are right there in black and white. Are people so partisan that they are willing to accept dishonest media misrepresentation so long as it aligns with their own partisan political leanings? it would seem some are.

            Do you deny that the NDP had this in the platform ?

          • It is a lie to claim they are against jobs and economic growth. This is what I pointed out in the first post, and what you repeatedly seek to ignore, you hack.

          • I am not certain why you would resort to name calling, I certainly did not use any derogatory terms in my comments to you. Further, I did not suggest anywhere that the NDP were or were not against jobs and economic growth. My comments were only that the NDP campaign platform did include a price on Carbon totalling $ 21.5 Billion and it was wrong for the NDP MP to suggest that any claims pointing that out were “blatantly misleading” when in fact such claims were in fact accurate and truthful.

          • Hi Bill,
            I entirely agree that the NDP platform shows they would raise $21.5 billion in revenues.
            Now, let’s move this conversation forward – care to rebut my point above?

          • If you could post a link to what your comments are based on I would be happy to respond.

          • Hi Bill,

            Link: http://www.pm.gc.ca/eng/media.asp?id=2131

            Now, I’m going to predict you’re going to ask me about the second half of the sentence I quoted, and that’s fine, but how about you first follow the courtesy I extended you – do you, or do you not agree that in 2008 the prime minister announced he planned to implement a carbon price of $65 per tonne – yes or no?

          • The Conservative price on carbon has you equally upset, no doubt.

          • You’re the only one who has said that those are the claims they are calling blatantly misleading. If anybody is being misleading, it’s you.

            And that’s why I called you a name, you lying hack.

          • Took me a couple of secs to find this on this blog. While not the platform itself it does make your claim a little silly.
            http://www2.macleans.ca/2012/09/27/the-farce-and-the-math/

            Check out the link to what VL had to say. And remember ALL of the different options from carbon tax to cap n’ trade and the present regulatory approach have costs to the economy and the consumer.[ most experts say that regulations are the costliest of all] The govt’s argument is a red herring.

          • In that post Wherry actually confirms that the Conservatvies are correct – the NDP Platform did INDEED contain a proposal of $ 21.5 BILLION in increased revnues on Carbon. In spite of confirming this he, suggests that the Conservatives pointing this out is somehow a “farce” when in fact it is true.

            Ultimately my issue is why does a supposedly non partisan member of the media need to cast his own personal political judgement and label anything as a farce ? Why not simply provide factual information instead ? Why not simply say “here is the comments from the Conservative’s and here is what was in the NDP platform – you decide” Suggesting that there is a “farce” when in fact these figures were factually in the NDP platform is not responsible journalism. It is however acceptable partisan commentary and that is ultimately my point and why I conveyed my point of view.

          • You aren’t paying close enough attention. Follow all the links through if you have the time and you will see what he is driving at. Don’t be tempted by the revenue red herring – it is exactly what the CPC want you to do.
            A more legitimate point to go after the NDP on is that they too pretend that their C&T will not hurt the consumer. Both sides are playing politics with this one. It does nothing to move the issue forward.

    • I tend to prefer doing my own fact checking and after an entire 19 seconds (would have been 16 seconds but I sneezed), on the PMO website, I found the following speech titled “Prime Minister Harper addresses the Canada-U.K. Chamber of Commerce in London”
      “…our plan will effectively establish a price on carbon of $65 a tonne”.
      How is it possible to suggest claims pointing out what is factually accurate and correct are “blatantly misleading”. These claims about the Conservative platform are correct and true. They supported a carbon tax.

      • Ah, but a “price” is not a “tax”, don’tcha’ see?

        • I have a feeling we won’t be hearing from Bill any time soon.
          Bill, are you out there?

        • Specially when it doesn’t book any revenue.

Sign in to comment.