Thomas Mulcair and the Premiers

by Aaron Wherry

The NDP leader is scolded by Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall.

“Here’s someone who wants to be a national leader, who, for the sake of politics, I think, would risk the economic advantage of the country,” Wall said. ”I work for the people of Saskatchewan and if Mr. Mulcair is wondering for whom I am a messenger, I am a messenger for the people of Saskatchewan and for the economic interests of this province.”

And dismissed by B.C. Finance Minister Kevin Falcon.

“Of course not. The prime minister or the finance minister has never phoned me to suggest what we should be saying about ignorant comments that a national leader may say,” he said. “I’m just telling you exactly what I think about those comments. When I read them, at the time, I was shaking my head. I just could not believe it,” he added.

Alberta Premier Alison Redford expands on her concerns via Facebook.

His claims about unregulated development and disregard for the environment are false. I would also like to make it clear to Mr. Mulcair that as Premier of Alberta I expect that someone would have the courtesy to properly inform themselves rather than making disparaging comments about Alberta.

Previous coverage herehere and here.




Browse

Thomas Mulcair and the Premiers

  1. Well, I’m not a Dipper, and not particularly fond of Mulcair….but pundits are always claiming we need a ‘dialogue’ on matters of national importance, and voters are always claiming they want honesty and to know what a politician really believes….so here we have one saying what he thinks….and people are jumping all over him.

    • Indeed. I’m an Albertan and I don’t think we’re particularly well served by the “circle the wagons” approach that Redford is taking here. We had the knee-jerk and defensive option presented to us in the election in the form of Danielle Smith and rejected it. Redford presented herself as someone more open-minded and thoughtful than she’s acting now.

      • Oh, like protecting the economic interests of her Province – Wow! What a cowboy!

        • “Oh, like protecting the short-term economic interests of an international consortium of companies extracting resources from her Province at ridiculously low premiums compared to any other jurisidiction – Wow! What a cowboy!”
          There, fixed that for you.

    • That’s because what Mulcair really believes is stupid. Are we now supposed to accept idiotic ideas from leaders in the name of ‘dialogue’?

      • Just calling the other person ‘stupid’ is not dialogue

        • Yes it is, when you explain why it’s stupid. Which is exactly what Wall, Redford, etc. have been doing. Simply denying that dialogue is dialogue doesn’t make a stupid idea less stupid.

          • No it’s not. Mulcair also has people who agree with him.

            What provincial premiers have to say about it is irrelevant.

          • Except for the little thing called the Rule of Law. You know, the Constitution and the separation of power between the federal government and provincial governments.

          • Except for the little thing called the Rule of Law. You know, the Constitution and the separation of power between the federal government and provincial governments.

          • Except for the little thing called the Rule of Law. You know, the Constitution and the separation of power between the federal government and provincial governments.

          • Except for the little thing called the Rule of Law. You know, the Constitution and the separation of power between the federal government and provincial governments.

          • Except for the little thing called the Rule of Law. You know, the Constitution and the separation of power between the federal government and provincial governments.

          • Except for the little thing called the Rule of Law. You know, the Constitution and the separation of power between the federal government and provincial governments.

          • Except for the little thing called the Rule of Law. You know, the Constitution and the separation of power between the federal government and provincial governments.

          • Except for the little thing called the Rule of Law. You know, the
            Constitution and the separation of power between the federal government
            and provincial governments.

    • What you mean is that you want a dialogue on issues you do not agree with

    • Further, is Mulcair offering dialogue by labelling an entire region of the economy a disease? Wow!

  2. Aaron,

    Why don’t you acknowledge that they’re all provincial Conservatives?
    And at least one of them (BC Liberals) has an NDP opposition almost 30 points ahead of them.

    I’m sure party affiliation would matter if it were the NDP premier’s Dexter & Selinger criticizing Harper. Party affiliation clearly mattered to you & Wells when Dalton McGuinty said the same thing about the inflated dollar…months before Mulcair.

    • Should probably point out that they’re all Westerner’s too. Everybody knows that nobody should listen to Conservative’s or Westerners, especially when it comes to matters affecting Western Canada’s economy.

      • They are four Conservative politicians, taking marching orders from the Albertan separatist Stephen Harper.

        Two of them (Redford & Wall) are only in power because commodity prices are high. They should kiss the Saudi king like their pal George Bush Jr. did.

        While the other two (Clark & Falcon) are massively unpopular in their own province. Adrian Dix & the NDP are going to decimate them whenever an election is called.

        • Oh right, I forgot, it’s all a giant Conservative conspiracy! The Saudi’s, George Bush, and Western Canadian premiers are all in cahoots to try to suck the life out Eastern Canada’s manufacturing base by increasing the value of the Canadian dollar and decreasing the value of the American dollar. And 9/11 was an inside job!

          • [Double Post]

          • Let me get this straight… because the Saudi’s control the price of oil, and (according to you) Conservative’s only get elected when the price of oil is high, these conservative’s are uniting to prevent Mulcair’s NDP from implementing a plan that will drive down the global price of oil by taxing production of it in Canada and transferring that wealth to Eastern Canada’s manufacturing sector?

            Just a weeeee bit of flawed logic in there, don’t ya think?

          • Christ. You conservatives don’t even understand the oil market that fuels your ideology.

            Alberta’s oil is thick & expensive to extract. The province needs high global oil prices to attract investment.

            When OPEC restricts output, they create high global oil prices.

            The Saudi’s lead OPEC because they have the fastest access to market.

            Without OPEC, the Saudi’s, & high global oil prices…Stephen Harper moves back in with his parents. And Alison Redford goes back to selling Spanx.

        • Then, if the the NDP are going to decimate them, then why doesn’t Adrian Dix come out and label the western economy a disease – weird eh?

    • Why don’t you acknowledge that they were elected by the citizens in the AB, SASK, and BC

  3. I thought the NDP was supposed to be the working man’s party. Not anymore, they’ve turned into a bunch of nuts. Who could vote for this bunch? They’d turn Canada into another Greece!

    • No, the NDP would turn Canada into Sweden.
      A balanced economy with muscular social programs.

      The Liberals & Conservatives are fine with us becoming a petro-narco state. Just look what they did to BC (Liberal narco’s) & Alberta (Con petro’s).

      • While the NDP are trying to turn Canada into Sweden, I’m glad the CPC isn’t trying to turn Canada into anything but Canada. If you want Canada to be Sweden so badly, why not just move to Sweden?

        • You support a party that’s trying to turn Canada into the American state of Texas. You support a prime minister who published an op-ed threatening to separate Alberta from Canada.

          Please no lectures on what’s Canadian.

          • You support a party who’s leader is a French citizen and is trying to turn Canada into a Communist state and take away the freedoms Canadians enjoy. You support a leader who has publicly and repeatedly stated he believes that wealth should be taken from productive industries and shifted into non-productive industries, to take from one region and give to another, just because it’s politically convenient.

            I also find it funny that you think Sweden is more like Canada than Texas. The average Canadian has a lot more in common with the average Texan than they do the average Swede.

          • “…trying to turn Canada into a Communist state and take away the freedoms Canadians enjoy.”

            I don’t know which is worse: that you would say such a thing knowing that it’s horn-honkingly stupid, or that you might actually believe that.

          • “…trying to turn Canada into a Communist state and take away the freedoms Canadians enjoy.”

            I don’t know which is worse: that you would say such a thing knowing that it’s horn-honkingly stupid, or that you might actually believe that.

    • Talking about something means they’re nuts?

      Half the voters are currently pro-NDP according to the polls.

      We are not remotely close to Greece, so don’t use that as a boogey-man

      • How do you make up such incredible lies like “half the voters are currently pro-NDP according to the polls”? Please provide a link to where the NDP is polling above 50%. Or even above 40%. Speaking of nuts….

          • The very first thing your link shows is the NDP polling at 33.4%.
            33.4% is not ‘half the voters’.

          • At the moment the NDP and Cons are tied in voter intentions.

            There is no need to be ‘cute’ about it.

          • I’m not being ‘cute’ about it. Defining ‘half the voters’ as half of the voters intending to vote either NDP or Conservative, ignoring that 40% of the electorate falls into neither of these buckets….
            THAT’s being ‘cute’ about it.

          • Yes you are. They’re standard polls.

            You’re just playing semantics because you don’t like the results.

            Cons and Dippers are tied….no matter what the Libs, BQ and Greens got.

          • Huh? You’re playing semantics because you DO like the results. A poll with the Tories not in the lead.

          • No, I don’t like the results at all. It’s just a standard poll

          • At the moment the NDP and Cons are tied in voter intentions.

            There is no need to be ‘cute’ about it.

          • So, you claim “half the voters” are currently pro-NDP, then you post a link to a poll that shows the NDP at 33%. Do you understand what “half” means?

          • Standard poll.

          • Is that supposed to mean something?! I suggest you do a poll of Canadians and find out how many of them think that 33% is “half”. You’ll be disturbed at the results.

          • Standard poll Rick….stop trolling, it’ll only upset your stomach.

          • On a standard poll, 50% is considered half. Not 33%. You’re the one trolling, posting fake numbers, and then descending into a world of gibberish.

          • Every time you’re bored you get belligerent and troll on here, just to argue

            Nobody finds it amusing.

            Ciao.

          • I’m simply pointing out your lies, I’m not surprised you don’t find it amusing. But that’s not trolling, it’s holding you to account. Funny how the person who spends the entire day trolling here, accuses others of the same. Just remember, 33% is not “half”!

        • 23% of the electorate is a “strong mandate”. Potato, potato.

          • What are you referring to? Harper was elected with over 37% of the popular vote. Are you as good with numbers as Emily?

          • 37% * 59%. Or do the 40%+ of registered voters who choose “none of the above” (or are maliciously diverted from voting by robocalling criminals) not count as the electorate?

          • If you don’t vote you’re signifying that you’re quite happy with whatever the results are.

          • And that changes the math how?

          • Heh. 38% in most of the west. “Strong mandate” territory indeed.

          • Heh. 38% in most of the west. “Strong mandate” territory indeed.

          • Heh. 38% in most of the west. “Strong mandate” territory indeed.

        • Well it’s great to see the enlightened Macleans crowd has voted a comment pointing out a plain, simple, demonstratable fact to -5. The Lefties here must love this new commenting system, they’ll never have to read any unpleasant truths ever again!

  4. Personally, I do agree with Thomas Mulcair.

    For those who oppose Mr. Mulcair, I think that negative attention is better than no attention at all. He’s doing well.

    • Ofcourse, we will equally disperse all economic activity across the country. We don’t want Seoul Disease by having all the manufacturing in one area of the country. We don’t want London UK Disease by having a financial center in Toronto. And, of course we don’t want Quebec Disease by having such huge amount of hydro-electricity located in one region – divert the waters!

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *