No. I did not say they were minor, only that they were a smaller % of GDP than those of Trudeau and Mulroney also had to deal with the economic momentum of them: Mulroney had to deal with more strain on the federal gov't resources (to service more existing debt) than Trudeau did. Of course Mulroney also took steps to try and alleviate the situation which Trudeau did not.
Pure conservative propaganda. What steps did Mulroney take to get rid of the deficit? None. On the contrary, he increased the deficit from around 25 billion $ to more than 40 billion $. Indeed, the deficit (which you claim was only minor) is what largely sunk the PC Party. Canadians are not stupid, as you seem to think. Maybe you give Mulroney the credit for getting rid of the deficit (and I assume so do all the conservatives), but Canadians don’t.
Again either your reading comprehension or your deductive reasoning skills are lacking. Chretien won 3 majorities because he was the ONLY leader of a strong national party. The PCs were almost non-existent because of backlash over the GST and (especially in the West) feeling that he hadn't done enough, fast enough to address the debt/deficit (which is ironic in that he did foster the environment to let it be addressed). The Reform wasn't viewed as a national alternative because of Central Canadian paranoia about political movements formed outside Ontario and Quebec, which was constantly encouraged by both the Liberals and the NDP in referring to the Reform and now Conservative "secret agenda" (though how a platform voted on in a public setting and that was subject to floor crossings both ways could remain such a secret is still a mystery to me). You still allude to it in your posts, SirJoe.
Oh, so you are aware that Chrétien won three majorities, are you? I thought in your dream world (where Mulroney ran a surplus and Liberals are running the biggest deficit in history) maybe you are under the impression that Conservatives won three majorities.
To a large degree that is exactly what has happened and no one who derides the Conservatives wants to admit this. Harper, the politician, will do whatever he has to in order to remain in power, as was true with any PM before him in the past 50 years(with the possible exception of Clark). Iggy/Dion and Layton have the ability to topple the gov't if they decide to do so and do it on an issue that puts Quebec's interests as differing from the country at large (thus mandating the Bloc will oppose the gov't). Thus Harper HAS to accede to the wishes of the other parties at times or frame the debate so that the opposition looks like the bad guy if the issue turns into an election trigger.
Quite, so we are in agreement. You think that Harper is the puppet, Dion (of whom Conservatives used to make fun of) was the puppet master and Dion could pull strings and make Harper do anything Dion wanted, against the wishes of Harper. So I assume you think that Harper wanted to run a big surplus, but the evil (sorry, Communist) Dion made him run the biggest deficit in the history of Canada. If you think that, you may be interested in a prime waterfront property I have for sale, called Brooklyn Bridge.
Did you know that President Truman had a plaque on his desk, saying ‘The buck stops here’? Quite a foreign concept to your ilk and to Harper, eh? To you, the buck stops anywhere except with Harper (unless it is something good, then of course the buck stops with Harper).
Now, I have no doubt that that is what Harper will try to do in the election; he will blame Liberals for the deficit. However, Canadians are not stupid, as you seem to think. They know who the PM was. It was Harper, not Dion. The deficit is Harper’s fault and nobody else’s. We have only your word for it that Harper wanted to run a surplus, but the Spawn of the Devil (sorry, Communist) Dion pulled his puppet strings and made him run the biggest deficit in the history.
Of course you think this: you have no idea of my voting history or my opinions of the politicians involved, you just fall back on the idea that if one does not worship the shade of Pierre Trudeau and spout his doctrine, they are a Conservative and thus below notice, except to be bled dry to fund the Liberal Party's next grand social spending spree. .
From the opinions you have expressed here (blame Liberals for every bad thing, praise conservatives for every good thing) I have no doubt in my mind that you are a committed Harper acolyte and that you were a Mulroney acolyte before that. After all, Mulroney got rid of the deficit and ran a surplus, right? And Harper intended to run a surplus but the evil (sorry, Communist) Liberals pulled his strings and forced him to run the biggest deficit in Canadian history.
