The Martin "Address" to the Nation


whicker
#31
Quote: Originally Posted by MMMike

As Stephen Harper correctly put it, "A prime minister should not be addressing the population on this partisan issue, but rather on the concerns and challenges with which we are confronted: the health care system, international trade, agriculture, the fiscal imbalance, safer communities, stronger families, and a cleaner environment."

He should not have used this time for anything as it is supposed to be 'national issue' time and the fact that the liberals are in hot water is not national but rather party issue.
 
whicker
#32
Quote: Originally Posted by Reverend Blair

Martin tried a Hail Mary pass tonight. Like that phrase.It just might work too...the man on the street reaction on TV has been mixed. We'll know next week when the polls come out.
I thought the 'man on the street' was supposed to like him already

Anyway, Martin did a good job in his first election speech in almost a year. He looked haggard and contrite. He listed everything that he did in regard to sponsorship, including shutting down the program. He played to all of the polls, which indicate that Canadians want to wait for an election.

Harper came off as being arrogant and unstatesman-like to anybody who is worried about him. I don't think he came across as arrogant or unstatesman but there is something about him that just doesn't seem to elicite a good reactionHe spun out the same old lines. He also, in the little bit of policy he mentioned, seemed to back away from Kyoto again. He flip-flopped before when he said he would honour the agreement, but tonight he mentioned every kind of pollution except greenhouse gas.

Harper looked like he was making an election speech to a partisan crowd in downtown Calgary, not to an Ontario audience that's nervous about him. Don't know what it is about the man but he looked like he was giving his very first speech in school, not an election speech or to anybody in particular. I thought his speech was better than the other two. It really wasn't an election speech or too much of one. No politician is going to miss an opportunity to stroke their own goals but at least it was at the end and only one para.
Duceppe played to his Quebec separatists. That's good. That's his job.

Layton made an election speech which was not necessary but then there is the stroking aspect.
Who's going to benefit? We'll see. Harper is going to have to get on an Ontario message if he wants to win seats though. Right now the only bet I'd take would be 100 to 1 for Duceppe becoming the next PM...everything else is too screwed up to call. And won't that make more mess for RC or Real Canada.

 
no1important
#33
Personally I think the PM no matter who he/she is, should adress the Nation at least once a month, even if it is just for five minutes.

People want to hear whats on his/her mind and talk to us, the people about ongoing issues, legislations and any other important updates etc. I think some issues are important enough that they should be coming from the horses (pm's) mouth, so to speak. So we are clear where he/she stands.

We elect them so it is their duty to keep us informed, and not just by newspapers, radio, speeches in House of Commons. The Prime minister is the head of the country and he should be able to adress the people without people bitching about it being a waste of money.

CPAC, Newsworld and Newsnet would carry it anyways at no cost to taxpayers.
 
Numure
#34
Quote: Originally Posted by DasFX

Quote: Originally Posted by no1important

well at 4 pm pdt was too early. 5:30 pdt would of been better(still early here but we all need to compromise), yes that is late in NFLD but still just 10 pm there. 8:30 in Montreal so that would of been a better compromise for the whole country. Most people I know do not get off work until 4 or 5. Its not as if they all would be driving home as fast as they could to watch it anyways..........

Honestly, it wasn’t Paul Martin who decided to go at 7 EDT (4 PDT), it was the networks. Thursday is a big night for Canadians to watch their American TV so having it interrupted by the Canadian Prime Minister wasn't even an option (for Ontario and Québec).

Like I said it was taped, watching it at 4 PDT or 5:30 PDT or 8 PDT wouldn't have made a difference so what is the big deal? The information didn't change. As for the opposition speeches, they simply read a script. I could have watched the thing at 3AM; I would have gotten the same info out of it.

Well, English TV isnt popular here. Any day or time would of been the same.
 
Reverend Blair
#35
Quote:

Personally I think the PM no matter who he/she is, should adress the Nation at least once a month, even if it is just for five minutes.

As long as the other party leaders get to speak too, that would be excellent. You can't even hear what they say in the HofC half the time anymore.

Quote:

I thought the 'man on the street' was supposed to like him already

That really didn't seem to have been changed by the speeches.

Quote:

I don't think he came across as arrogant or unstatesman but there is something about him that just doesn't seem to elicite a good reaction

Everybody I've talked to that isn't right-leaning is creeped out by Harper. One right-leaning (far enough that I keep expecting him to tip over) person that I know is absolutely livid at Harper right now. Harper should be way up in the polls with all this going on. He isn't.
 
dukee
#36
Quote: Originally Posted by no1important

Personally I think the PM no matter who he/she is, should adress the Nation at least once a month, even if it is just for five minutes.

People want to hear whats on his/her mind and talk to us, the people about ongoing issues, legislations and any other important updates etc. I think some issues are important enough that they should be coming from the horses (pm's) mouth, so to speak. So we are clear where he/she stands.

We elect them so it is their duty to keep us informed, and not just by newspapers, radio, speeches in House of Commons. The Prime minister is the head of the country and he should be able to adress the people without people bitching about it being a waste of money.

CPAC, Newsworld and Newsnet would carry it anyways at no cost to taxpayers.

That's actually a good idea. You should pass it on to Mr. Harper (sorry, I couldn't resist ).
 
cub1c
#37
Quote:

I know and understand how the Bloc has the power it does,but why is a regional separatist group allowed to be ann official opposition in our government? Their motives are only pursuing their separatist agenda and not on the betterment of our country.

Euh, because they are elected?

Ok, so you're saying we should stop a party that have different views than you from being candidates. WTF

Ok let's have only one party so everybody always agree!

Man, I can't stand federalists.
 
cub1c
#38
Quote:

I like what he said. He apologized, took some of the blame, vowed to fix things, and promised to hold an election once the final report is release.

Do you really think it was possible that he was going to say: f*ck you all...I don't remember what happened...I don't see why I should fix anything...and there will never be any election anymore!

PS: Get real, he didn't wrote a single line himself in this speech.
 
cub1c
#39
By the way, how many people still think we will not have an election in June?

Wake up. The machine is started. And there is no turning back.
 
no1important
#40
Quote:

As long as the other party leaders get to speak too, that would be excellent. You can't even hear what they say in the HofC half the time anymore.

That could work. It sounds appealling and as I tax payer I would not mind "paying" for something like that.

Quote:

I know and understand how the Bloc has the power it does,but why is a regional separatist group allowed to be ann official opposition in our government? Their motives are only pursuing their separatist agenda and not on the betterment of our country.

Well who ever wins the second most seats is the official opposition. Thats the way it is and should be. Just like it was in 1993. (I believe it was 1993 I may be wrong).

Actually it is "something" that a one province federal party could be official opposition but it happened and I respect the rules, even though I thought at the time Preston Manning should of been "official opposition" as he was leading a national party but he never recieved enough seats. So tough titty, I guess.

Actually you know, it could even happen again next time, slim but entirely possible. Especially if Liberals get "beat up bad" in the next election. The libs would have to lose 50-55 seats(I believe they have 121 now but if wrong please correct me) and bloc sweep Quebec and it could very well happen, if the electorate is that mad at Liberals.
 
cub1c
#41
Quote:

...and bloc sweep Quebec and it could very well happen, if the electorate is that mad at Liberals.

Conservatives are mad at Liberals. BQ and Quebecers are mad at federalism.
 
whicker
#42
Quote: Originally Posted by cub1c


Conservatives are mad at Liberals. BQ and Quebecers are mad at federalism.

Aren't they all ----- -------
 
Reverend Blair
#43
Quote:

Do you really think it was possible that he was going to say: f*ck you all...I don't remember what happened...I don't see why I should fix anything...and there will never be any election anymore!

PS: Get real, he didn't wrote a single line himself in this speech.

I would have paid money to hear him say that.

That's not really the point though. His first job is to get re-elected. If he can't do that his job is to maintain enough power to influence policy. He gave an effective speech to that end given the situation. It was a good move politically.

I said a while ago that Martin wasn't calling the shots anymore, that the party strategists had taken over.

Quote:

By the way, how many people still think we will not have an election in June?

Wake up. The machine is started. And there is no turning back.

June 27. The only way out of that is for Martin to let Layton call the shots on the budget. That goes against Martin's brutally conservative bias, so it's not going to happen.

Quote:

Actually it is "something" that a one province federal party could be official opposition but it happened and I respect the rules, even though I thought at the time Preston Manning should of been "official opposition" as he was leading a national party but he never recieved enough seats. So tough titty, I guess.

I considered Manning (and still consider Stevie) to be as much of a regional rump party as the BQ. Alberta holds no more thrill for me than Quebec. At the BQ have some progressive policies though.
 
cub1c
#44
Quote:

June 27. The only way out of that is for Martin to let Layton call the shots on the budget. That goes against Martin's brutally conservative bias, so it's not going to happen.

You forget to say that even if Layton has legitimate requests, they are in fact unrealistic.
 
Reverend Blair
#45
The request is perfectly legitimate...dump the corporate tax cut and give the money to the provinces. We already have one of the lowest corporate tax rates in the developed world.
 
no1important
#46
Anyone else see Martin on the National tonight? He sure looked haggard.

There were some interesting comments shown afterwards 3 for Martin and 3 against.

I think Harper is really power hungry and wants power at no matter the cost, even before the final judgement is out. I saw his "speech"( if you can call it that) and he really showed his true colours.

I sure hope the NDP pick up seats next time, but I also hope they do not split to much of the vote so Harper gets in.
 
Reverend Blair
#47
As long as Harper is in a minority, it doesn't matter if he gets in. He can't get a majority with his numbers, especially in Ontario, so what the hell?

Even if he were to get a majority, what harm would it do? SSM is already a fact in eight jurisdictions and only a moron would try to back out of Kyoto.

Martin is already toeing Harper's line on the rest.
 
Canucks fan
#48
We have set election dates in BC now.


As for the speech, I thought it was pathetic. I was still behind the Liberal govt and Martin until I watched it last night. He just made himself look like an idiot and embarrassed the country. The way he did it just wasnt right. He totally abused his power.
 
Scape
#49
On that I think he did it right. It was short and to the point. The leaders of the opposition responses were all far longer than Martin and I think that was the idea, to get them yapping and to show what they are really about getting the spotlight, not about getting this mess addressed.

Quote: Originally Posted by MMMike

Can't you make up your own mind about what went on? The testimony is rehashed every day on the news and radio, and internet. You can read the testimony online. Come to your own conclusions.

If Martin was so concerned about the voters having all the facts before an election, why did he shut down the Public Accounts Committee investigation into the sponsorship scandal just before going to the polls last spring??

So I am supposed to wade though hours of testimony? C'mon! The inquiry has a job to do, transparency is a rare thing in politics and you want to shut it down? Martin called an election and shut down the Public Accounts Committee before for the exact same reason. An election during it would negate the findings and we would have to do the whole thing from scratch again, or do you want a kangaroo court? Sounds like your minds made up already so I will quite now trying to reason with the unreasonable.
 
cub1c
#50
Quote:

So I am supposed to wade though hours of testimony?

Quebecers do it!
You should too!

Quote:

The leaders of the opposition responses were all far longer than Martin and I think that was the idea

Remember that this address wasn't an official one! Martin didn't reclaim time for his address, he made a video tape, propaganda video like terrorists do, to defend his party, the liberal party.

He then sent the tape to broadcaster, and then the broadcaster gave a place for the opposition to speak up too. I'm sure Martin whished the opposition leaders did not speak directly after him, but he had absolutely no control over it.
 
cub1c
#51
What most people tend to forget, or do not know, is that the BQ requested 26 times over the years for an inquiry about this scandal.

Still, Martin has the guts to say he made this inquiry.

I think lots of folks in the west don't know that, I wonder why.
 
no1important
#52
Quote: Originally Posted by cub1c

What most people tend to forget, or do not know, is that the BQ requested 26 times over the years for an inquiry about this scandal.

Still, Martin has the guts to say he made this inquiry.

I think lots of folks in the west don't know that, I wonder why.

Could be because in Vancouver Canwest has both major dailies, plus National post, numerous local 2-3 times a week papers, owns the major TV station for news (Global BC and CH on island). Global news at 6 is number 1 newscast in Canada. Thats more than likley is the reason.

There is no real competition or real alternative out here. Thank Zeus for the internet.
 
MMMike
#53
Quote:

So I am supposed to wade though hours of testimony? C'mon! The inquiry has a job to do, transparency is a rare thing in politics and you want to shut it down? Martin called an election and shut down the Public Accounts Committee before for the exact same reason. An election during it would negate the findings and we would have to do the whole thing from scratch again, or do you want a kangaroo court? Sounds like your minds made up already so I will quite now trying to reason with the unreasonable.

It's already clearly apparent what this 'sponsorship' program was all about. Cash in brown envelopes, million dollar commissions for little or no work, and massive donations to the Liberal Party. If that is not enough how about appointments to the bench for lawyers volunteering for the Liberals, how about interventions for immigrants freindly with the Liberals, how about the massive waste of taxpayer money on HRDC, gun registry, administering native land claims.... it goes on and on. There are plenty of reasons to turf the Liberals: pick one.

Gomery will go on and complete his report regardless of if there is an election or not. The only thing blocking him are the Liberal party members trying to shut him down in the courts.
 
Reverend Blair
#54
That's not accurate, MMMike. You are confusing the criminality with the legitimate program and are assigning that criminality to all Liberals without knowing whether they were involved or not. You are ignoring conflicting testimony and you have not seen the documents that may or may not support the testimony you have chosen to believe.

There have been elections since HRDC and the gun registry came into being. Native land claims will have to be settled whether you like it or not...they are based on international-level treaties.

There is no reason to rush into an election right now (at a cost of $250 million) except for crass political gain by a party that shows no signs of being any less corrupt than the Liberals and is of dubious readiness to govern.
 
MMMike
#55
Quote:

That's not accurate, MMMike. You are confusing the criminality with the legitimate program and are assigning that criminality to all Liberals without knowing whether they were involved or not. You are ignoring conflicting testimony and you have not seen the documents that may or may not support the testimony you have chosen to believe.

If you can't see that this program from the outset had nothing to do with federalism you have your head in the sand. How is putting up flags at a hunting show, or sponsoring tips on fishing on the radio in anyway connected to federalism. The very idea is insulting. And why do you think that millions of $$ in commissions were handed over for NO work? Or how about the magazine where our money was used to underwrite advertising for the PQ?? Face it, the whole point of the program was to skim off taxpayer dollars for Liberal coffers.

Quote:

There have been elections since HRDC and the gun registry came into being. Native land claims will have to be settled whether you like it or not...they are based on international-level treaties.

I'm talking about their great new ADR system where 97% of the costs went to the lawyers and judges (Liberal friendly no doubt), and 3% was actually paid to the victims.

Quote:

There is no reason to rush into an election right now (at a cost of $250 million) except for crass political gain by a party that shows no signs of being any less corrupt than the Liberals and is of dubious readiness to govern.

Crass political gain? That is always the reason for the timing of an election. It's a minority government - they have to rely on the Conservatives to prop them up. The liberals have clearly lost the moral authority to govern.
 
Reverend Blair
#56
Quote:

Crass political gain? That is always the reason for the timing of an election. It's a minority government - they have to rely on the Conservatives to prop them up. The liberals have clearly lost the moral authority to govern.

The Liberals are up to 31 points (rise of 3) since the speeches, MMMikey. Conservatives are down 1.

Quote:

'm talking about their great new ADR system where 97% of the costs went to the lawyers and judges (Liberal friendly no doubt), and 3% was actually paid to the victims.

Then you aren't talking about land claims, you are talking about people being compensated for being raped. It's important to use the right terminology.

Quote:

How is putting up flags at a hunting show, or sponsoring tips on fishing on the radio in anyway connected to federalism. The very idea is insulting.

So all the sponsorships of sporting and cultural events by private companies are a waste of money too? We'd better let them know before the Indy 500 then....



Quote:

And why do you think that millions of $$ in commissions were handed over for NO work?

That's the criminality part. It needs to be fully investigated and charges laid.
 
MMMike
#57
Quote:

Then you aren't talking about land claims, you are talking about people being compensated for being raped. It's important to use the right terminology.

Mea culpa... I was referring to the lawsuits over the residential schools. You're right.

Quote:

So all the sponsorships of sporting and cultural events by private companies are a waste of money too? We'd better let them know before the Indy 500 then....

Big difference: private companies are free to spend their money however they see fit, subject to the approval of their shareholders. We're talking about my tax dollars that they were wasting there. Besides, I think you would agree that selling widgets is a little different than selling "federalism".

Quote:

That's the criminality part. It needs to be fully investigated and charges laid.

Ooh, yes. I expect to see Jean Chretien in handcuffs... I won't hold my breath.
 
Reverend Blair
#58
Quote:

Mea culpa... I was referring to the lawsuits over the residential schools. You're right.

What's the Conservative policy on that though. They didn't think the Canadian government should pay any compensation at all when the issue first came up. Did that change?

Quote:

Big difference: private companies are free to spend their money however they see fit, subject to the approval of their shareholders. We're talking about my tax dollars that they were wasting there. Besides, I think you would agree that selling widgets is a little different than selling "federalism".

The point is that kind of advertising is known to work. If it didn't work, it wouldn't exist. It is part of the branding process and the federal government was selling brand Canada; mostly, but not just, in Quebec. Every party attempted to get at least some money for their pet projects through that program too.

Whether you agree with the program or not is beside the point the though. It was a legitimate program, separate from the scandal that arose from the misuse of funds.

Quote:

Ooh, yes. I expect to see Jean Chretien in handcuffs... I won't hold my breath.

For him to be charged, there has to be evidence that he did something criminal. That hasn't happened yet.
 
insignificant
#59
Quote:

Quote:
Ooh, yes. I expect to see Jean Chretien in handcuffs... I won't hold my breath.


For him to be charged, there has to be evidence that he did something criminal. That hasn't happened yet.

That cant happen - is he not exempt from criminal charges?
 
MMMike
#60
Quote:

Whether you agree with the program or not is beside the point the though. It was a legitimate program, separate from the scandal that arose from the misuse of funds.

A program set up to push federalism giving money to the PQ? And the massive commissions to liberal friendly ad agencies? The work of 'rogue bureaucrats' no doubt. Legitimate program my ass.