1629 others browsing the Canadian Forums! Join us!

Conservative Gurmant Grewal

Conservative Gurmant Grewal

Andygal

#181

RE: Conservative Gurmant

Jun 16th, 2005

Nobody's arguing that the Liberals are innocent. They did make offers. However the offers were not really explicit, which is what the Conservatives were originally saying, and Grewal approached them looking for bribes, when as I understand it, his original story was that THEY approached HIM.

You are missing the point that the tapes were altered, and Stephen Harper's high ranking bearucrat cronies knew about it at least, and he MUST have known about it.

You still persist in pointing the finger at the Liberals, while ignoring the fact that the Conservatives have been caught with bright red hands editing tapes and lying, and that this thing goes well up in the party ranks, maybe all the way up to Stephen Harper.

You are so busy spinning on the Conservative wheel that you cannot even concieve of the fact that you might be wrong to place the blame soley on the Liberals.

Reverend Blair

#182

Re: Conservative Gurmant Grewal

Jun 16th, 2005

Quote:

If there answer was no, why did they say that Martin would talk to him on the phone on the way to Regina? Why did Dosanjh not say no? Why did Murphy not say no? Why did Dosanjh have to get Murphy, just so neither could say no? Why did the LIbs continue to call Grewal and not say no? Why is there absolutely no indication of a no response in any of the transcripts? And further:

They didn't say yes. Considering that Grewal was doing was entrapment, that's a pretty solid defence.

Nobody is saying that the Liberals shouldn't be investigated for this, though. In fact the NDP called for a full investigation of both the Liberals and the Conservatives by the Ethics Commissioner and the RCMP.

Quote:

On The Rutherford Show in Calgary today, it was confirmed that the original tapes have been reviewed by one of the same experts who said that the copies were altered, and he said that the originals were unaltered. I wonder why this has not been healdline news across Canada, given that the altered copies was headline news.

Like I said, the original tapes being unaltered got full coverage on CBC. If the story was no considered above the fold front page news by some editors has a lot to do with what the stories of the day were though.

Considering that the Conservatives never released those tapes in the first place, instead releasing altered copies in an attempt to garner public support, the altered copies were a much bigger story. That is especially true because the Conservatives were pushing the fact that they had pulled a Nixon and secretly recorded conversations.

Quote:

In addition, the RCMP investigated the Air Canada incident and determined nothing illegal was done, and there was no impropriety. Anyone who has passed the security is free to do exactly what Grewal did, and apparently this happens all the time.

There are pretty tight rules at airports, Blue. Nobody with a working brain asks people they don't know to carry a package onto an airplane for them, especially a plane the owner of the package is not getting on. It does not happen all the time.

Quote:

John Reynolds also said that he has reported Murphy, Dosanjh, and David Petereson to the Law society due to their improprieties in the Grewal and Stronach deals. He said he was encouraged to do this by lawyers from BC. Appears all this may no be over yet.

And the longer the Conservatives keep it going, the further they drop in the polls. Peterson and Stronach have nothing to do with the Law Society in BC at all, plus there is no proof that anything improper was done. Grewal is pretty questionable as well, since he was attempting to entrap the Liberals, made recordings in a questionable way, and never got yes for an answer.

bluealberta

#183

Re: RE: Conservative Gurmant

Jun 16th, 2005

Quote: Originally Posted by Andygal

Nobody's arguing that the Liberals are innocent. They did make offers. However the offers were not really explicit, which is what the Conservatives were originally saying, and Grewal approached them looking for bribes, when as I understand it, his original story was that THEY approached HIM.

You are missing the point that the tapes were altered, and Stephen Harper's high ranking bearucrat cronies knew about it at least, and he MUST have known about it.

You still persist in pointing the finger at the Liberals, while ignoring the fact that the Conservatives have been caught with bright red hands editing tapes and lying, and that this thing goes well up in the party ranks, maybe all the way up to Stephen Harper.

You are so busy spinning on the Conservative wheel that you cannot even concieve of the fact that you might be wrong to place the blame soley on the Liberals.

As usual, you miss the point. No one is condoning what Grewal did, and in fact, John Reynolds admitted their first mistake was the tapes. However, there is certainly differences of opinion about who approached who first, which maybe the RCMP will determine.

My point is that the media, and the left wingers, are very quick to jump all over Grewal, but totally ignore the fact that there were offers made by the liberals, which are illegal. And please, it only takes once to say no, not 23 times.

As far as spin goes, the liberal spinners are guilty of exactly what you accuse me of being. I admit Grewal may not have been right, but where have any of the left wingers admitted the libs were wrong? Of course, I understand that there are very few morals or ethics on the left wing which does explain why no one on the left can ever admit they may be wrong. Just one more difference between left and right: the right can admit mistakes, the left does not ever admit or recognise mistakes, because they truly believe they are incapable of mistakes. Such arrogance.

bluealberta

#184

Re: Conservative Gurmant Grewal

Jun 16th, 2005

Quote: Originally Posted by Reverend Blair

Quote: If there answer was no, why did they say that Martin would talk to him on the phone on the way to Regina? Why did Dosanjh not say no? Why did Murphy not say no? Why did Dosanjh have to get Murphy, just so neither could say no? Why did the LIbs continue to call Grewal and not say no? Why is there absolutely no indication of a no response in any of the transcripts? And further:They didn't say yes. Considering that Grewal was doing was entrapment, that's a pretty solid defence.
Nobody is saying that the Liberals shouldn't be investigated for this, though. In fact the NDP called for a full investigation of both the Liberals and the Conservatives by the Ethics Commissioner and the RCMP.
Quote: On The Rutherford Show in Calgary today, it was confirmed that the original tapes have been reviewed by one of the same experts who said that the copies were altered, and he said that the originals were unaltered. I wonder why this has not been healdline news across Canada, given that the altered copies was headline news.Like I said, the original tapes being unaltered got full coverage on CBC. If the story was no considered above the fold front page news by some editors has a lot to do with what the stories of the day were...
Quote has been trimmed

Unbelievable. Repeat the socialist left mantra long enough and I guess you will believe it: Conservatives always wrong, Libs always right. If Peterson offered Stronach a reward for switching, he will be guilty of unethical behaviour as defined by the Law Society. Same for Murphy and Dosanjh, who are also both lawyers.

The original tapes, no matter when or who they were given to, are unaltered. If the Libs wanted to say no, which is not true, they had all sorts of opportunities. If both Murphy and Dosanjh both said no, why would they offer to let Grewal talk to Martin? So Martin could say no? Refusing to acknowledge the Liberals made offers is simply stupid, which I suppose reflects the intelligence of those who refuse to acknowledge the offers.

Given everything the Liberals have been accused of and been proven to have done regarding mismanagement, stealing, lying, and money laundering, tell us exactly what they have to do before they can be accused of being incompetent to run the country? Or do Eastern Canadians really want an Idi Amin type of government?

Reverend Blair

#185

Re: Conservative Gurmant Grewal

Jun 17th, 2005

Quote:

If Peterson offered Stronach a reward for switching, he will be guilty of unethical behaviour as defined by the Law Society.

And when it turns out that the Conservatives have no proof, they will get whipped for playing political games with the law society. Then they'll whine because everybody is picking on them.

The BC Law Society has no standing in Ontario though. That pretty much just leaves Dosanjh as the only one they can take action against. Again, he never said yes so it will be very difficult to prove he did anything wrong. There is a much better chance of the Ethics Commissioner for the HofC going after him.

You are talking about legal matters, Blue. This is not the same as one of your right-wing call-in shows.

Quote:

The original tapes, no matter when or who they were given to, are unaltered.

So why weren't they released to the public? Why the altered versions instead? And why haven't the RCMP got the tapes?

Quote:

If the Libs wanted to say no, which is not true, they had all sorts of opportunities. If both Murphy and Dosanjh both said no, why would they offer to let Grewal talk to Martin? So Martin could say no? Refusing to acknowledge the Liberals made offers is simply stupid, which I suppose reflects the intelligence of those who refuse to acknowledge the offers.

Again, you are talking about a legal matter and trying to judge it by talk show standards. That doesn't work. The Liberals never said yes. Were they stringing him along? Almost certainly. So what? Stringing somebody along isn't illegal. Asking for a UN gig for your wife in exchange for your vote is though.

Unless there is more evidence than the tape, it's a pretty hard case to make, especially since the Conservatives have been less than cooperative in getting an investigation going.

Again...your best bet is with the Ethics Commissioner.

Ted

#186

Re: Conservative Gurmant Grewal

Jun 17th, 2005

Blue, again, I want to bring up the fact that Chuck Cadman was offered money to vote with the Conservatives. I am still waiting to hear why you rant on and on about the Liberals making offers to Grewal, but you want to completely avoid the Cadman situation.

Grewal lied to obtain citizenship, he lied about his past work on resumes and in interviews, and he tried to entrap the Liberals. Then to top it all off, he committed a security faux pas at the airport.

I'm sorry, Blue, but consensus here in Grewal's riding is that the guy is a major scum bag. I don't believe anything he says. Chuck Cadman is a different story.

So, do explain how you reconcile this double standard you have. I think you need to cut down on the kool-aid, step back and see things without prejudice.

bluealberta

#187

Re: Conservative Gurmant Grewal

Jun 23rd, 2005

In the interests of fairness regarding Mr. Grewal:

Grewal cleared in immigration controversy
Last Updated Wed, 22 Jun 2005 18:07:58 EDT
CBC News
The federal ethics watchdog has cleared Tory MP Gurmant Grewal of conflict-of-interest allegations in an immigration controversy.

Ethics commissioner Bernard Shapiro said the B.C. legislator made an error in judgment by having his office demand cash guarantees of up to $250,000 before he helped some foreigners seeking visas to visit Canada.

Gurmant Grewal. (File photo)
In a report tabled Wednesday in the House of Commons, Shapiro said the practice placed Grewal in an apparent conflict of interest .

However, Grewal was making an honest mistake and never pocketed any money from the pledges, the ethics commissioner said.

"There was no real conflict of interest," Shapiro said in the report.

"No profit personal to Mr. Grewal was either intended or realized."

Grewal's office asked some sponsors for the guarantees before the MP would go to bat for them after the Immigration Department turned down a visitor's visa for a friend or relative.

The pledges – which ranged from $1,000 to $250,000 – were meant to ensure that the visitors didn't stay in Canada after their visas expired.

The ethics investigation found that Grewal's office collected 232 signed guarantees from 2002 to 2005, when it ended the practice. There was no attempt to redeem any of the guarantees.

Shapiro's investigation stemmed from a complaint in April from Federal Immigration Minister Joe Volpe.

FROM JUNE 6, 2005: MP Grewal goes on stress leave

Grewal is on stress leave after finding himself in the midst of a separate controversy over tapes he made as he negotiated with top Liberals to break Conservative ranks in order to ensure Paul Martin's minority government didn't fall.

Earlier in June, Grewal was also cleared of wrongdoing by RCMP and Transport Canada investigations launched after he tried to get Ottawa-bound passengers at the Vancouver airport to carry a package for him.

bluealberta

#188

Re: Conservative Gurmant Grewal

Jun 23rd, 2005

More Grewal positive stuff:
PM to be included in Grewal ethics probe

Prime Minister Paul Martin and his chief of staff will be part of a federal ethics probe into allegations that the Liberals tried to buy the votes of two Conservative members of Parliament.

Speaking to a Commons committee on Thursday, ethics commissioner Bernard Shapiro confirmed he'll include Martin and Tim Murphy in his investigation, which begins next week.

Health Minister Ujjal Dosanjh is already under investigation.

In May, as the minority Liberals faced defeat in the House of Commons, Tory MP Gurmant Grewal made public secretly recorded meetings and phone calls with Dosanjh and Murphy.

The three discussed the possibility that Grewal and his wife, Tory MP Nina Grewal, would support the Liberals in a key confidence vote on May 19 in exchange for plum jobs.

Grewal says the Liberals approached him with an offer, but Liberal officials say he approached them first. Independent experts later confirmed the tapes of the conversations had been altered.

Shapiro had previously said he lacked the power to investigate Murphy because he is not a member of Parliament. The opposition strenuously protested that analysis.

However, Shapiro conceded that Murphy is central to the issue of whether inducements were offered improperly to Grewal before the budget vote.

Shapiro said Murphy won't be the central focus of the probe, which will look into whether the conversations violated ethical standards drawn up by the prime minister.

New Democrat MP Ed Broadbent is spearheading an effort to force Shapiro to resign by bringing forward a motion of non-confidence. Broadbent says he believes Shapiro can't handle the posting.

MPs said they will decide next week whether to consider the motion.

Reverend Blair

#189

Re: Conservative Gurmant Grewal

Jun 23rd, 2005

Positive stuff about Grewal?

Quote:

In May, as the minority Liberals faced defeat in the House of Commons, Tory MP Gurmant Grewal made public secretly recorded meetings and phone calls with Dosanjh and Murphy.

That ain't positive.

Quote:

Independent experts later confirmed the tapes of the conversations had been altered.

That ain't positive either.

Quote:

New Democrat MP Ed Broadbent is spearheading an effort to force Shapiro to resign by bringing forward a motion of non-confidence. Broadbent says he believes Shapiro can't handle the posting.

That ain't positive for Grewal either, although it is positive for Ed.

Quote:

Ethics commissioner Bernard Shapiro said the B.C. legislator made an error in judgment by having his office demand cash guarantees of up to $250,000 before he helped some foreigners seeking visas to visit Canada.

This would also be not positive, especially since Ed's motion points to Grewal deserving more punishment.

Quote:

In a report tabled Wednesday in the House of Commons, Shapiro said the practice placed Grewal in an apparent conflict of interest .

That's also not positive...especially since you guys are going after Judy Skro who got the same kind of non-judgement.

bluealberta

#190

Re: Conservative Gurmant Grewal

Jun 23rd, 2005

The commissioner cleared Grewal on conflict of interest allegations and the Air Canada incident.

Taping conversations with known criminals and crooks is a common method of protecting your ass.

The original tapes have been confirmed as authentic and unaltered. The copies were edited, which was not denied.

Reverend Blair

#191

RE: Conservative Gurmant

Jun 24th, 2005

Just going by the news reports you posted, Blue.

The commissioner did not clear Grewal on conflict of interest. In fact he said there was at least the appearance of conflict of interest.

Making secret recordings outside the law enforcement community (who need a warrant for the evidence to be admissible btw) is not illegal, but the ethical concerns make Grewal look like an idiot.

The edited copies were what was released to the public. It was clearly an attempt to mislead for political advantage. It also very likely goes a hell of a higher than Gurmant Grewal. The CPC then claimed to have made the originals available to the RCMP, but if the RCMP had them, what was an expert (hired by the CPC, not the RCMP) doing with them?

bluealberta

#192

Re: RE: Conservative Gurmant

Jun 24th, 2005

Quote: Originally Posted by Reverend Blair

Just going by the news reports you posted, Blue.

The commissioner did not clear Grewal on conflict of interest. In fact he said there was at least the appearance of conflict of interest.

Making secret recordings outside the law enforcement community (who need a warrant for the evidence to be admissible btw) is not illegal, but the ethical concerns make Grewal look like an idiot.

The edited copies were what was released to the public. It was clearly an attempt to mislead for political advantage. It also very likely goes a hell of a higher than Gurmant Grewal. The CPC then claimed to have made the originals available to the RCMP, but if the RCMP had them, what was an expert (hired by the CPC, not the RCMP) doing with them?

REad the first post:

The federal ethics watchdog has cleared Tory MP Gurmant Grewal of conflict-of-interest allegations in an immigration controversy.

I repeat: Cover your ass when dealing with crooks and liars.

The originals are authentic, as verified by the same expert who verified the copies were edited, and this expert was trotted out by the Liberals.

Face it, a lot of this stuff is coming back on the liberals as proof of their lies and fearmongering.

Reverend Blair

#193

RE: Conservative Gurmant

Jun 24th, 2005

Read the text. Listen to somebody outside of your little bubble.

bluealberta

#194

Re: RE: Conservative Gurmant

Jun 24th, 2005

Quote: Originally Posted by Reverend Blair

Read the text. Listen to somebody outside of your little bubble.

Even you can read: He has been cleared. Read the post before the one you are looking at, okay? It's not hard, you simply scroll up to the article in question.

SirKevin

#195

RE: Conservative Gurmant Grewal

Jun 24th, 2005

You guys are proud that your best political strategy is to offer a vote to the government in exchange for rewards, tape them discussing your suggestion, and then accuse them of acting unethically?

That's just pathetic, not to mention childish.

I somehow have no problems picturing Harper handing out tape recorders at a caucus meeting.

bluealberta

#196

Re: RE: Conservative Gurmant Grewal

Jun 24th, 2005

Quote: Originally Posted by SirKevin

You guys are proud that your best political strategy is to offer a vote to the government in exchange for rewards, tape them discussing your suggestion, and then accuse them of acting unethically?

That's just pathetic, not to mention childish.

I somehow have no problems picturing Harper handing out tape recorders at a caucus meeting.

....and it does not bother you that in order to protect you ass with the liberals people are forced to take these measures? That is patheti, and incredibly naive. The offers were made. That is unethical. Belinda was bought, she and the libs are both unethical.

You can picture all you want, but your lens is a little clouded when you can defend the liars, cheats, and crooks in the liberal party. You have bought into the disinformation propoganda machine spun out by the libs. They do it just for folks like you, and I guess it works. You fell for it.

SirKevin

#197

Re: RE: Conservative Gurmant Grewal

Jun 24th, 2005

Quote: Originally Posted by bluealberta

....and it does not bother you that in order to protect you ass with the liberals people are forced to take these measures? That is patheti, and incredibly naive. The offers were made. That is unethical. Belinda was bought, she and the libs are both unethical.

Grewal was somehow forced to go to the Liberals looking for a Cabinet post or Senate seat? This was nothing more htan a childish prank on the Conservatives' part.

bluealberta

#198

Re: RE: Conservative Gurmant Grewal

Jun 25th, 2005

Quote: Originally Posted by SirKevin

Quote: Originally Posted by bluealberta
....and it does not bother you that in order to protect you ass with the liberals people are forced to take these measures? That is patheti, and incredibly naive. The offers were made. That is unethical. Belinda was bought, she and the libs are both unethical.
Grewal was somehow forced to go to the Liberals looking for a Cabinet post or Senate seat? This was nothing more htan a childish prank on the Conservatives' part.

No, Kevin. Given that the liberals always lie through their teeth, he thought it was prudent to have proof by taping the conversations. Although the copies were edited, and I have seen and posted the edited verisions where the edited parts were cut out as they did not add anything, the originals are unedited, as confirmed by the same expert the liberals used to verify the copies were edited.

jimmy123

#199

RE: Conservative Gurmant Grewal

Jun 27th, 2005

As I stated before, the problem with the Grewal taping incident is simply that, if it was all a "sting" operation as Grewal and the Conservatives insist, they should have been more than happy to turn the entire, unedited conversations over to the media, authorities, etc. right off the bat. Simply making pure, 100% reproductive copies of original, unedited tapes is not that difficult to accomplish. Why in the world would you edit the tapes and/or not present the tapes in their entirety if your original motives were pure is flat out foolishness. Unless of course Mr. Grewal was in fact initially after a plum post for him and his wife, and if he didn't get a guarantee of such posts from the Liberals (I believe the tapes show that there was in fact no guarantee) , he would use the tapes to try and become a star within the ranks of the Conservative Party by claiming that it was all done in an effort to expose the Liberals as a party that tries to buy off opposition members to switch sides.

Having said that, cutting deals with opposition members is far from unusual in the history of politics. None other than Winston Churchill switched parties not once but twice in his political career. The first time was from the Conservatives to the Liberals just as the Conservatives under PM Balfour were being ousted from power (Churchill bargained for an assistant secretary position he wanted with the Liberals after he was originally offered another position he found less appealing). The second time was switching back to the Conservatives when he was offered the prestigious role of Chancellor of the Exchequer by the Conservatives.

jimmy123

#200

Re: Conservative Gurmant Grewal

Jun 27th, 2005

My main concern with Mr. Grewal is not so much his attempted spy tactics or his requests that foreigners arriving in the country put up money as a deposit to ensure they do not abuse their privileges when entering the country (I think this was an honest mistake like the Integrity Commissioner stated).

The real sore thumb is the alleged incident where Grewal "invested" money in a Canadian company upon his arrival in Canada to meet requirements to fast-track his ability to gain official status in Canada by investing to "create jobs" for Canadians, only to apparently pull his money out of the "investment" the following day. I have just heard/read bits and pieces of this story, but if true, it appears to be a blatant attempt to skirt the rules to accelerate his acceptance into Canada, as investing in a company one day and pulling your money out the next obviously does not create the "jobs" such and investment is intended to offer.

Ted

#201

Re: Conservative Gurmant Grewal

Jun 27th, 2005

Quote:

....and it does not bother you that in order to protect you ass with the liberals people are forced to take these measures? That is patheti, and incredibly naive. The offers were made. That is unethical. Belinda was bought, she and the libs are both unethical.

And the Conservatives offered money and perks to Chuck Cadman. So as I have said before, they are all corrupt and unethical. Chuck just refused to be bought, and he had enough integrity to not secretly tape the conversations. Why is it so wrong for the Liberals to talk to Grewal, but it's ok to try to bribe Cadman. Please do explain. You keep sidestepping my question, Blue.

mrmom2

#202

Re: Conservative Gurmant Grewal

Jun 27th, 2005

Ethical politicians

There is no such thing they are all corupt HELLO :P You people are making zero sense

bluealberta

#203

Re: Conservative Gurmant Grewal

Jun 27th, 2005

Quote: Originally Posted by Ted

Quote:
....and it does not bother you that in order to protect you ass with the liberals people are forced to take these measures? That is patheti, and incredibly naive. The offers were made. That is unethical. Belinda was bought, she and the libs are both unethical.
And the Conservatives offered money and perks to Chuck Cadman. So as I have said before, they are all corrupt and unethical. Chuck just refused to be bought, and he had enough integrity to not secretly tape the conversations. Why is it so wrong for the Liberals to talk to Grewal, but it's ok to try to bribe Cadman. Please do explain. You keep sidestepping my question, Blue.

Not trying to sidestep anything. They offered to let him run unopposed in the nomination meeting. He still would have had to run as a candidate against the other parities. Quite a different story than buying somone, or trying to buy someone, and then either giving them a cabinet position (Stronach) or offering a position (Grewal). Apples and oranges.

Ted

#204

Re: Conservative Gurmant Grewal

Jun 27th, 2005

Blue I heard Cadman on CKNW say that not only did they offer to not run anyone against him, they also offered him money for his campaign.
You can check this out. The statement is on the record.

I also wish that they would investigate whether Grewal lied to obtain entry and citizenship. I am sick and tired of people lying to come here. I also think it is highly unethical to ask people to post bonds to anyone that is not CIC. This guy is a lying corrupt scum bag.

bluealberta

#205

Re: Conservative Gurmant Grewal

Jun 27th, 2005

Quote: Originally Posted by Ted

Blue I heard Cadman on CKNW say that not only did they offer to not run anyone against him, they also offered him money for his campaign.
You can check this out. The statement is on the record.

I also wish that they would investigate whether Grewal lied to obtain entry and citizenship. I am sick and tired of people lying to come here. I also think it is highly unethical to ask people to post bonds to anyone that is not CIC. This guy is a lying corrupt scum bag.

Had not heard of the money thing. And to your bond comment, the ethics commissioner, a liberal, cleared him in that regard. Hey, he is not my favorite bud either, but I get really tired of the left jumping all over any right winger who may or may not have been squeaky clean, when there are so many examples on the left that no one cares about. The hypocrisy of the media in particular is overwhelming on this issue.

Ted

#206

Re: Conservative Gurmant Grewal

Jun 27th, 2005

Yeah, Blue, they are all corrupt. I wish there was the "None of the Above" option on the ballot. I am not right or left. These concepts are just inventions to perpetuate the myth of democracy. I vote for the best man or woman to represent my riding. And when they put their party before the constituents, I spam them with angry mail.

They all tell us what they think they need to say to get elected, and then they only care about keeping their power and increasing it. Each party has their own flavour of Kool-aid and we drink it and froth at the mouth at each other, spewing stupid partisan spin at each other. Instead, we should be standing together and demanding that they represent our interests in parliament. As long as we get caught up in the game, we will never be able to unite in the best interests of the country.

mrmom2

#207

Re: Conservative Gurmant Grewal

Jun 27th, 2005

All right Ted your one of the few people on this forum that feels the same way I do .Its all one big scam to make sure they can control and steal the masses money

bluealberta

#208

Re: Conservative Gurmant Grewal

Jun 27th, 2005

Quote: Originally Posted by Ted

Yeah, Blue, they are all corrupt. I wish there was the "None of the Above" option on the ballot. I am not right or left. These concepts are just inventions to perpetuate the myth of democracy. I vote for the best man or woman to represent my riding. And when they put their party before the constituents, I spam them with angry mail.

They all tell us what they think they need to say to get elected, and then they only care about keeping their power and increasing it. Each party has their own flavour of Kool-aid and we drink it and froth at the mouth at each other, spewing stupid partisan spin at each other. Instead, we should be standing together and demanding that they represent our interests in parliament. As long as we get caught up in the game, we will never be able to unite in the best interests of the country.

So, I may agree with this in principle, but the question then remains: What do we do about it, or how do we fix it? These things have been discussed ad naseum, with no change. Eastern Canada still elects the government, policies are set for Eastern Canada because of this, not that I blame them the government, and the hinterlands outside of central eastern Canada gets ignored or belittled. I have long thought that this country is too big, geographically, to operate as a unified system, and perhaps a regional federal government is required. For example, and this is really basic, how about a Western government (BC, Alta, Sask, Man) a Central Govt (Ontario and Quebed) and a Maritime government, plus a territorial government? Representatives from each of these areas meet once, twice, three?? times per year, at the Parliament for issues relating solely to national interests, like military, immigration, to name two, and the rest of the time, these governments meet in their own regions to discuss their own regional interests. At least then, the regional governments would be dealing with regional interests, which to me, is the cause of much of the tension in the country today.

I know this is just a rough idea, and maybe the Maritimes could be lumped with Quebec and Ontario, and maybe the territories could be lumped with Western Canada, so you would only have two groups. At the very least, it would ensure that regional issues get discussed at a national level, and would also get the feds out of everything that pertains to the provinces.

mrmom2

#209

Re: Conservative Gurmant Grewal

Jun 27th, 2005

I like that idea Blue but the problem with it is we'll end up paying even more taxes because we'll have more politicians and beuracrats

bluealberta

#210

Re: Conservative Gurmant Grewal

Jun 27th, 2005

Quote: Originally Posted by mrmom2

I like that idea Blue but the problem with it is we'll end up paying even more taxes because we'll have more politicians and beuracrats

Maybe, maybe not. I would see it as each region setting tax rates and collecting taxes to be used in their own regions, to go to programs that are an issue in their regions. So if Ontario wanted to have a program for, oh, gun control, but the western region did not, then the east could fund its own program, while the west could do something else.

This is a rough idea only, but there may be some merit to it. Any other thoughts on how this may, or may not, work? And reasonable ones, not some sort of cliched rhetorical response.

Similar Threads

Conservative Euphemisms
by Cannuck | Apr 28th, 2009

Why are you Conservative?
by CanadienA1 | Jan 6th, 2007

What don't you like about Conservative policies?
by MMMike | Jan 24th, 2006

Everything you need to know about what a Neo-Conservative is
by jjw1965 | Oct 23rd, 2005

Gurmant in Trouble Again.
by Reverend Blair | Aug 14th, 2005