- With Harper 'the devil is in the details'
submitted: 8:32am, PDT, 2 Apr.'10 CBC NEWS
More MPs proposed for B.C., Alta., Ont., April 1, 2010, CBC News
http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/04/01/seat-distribution-house-commons.html#socialcomments
It may make sense to increase the number of seats in BC, Alberta and Ontario and it may be that these numbers also make sense.
However, as they say 'the devil is in the details'.
Everyone knows that Stephen Harper and the Con's do everything for political reasons, I challenge anyone to point out any non-trivial action taken by the Harper government that was intended for the benefit of all Canadians as a whole. Why would this be any different, and likely it's not any different.
Leaving out Quebec is something that must be given very careful consideration and Harper ought to have opened the issue up for public comment and perhaps an ad hoc Committee, before presenting the Bill. The fact that he didn't is, in itself, cause to be suspicious on his motives. You can be sure that the Con's have done internal polls to see how it impacts on various segments of the population, especially their die-hard supporters centred in Alberta and what they feel is their increasing support ion Ontario and BC. As pointed out the Con's may very well feel Quebec is pretty much a write-off as far as increasing seats.
The reason for leaving Quebec out "the Quebeque, if they did what they, achieved their goal which is to separate, Quebec would have zero seats in the House of Commons", Steven Fletcher, Minister of State for Democratic Reform, (CBC, Power & Politics, 1 Apr.'10).
You can be sure that this was not a miss-speaking, but a very carefully crafted sound bite designed to appeal for support on an emotions basis, as opposed to a rational, logical one, especially to the Con core supporters, for who there is a growing resentment towards what they perceive as Quebec's special treatment. In fact, the Harper strategy is to dis-enfranchise the people in Quebec that don't support them. We saw this when Harper prorogued Parliament in Dec.'08 to avoid losing power.
In fact, if we look at it the other way around.
Perhaps someone might identify those regions of Canada where the Con's have the greatest potential of increasing the number of seats towards a majority, relatively speaking - i.e. obtain a high % of new seats compared to other parties. If it weren't Alberta, BC and Ontario I would be very surprised. So, the question is just how would these additional seats be distributed, not just in a general fashion but actual boundary lines.
For example, it is obvious that the GTA would get several additional seats. But, the 905 region supported the Harris government and were the main reason he was elected (Harris was the conservative government in Ontario during the mid '90's to early 2000's which devastated Ontario with there extreme right wing ideologically based across the board spending cuts - oh, and did I mention, Jim Flaherty, John Baird, Tony Clament were Ministers in this government, as well as many top Con advisors, assistants, etc., etc., etc.).
Lloyd MacILquham cicblog.com/comments.html
More MPs proposed for B.C., Alta., Ont., April 1, 2010, CBC News
http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/04/01/seat-distribution-house-commons.html#socialcomments
It may make sense to increase the number of seats in BC, Alberta and Ontario and it may be that these numbers also make sense.
However, as they say 'the devil is in the details'.
Everyone knows that Stephen Harper and the Con's do everything for political reasons, I challenge anyone to point out any non-trivial action taken by the Harper government that was intended for the benefit of all Canadians as a whole. Why would this be any different, and likely it's not any different.
Leaving out Quebec is something that must be given very careful consideration and Harper ought to have opened the issue up for public comment and perhaps an ad hoc Committee, before presenting the Bill. The fact that he didn't is, in itself, cause to be suspicious on his motives. You can be sure that the Con's have done internal polls to see how it impacts on various segments of the population, especially their die-hard supporters centred in Alberta and what they feel is their increasing support ion Ontario and BC. As pointed out the Con's may very well feel Quebec is pretty much a write-off as far as increasing seats.
The reason for leaving Quebec out "the Quebeque, if they did what they, achieved their goal which is to separate, Quebec would have zero seats in the House of Commons", Steven Fletcher, Minister of State for Democratic Reform, (CBC, Power & Politics, 1 Apr.'10).
You can be sure that this was not a miss-speaking, but a very carefully crafted sound bite designed to appeal for support on an emotions basis, as opposed to a rational, logical one, especially to the Con core supporters, for who there is a growing resentment towards what they perceive as Quebec's special treatment. In fact, the Harper strategy is to dis-enfranchise the people in Quebec that don't support them. We saw this when Harper prorogued Parliament in Dec.'08 to avoid losing power.
In fact, if we look at it the other way around.
Perhaps someone might identify those regions of Canada where the Con's have the greatest potential of increasing the number of seats towards a majority, relatively speaking - i.e. obtain a high % of new seats compared to other parties. If it weren't Alberta, BC and Ontario I would be very surprised. So, the question is just how would these additional seats be distributed, not just in a general fashion but actual boundary lines.
For example, it is obvious that the GTA would get several additional seats. But, the 905 region supported the Harris government and were the main reason he was elected (Harris was the conservative government in Ontario during the mid '90's to early 2000's which devastated Ontario with there extreme right wing ideologically based across the board spending cuts - oh, and did I mention, Jim Flaherty, John Baird, Tony Clament were Ministers in this government, as well as many top Con advisors, assistants, etc., etc., etc.).
Lloyd MacILquham cicblog.com/comments.html
posted by wlloydm at
8:38 AM
<< Home