Liberals Dump Candidate
Today it was the Liberals who dumped a questionable candidate, this time Abbotsford, BC Liberal David Oliver. Like the Tory the day before, Oliver was guilty of a grievous sin this time bribery. Zeisman who is up for trial for smuggling charges, although there are hints it these charges are without merit, was dumped quickly by Harper, for a) failing to disclose the charge and b) image issues. On the other hand Oliver apparently bribed his NDP opponent to drop out, promising him help in getting elected to local council and a plum job in Ottawa.

This is the first time the Liberals have been accused of bribing people for political gain. We all know that Belinda Stronach was wowed by Liberals with a prominent Cabinet position. (Paul Martin said her defection from the Tories had nothing to do with the upcoming confidence vote, which the Libs were posed to loose until the defection. He said, "This move had nothing to do with upcoming vote." followed by loud laughter from the press gallery.) The Liberals were also accused of offering Gurmant Gerwal and his wife plum positions in government if they defected. This accusation is in line with the typical Liberal feeling of entitlement. Liberals believe, "I can do whatever I want to retain power, because, I'm a Liberal."

Low Income Housing
I believe one goal of all Canadians is to one day own their own home. I know it was a dream of mine. Sure I wasn't able to buy that mansion on the hill overlooking the city with panoramic views of the Rockies, but it's home. The economy in many parts, especially here in the west is growing in leaps and bounds. During the past 13 years of Liberal government we have seen the distance between rich and poor expand. Many of those who began life in poverty have a problem getting out, of the cycle of depression. While there may be many jobs available, most do not have the education necessary and are rarely able to get ahead of the game by investing into real estate.

The Tories have proposed a $200 Million tax incentive for builders to supply low income housing in areas where needed. I consider myself to be a Blue Tory, financially but a Red Tory socially. Tough financial management along with using all resources to give people incentives to help others. What a great opportunity we have to construct housing, real housing, to help others find a home. Help them get out of the ghetto or projects where crime and diminished moral values are prominent.

In the town of Canmore, west of Calgary, town council have told developers a certain percentage of new housing has to be classed as low income. This helps keep taxes low, as there are people already in the area who may not be able to afford luxury homes going up around them and allows for those less fortunate to enjoy suburban life, while not enshrining the confined housing units found in many large cities.

Liberal Attack Ads
With most "Anti-Anything" ads or promotions, they take partial truths and twist them in a way they sound bad. For instance, Anti-Mormons have always said that John Taylor (3rd President of the Church), said that Joseph Smith, "has done more, . . . for the salvation of men in this world, than any other man that ever lived in it." Now this is true what he wrote, but they put in the pause ". . . " noting that words were left out, those words were "save Jesus only". In one of the Liberal ads they hint that Harpers Tories would put soldiers, "with guns. . . in cities. . . in Canada". That is only partially true. The Tories pledge to get more soldiers, closer to big cities. Why? Here is what the Tory platform states:

The Conservative Party’s “Canada First” defense policy supports Canada’s soldiers by calling for an increase in our reserve personnel levels in major urban areas across Canada, and for providing them with more resources to do their job.

The policy will strengthen the Canadian Forces so that Canada has a better capacity to respond to domestic emergencies and natural disasters, such as ice storms in Ontario and Quebec, floods on the Prairies, and hurricanes in Atlantic Canada.

The Tories don't want soldiers, walking around in cities, but closer to where they may be needed, particularly in humanitarian aid.

The attack on the Harris 'Common Sense Revolution' stated, Ontario must be surrounded by crumbling schools and hospitals, a province ravaged by neglect. I lived in Ontario during those days. I was originally opposed to the Harris government, but joined it for one major reason, they did what they said they were going to do, in other words they did something most politicians don't THEY KEPT THEIR PROMISES. Harris promised responsible government, he delievered. He promised reformed labor laws, including standing up to the OTA, OPSU, ONA and general organized labor, he did. Cut taxes, eliminate the deficit, bring back Ontario's Big Blue Machine of the 70's and early 80's, he did that. The final year of his, they had a balanced budget, taxes where the lowest in the country, the economy was growing, unemployment was around 6.5%. What's wrong with having politicians keep their promises. (Unfortunately the final year and a half, Ontario was hit hard, unemployment skyrocketed, SARS, Walkerton, etc and the deficit ballooned)

Would Harper put a smile on Dubya's face? Of course. If you had a neighbor who for years, said things behind your back, didn't agree with you on much and allowed its dogs to pee on your lawn, you'd be happy when they left. Especially if the new neighbor said, "I won't put up with his crap, but I'll make sure my dogs stay off his lawn, and invite him over for a BBQ and a Beer to try to be friends with them, so as to avoid any communication problems." We all know that we work better with friends, and people who we respect. The old saying says, "You attract more flies with honey than with viniger"

The Atlantic comment? Harper has since apologized and apparently made amends with the Maritimes. (The Tories lead at 41%) The Libs then attack Harper on health care, saying that he'd destroy public health. They fail to mention Martin is in the private care system, where Harper and most blue collared Tories. They grab past comments of Harper, again American friendly comments, and blast it, although he wasn't a MP at the time. That's like saying, something you said while talking to friends at a 7-11 years ago after a party, and taking it as your policy.

Many other things occur, most all lies and made up attempts to try to claw back from the (up to) 12 point lead the Tories have. The Libs see their ship is taking on water quickly and the Tories are sailing to majority territory. The Tories now lead in all regions except Quebec where they are second to the BQ and hold a 5 point lead over the Liberals. Here's where the polls are:

My Election Predictions:

Province	CPC	LIB	NDP	BQ	Total
NF	5	2			7
NS	6	3	2		11
NB	5	3	2		10
PE	3	1			4
QC	8	7		60	75
ON	55	32	19		106
MB	10	1	3		14
SK	10	1	2		13
AB	28				28
BC	25	3	7		35
North	1	1	1		3
Total	156	54	36	60	306

Liberals Plan Handgun Ban: My View
The Liberal plan would be an extension of what Canada already has. We have had a handgun registry since 1934. Handguns have effectively been illegal except to gun collectors, target shooters and law enforcement officers. The current long gun registry has proven a disastrous failure. A registry that was to cost $2 Million has skyrocketed to almost $2 Billion. Over 85% of gun crimes are committed by unregistered, unregulated and untraceable handguns. This plan is to cost "just" $35 Million should shoot (sorry no pun intended) to the hundreds of millions, as the plan calls for a buy back program for gun collectors. Imagine the Canadian government buying rare guns from citizens then destroying them all for the sake of "making our streets safer". I don't know about you, but I don't know any gun collector who has a late 1800's Smith & Wesson .45 who will go out and use it in a drive by. This plan is not about making our streets safe, as statistics prove it will not work, as  has happened in Britain and Australia, but a typical knee jerk reaction to a problem as well as a grab for votes in metro cities.

A better response would be to enlist more police, more resources to ensure guns are not smuggled across our porous boarders and stiffer penalties for those who commit a crime with a firearm. We do not need more rules, we need smarter rules. 

Tories promise tax credit for kids' sports fees
One of the great ideas of this election was unveiled by the federal Tories. Parents can now receive up to a $500 tax credit, per child under 16, when registered in a physical activity. The purpose of this strategy is tri-fold I believe.

1. Helps to reduce child obesity, thus reducing future potential problems

2. Helps to promote good sportsmanship and friendship

3. Helps low income families, those who may be at the highest risk for social problems, to be involved in positive activities

Again this is an excellent proposal to promote healthy living. Although it is linked to physical activities where a registration fee is paid, we may be able to go further for school funded activities where minimal costs are made.

Reality Check: Conservative Day Care Plan
I almost fell out of my chair the other day reading an article from Sheila "The Beast of the East" Copps. Her article in the December 7th edition of the Toronto Sun, "Harper Gets it Right" totally took me by surprise. When I heard she was to be a columnist with the Sun chain, typically very conservative in its views, I was outraged. I didn't want to hear some Lib-Left pinko, especially one whom I loathed, to write for my beloved paper.

In her article she reiterated why she supports the Tory plan to give parents $1200 per year for child care, and spend the way they best believe. Although the payment would be taxable, lower income families would get the money tax free.

The main problem with the Liberal plan was that money was to be transferred from one bureaucrat to another (giving money to the province to run it). Typically Liberal I say. There is no guarantee that the money given to the provinces would all go to day care, as seen currently in some provinces. As well, it only looks after parents who work, not those who choose to stay home, because of the cost, also it doesn't help the thousands of parents (many single) who work shift work.

The Tory plan would give money to the parents to choose as well as giving companies incentives to create day care in house. Responsible parents, and I assume that most working parents are responsible, would spend it on the child's "care", whether it be on actual day care, clothing or other items and not "beer and popcorn" as suggested by top Liberals.

Many parents, mostly Liberal and  NDP supporters, say, 'I don't need that money. It should go to those who need it.' Well why not create an option for parents to 'donate' that money to a specific day care related organization, either a community based day care or to a 'general fund. This money would then be taxable, as income but then tax deductible, as a donation.

Tories pledge tax breaks for public transit users
In a quite strange change of events, the Tories are the first to announce 'real' solutions for the environment. The Liberals, the supposed champions of the environment have not made one announcement about the environment (neither have the NDP). The Tories however, have announced tax breaks of 16% to those who purchase monthly passes. I have been a proponent of public transit most of my life. (mostly because my dad works for the Thunder Bay City Transit)  I work in downtown Calgary and have for four years and only driven to work a handful of times (about 10, these were also on days when I had a free parking spot and had to go around town, etc) 

This is part of the parties plan to increase ridership of public transit and get cars off the streets. It costs nothing but gives much in return. I have always said one solution to getting cars off the road is to move costs laterally rather than vertically. Ideas such as more HOV lanes, better Transit, incentives for ridership, etc will go along way to cure the culture of cars. We  have to look at our environmental problems, not as one or two concerns but rather the whole, culture. The US has begun to do a great job by giving incentives to leave more environmentally friendly. They increase the taxes on gas guzzlers, incentives for hybrids and invest in new technologies, as well has financial assistance to lower income earners to retrofit homes. All these will go much further than maintaining the status quo and "buying CO₂" credits from other countries.

One great problem this proposal will do is to eliminate the "Catch 22" situation with most transit systems. Most need more cash to improve the system which will increase ridership, but ridership injects money, so there is a conundrum. Giving incentives to people to buy monthly passes will increase much needed revenues to these departments. Also, most subsidies come from the province. This will create, technically another level of payment of cash to transit to improve the systems.  Imagine what this increased revenue can do for your transit system? A C-Train to the Calgary Airport, a TTC line to Pearson or even a line extended beyond Toronto Proper. We need REAL solutions to REAL problems.

Health Care
Health Care is again a major issue in the election and the Libs are defining themselves as the "Saviors" of health care. Never mind that PM Martin while Finance Minister slashed BILLIONS from health transfer payments to the provinces. Never mind that Martins' own family doctor 'double dips' in both the private and public realms. We  have seen that the Liberals favorite whipping boy (Alberta) has a pilot project making use of private and public facilities to reduce waiting times for hip replacements. Times went from upwards of 18 months to 3 MONTHS. Interestingly, Quebec leads the country in private clinics and programs, yet the Liberals (who depend on Quebec) ignore it, but rather wish to bash the Klien Albertans, since they mean nothing to them. 

Money is not needed but better management of those funds. Only the Tories want to add a 6th principle to the Canada Health Act, provide stable and transparent funding. Only the Tories believe that it is the Provinces who spend and are responsible for Health Care, as stated in the Constitution, and they believe it is they who should spend as they see fit, so long as they keep the principles of the CHA.

The Liberals have been all talk. After years of slashing transfer payments, they commit to restoring billions. Unfortunately that's their plan. They plan on spending billions on new programs, but none on technology and investment. We need to invest on finding new ways, using the vast resources of knowledge in our country to solve the problems.

Crime
One of the we citizens have is fighting crime. The Liberals take all the credit for dropping crime rates, especially for the drop in the murder rate. Not one person has come forward and said, "If it wasn't for the gun registry, I would have shot. . . " Most pundits and sociologists believe the change in crime is due to the change in demographics. As baby boomers age they still commit crimes, but they are non-violent crimes, but still torts.

Some have said that being tough on crime won't work. But if we look how NYC and Boston dealt with crime we will see they got tough and cleaned up the streets. Bad people were taken off the streets, for a long time. I suggest we build a jail or two in the Territories and let those thugs suffer.

Immigration
Over the next 5-10 years Alberta will need thousands of workers to construct infrastructure in the Oil Sands alone. Where will all these people come from? The Alberta Nurses Association says that within the next 10 years the province will need another 30000 nurses to replace the aging and growing population. There are hundreds of other examples, but the priority remains that through the last 15 years there has a been a brain drain from Canada. Our best and brightest have left for higher paying jobs abroad. Now we find ourselves at a point where we need those to sustain our lifestyle. Doctors, nurses, trades people, and other professionals are needed. The question arises, where are all these qualified people going to come from? One suggestion is via immigration.

Traditionally the Liberals have benefited from the votes of new Canadians, feeling that allowing them into the country they owe the Liberals one, since the Liberals say they fight for minorities. The Libs now want to speed up that process. Why? To get more votes. The issue has nothing to do with providing these new Canadians with a better life, but prolonging the Libs life.

Surprisingly, I support the Conservatives plan to fast track qualified immigrants to Canada and help them choosing destinations that will help the country as a whole. Currently almost 90% of all immigrants choose Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Toronto or Montreal as their choice, with Vancouver and TO being the choice of 60% of those. (Statistics show that by 2010 Caucasians will be the minority in Toronto) The Tories also propose that a plan to evaluate and establish standards for immigration. Here is what I believe they should be:

• Ability to communicate (both read and write) in either of Canada's official language at a 6th grade level

• Provide proof of a required skill or profession. Immigrants may be required to take a standards test, example doctors, or take upgrading course to familiarize them with Canadian needs.

• Provide them with areas in need of their skilled trade. Doctors to under serviced areas. Skilled laborers to under skilled regions.

• Ensure families are set up with required communication and language skills training where needed

• Set up community programs to integrate them into their new home

• Providing a 'sponsor' or working permit

These along will not solve problems but will go along way to better use this resource. A major problem today and yesterday (see the old NYC mobs of the early 1800s) was communication. Today many ethnic groups bind together, while important for cultural reasons, they are not properly integrated into society because of bias and the inability to communicate with other Canadians. Nothing is more frustrating than not being able to convey my thoughts into the language of another. This frustration leads to perceived racism and racism itself, which can then result in ethnic gangs and crime. If we eliminate this symptom we can continue to work on the problem. Canadians pride themselves on a 'cultural mosaic'.

Another problem we currently have is the forming of 'ghettos'. Although they do not form as they did in the early 20th century we do have communities dominated by one cultural group. For instance in Calgary, the northeast is known for its large East Indian population. Edgemont and Citadel are havens for the Chinese. Parts of the southeast are preferred locations for the Sudanese community. Although I can empathize with the desire to be around those with a similar culture, it does not promote cultural openness. I know of many who have been in Canada for years but do not speak English (or French) and have few friends outside their ethnic group. We need to work with them to land in areas where jobs are, where they will be needed and integrated into the Canadian culture more.

Some solutions may be to get them involved in the community, this way they meet others with similar problems and can begin the building of trust and friendship with others. As well as finding ways to solve these problems collectively. Again helping families of new Canadians to feel truly welcome here but giving them proper education to effectively live as Canadians will go a long way to creating a new generation of Canadians. Numerous examples lie where the father, who speaks English, works with others but the mother and children struggle with the culture and language. The children fall behind in school and become susceptible to trouble. Investment into preventing these problems would go far into solving some potential crime.

Economy

Defense

Foreign Affairs

Drugs

Environment
There is one word which can sum up Canada's "commitment" to the environment. . . KYOTO! This, ill conceived, done off the cuff international agreement is not worth more than the recycled paper it was written on. While I consider myself to have a strong social and environmental conscience, I also understand that it is problems we need fixing not symptoms. Kyoto itself will not reverse the so called "global warming". Even that statement is globally argued among accredited scientists. Some feel it is part of the global cycle, average temps rising about 0.6 degree over the past hundred years, while others feel "THE SKY IS FALLING!". (Chicken Little would be proud)

Let's take a quick look at Kyoto. To better understand climate change one must look at the whole picture, Kyoto only focused on one aspect of pollution and climate changing agents, greenhouse gases. This pact is not enforced, although, it is considered "binding". Over 60% of 'polluters had to ratify the agreement. This included developed countries like, Canada (which make up about 6% of overall pollution), most of Europe, Australia, Japan and the US. Each country is treated differently. Why? I don't know, because it's flawed and unfair. (Remember this was done by a bunch of 'do-gooders')  Not only this, but 'developing' countries need not apply. Major world polluters such as Brazil, India and China do not have to follow Kyoto one bit.

In the end the 60% goal was met when Russia ratified the agreement at the last minute. (It was debated quite heavily but figured if they wanted to prove to the other countries that they care, this would be one way) Canada's goal is to reduce its greenhouse gas levels to 6% lower than 1990. Currently our output has increased by 24%, meaning by 2012 we will have to cut greenhouse gases by 30% in just six years. While the goal of reducing overall gases, worldwide, by 6% was admirable, it is unattainable, considering current technology.

Our government has talked and talked about how this pact will "SAVE THE WORLD", while sitting idle and doing nothing. Its hummed about a possible 'carbon tax' on main polluting provinces, like Alberta, buying credits from countries who may have excess 'credits' or even opting out of some aspects because Canada has a carbon sink, our forests. None of these fix the problem, only cover it.

Recently Paul Martin condemned the US for not having a "global conscience" on climate change he was reminded by US Ambassador to Canada, David Wilkins that the US has spent $20 Billion in tackling climate change, "more than any other country". He also reminded Martin, "I would respectfully submit to you that when it comes to a 'global conscience,' the United States is walking the walk". This is where Martin stands. You don't have a global conscience unless you sign on to an agreement. You don't have to do anything, just sign. For the record while Canada's greenhouse gases have increased 24% under the Chrétien and Martin governments (who are self proclaimed "defenders" of the environment) the American output has increased only 13%, while their economy has increased more as well.

What Can Be Done?
There is so much Canadians can do to reduce these gases and become more environmentally conscience.

• Practice the three "R's": Reduce, Reuse and Recycle. While we may not want to as it may not be popular, it is an excellent way to reduce refuse in our environment. My family went from 3 bags a week to one. I suggest buying products that use less packaging and more environmentally friendly packaging, such as something that can be reused. I wrote a company because of their change in packaging, they made a box that couldn't be used although recycled and covered it with plastic. Practice it, including our water and energy use.

• Use public transit: I know many of you may think that public transit is for 'losers'. Do you know that NYC mayor can be caught on the subway everyday traveling to city hall? He's a multi Billionaire and the Mayor of the largest city in North America, loser? I think not. Get off the road. We don't need people who can easily take the bus or train to work, traveling on our already congested highways, drinking our already depleting energy supply and taking up the ever shrinking parkades. I love taking the bus. I can sleep on the bus in the morning and then veg on the way home.

• Car Pool: Don't want to rely on the bus? Find a friend or neighbor going your way and share cars.

• Be Energy Conscience: Easy, turn off lights, set your thermostat down a degree during the day and 2 during the night. (saves money too) Use more energy efficient lighting and appliances. If you have a deep freezer in the garage, you can turn it almost off during cold spells. (my garage gets kinda cold and would keep things frozen if I left the door open, so I turn down the freezer to 1, but then turn it back up to 3 when it hits the freezing mark) Don't waste water.

• Modernize Your Home: Ok your house may only be 15 years old, but there are ways of sealing holes, reducing water waste, etc, to save money and the environment

• Heavily Invest in Technology: One of the reasons the US is leading in greenhouse reduction is because of its focus on technology, that is energy efficient technology. This includes biofuels and alternative energy sources. The city of Calgary is working with a Enmax and EnCana to drill for methane gas in city landfills. 

• Tax Incentives: Governments can give the private sector incentives to become more energy efficient and more environmentally friendly. Things such as R & D into biofuels, wind and solar energy will help to meet our increasing energy demands. Tax breaks to companies who install solar panels or wind turbines on buildings, to reduce the demand on electricity grid. Building greenspaces on building roofs. There are literally thousands of ideas.

Helpful Links:
GreenMax | One Ton Challenge |  Energy Star | EPA | Direct Energy

Democratic Reform
With Prime Minister Harpers announcement. . . I mean Tory leader, although soon to be PM, on democratic reform, I was pleased as it echoed many of the founding ideas of the Reform Party. I have always been a fan of fixed election dates as well. What do they do?

Fixed Election Dates:

• Will help opposition parties to prepare for upcoming elections

• Will reduce egos of governments taking advantage of their current popularity, (See Ontario Liberals in 1989, 1997 Federal Liberals, 2000 Federal Liberals, just see the Liberals)

• Reduce speculation and volatility of markets

• Saves money

What about minority governments who are defeated? Well keep the election date, but also make them work better and if they are defeated the next popular party will have to form a coalition government.

Elected Senate:
With the current system it is biased towards patronage. If the current PM likes you, and you've done something good, a Senate job could be yours, case in point of Chrétien's appointment of his former communications director, Jim Munson and Art Eggleton. Unfortunately the appointments are considered to be unfair since they are appointments and usually party based. The US congress, I believe is a better system. That is the system we should pattern our senate and parliament after.

• All Senators Elected

• Proportioned to be equal per region

• Make them as accountable as MP's

Currently, senators sit until they die or until age 75, meaning some can sit at a plum $116,000/year + plus benefits, job and only show up a few times a year. Elected senators would be more prone to attend. I propose to have 3 senators per province and one per territory for 33 total. It would be set up similarly to the US. This would mean that no region would have more say on an item than another. Also, bills would then have to pass through the House and the Senate, thus possibly attaining more bipartisanship. One senator could be elected every 2 years and sit for 6 total. This would help to defer any political feeling of the day from controlling the Senate.

Your Thoughts:

Send Me Your Thoughts: [email protected]

Proudly a member of the Conservative Party of Canada