| From: DeplorableIrredeemableRedneck | 1/4/2009 11:24:24 PM | | | | | | Layton biggest loser in coalition folly
NDP leader came off as self-serving in move to topple government
By Lorne Gunter, Edmonton Journal, January 4, 2009
The Tory-versus-coalition flap defined Canadian politics this past year. Even though it came late in the year and despite the fact there was also an election, the constitutional crisis caused by the Tories' overreaching attempt to defund their opponents and the Liberal-NDP-Bloc attempt to overturn the results of an election less than two months after it was held will be the political event longest remembered from 2008.
And the more I reflect on it, the more I am convinced Jack Layton was the crisis's biggest loser. If we assume the coalition is dead (and it 99.9 per cent is), then the party and leader who have fallen the farthest back as a result of the power play are the NDP and Layton.
New Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff is keeping the possibility of a coalition alive rhetorically because without the threat of the coalition toppling the Tories at the end of this month, the Liberals' bargaining position would be greatly weakened. Ignatieff would have little chance of convincing the Tories to include his stimuli in the upcoming budget stimuli if he announced today that, no matter what, the Liberals will not pull down the government over the budget.
But it is not in even in Ignatieff's interests over the next three to six months to keep the coalition alive. For his predecessor, Stephane Dion, the coalition was the only hope he would ever become prime minister. Yet for Ignatieff, the coalition is the biggest impediment to him becoming prime minister and staying in the job.
Can you imagine a new, energetic Liberal leader being saddled with running a government in co-operation with the NDP? One-quarter of his ministers would be under the control of another leader and Ignatieff would have a great interest in keeping them in the dark about Liberal strategy and in keeping them from snatching the credit for popular moves. In the end, the hodgepodge government would almost certainly fall apart far sooner than the 2 1/2 years its component parties agree to and it would also surely dissolve in petty bickering and finger-pointing, giving the Tories a running start in the election that would follow.
It's true Ignatieff has other big impediments in his path to 24 Sussex, such as his old New York Times columns championing an American empire and referring to "we" Americans. And he is also going to have to live down his signature on the coalition agreement that in its first line talks about the coalition being in the best interests of "Canada and Quebec," as if the two were separate nations already.
But Ignatieff will be aided by the infinite malleability of the Liberal conscience. Anything a Liberal does can be forgotten by all other Liberals (and the vast majority of the Parliamentary press gallery), if shoving it down the memory hole is in the best interest of the Liberal party. For instance, in Saturday's Toronto Star, senior Liberal strategist Tom Axworthy wrote that Ignatieff's selection gives the Liberals their best chance in a generation of "democratic renewal of the party," even while also admitting that Ignatieff's selection marked the first time since the 19th century that the Liberal rank-and-file played no direct part in choosing the party boss.
Nonetheless, I think the Liberals will turn out to be winners if they back away from the coalition idea, as I suspect they already have. This crisis enabled them to dump an awful leader in Dion and replace him with someone who, no matter his political warts, is instantly a more attractive leader. And it has made the Tories more reluctant to yank the other parties' chains (especially the Liberals') in the Commons.
Stephen Harper and his Tories have slipped as a result of the crisis and the way they provoked it. If nothing else, their shenanigans indirectly led to the early resignation of Dion, who was so bad he had been the Tories' ace in the hole. Moreover, Harper could, before, with just a glance, send the opposition parties (especially the Liberals) scurrying into a corner of the Commons cowering in fear. Now they no longer fear him. And it will take a long time, if ever, before he has the full command of the House he enjoyed before the crisis.
Still, it was Layton who suffered most. First, he had a chance to do the Liberals in and replace them as the default selection on the left had he gone along with the Tories' plan to end public funding to parties. Next to the Tories, the NDP have the best chance of replacing public handouts with private donations. Layton could have crippled the Liberals, instead he tried to vault himself into cabinet by riding into power as the Liberals' shotgun.
With the revealing of the coalition, Layton was also exposed as a self-serving opportunist with no compunction about making a deal with separatists, even weeks before the Tories lit the match on the crisis. And with the coalition's demise, Layton is now even further from power than he was before. The Tories and Harper were undeniably scathed, but Layton and the NDP were hurt the worst. |
| | Canadian Political Free-for-All | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| From: DeplorableIrredeemableRedneck | 1/4/2009 11:28:41 PM | | | | | | Former sponsorship chief Guité granted parole
Last Updated: Saturday, January 3, 2009 | 6:15 PM ET
The Canadian Press
Chuck Guité leaves a Montreal courtroom in 2006. (Ian Barrett/Canadian Press)
Chuck Guité, the federal bureaucrat who headed the scandal-plagued sponsorship program in the 1990s, is getting parole.
Guité's conditional release was authorized on Dec. 23, National Parole Board spokeswoman Arti Jolly said Friday.
The Stetson-wearing Guité, who defended himself during his trial, will have served about one-sixth of his 42-month prison term when he is released in February.
"Whenever there's no violent element to the crime, [offenders] are eligible to have accelerated review and have a potential release date considerably earlier," Jolly said.
Guité is eligible for day parole on Feb. 15 and full parole on Sept. 16, Correctional Service of Canada spokesman Jeff Campbell said Friday.
He said Guité would likely reside in a halfway house while on day parole and would be free to return to his own residence once he's fully paroled.
"It's part of a graduated step towards that reintegration process in the community," Campbell said.
"But even when somebody's on [full] parole, there's requirements to report to their parole officer and abide by whatever conditions that may apply."
Guité will complete his sentence on Jan. 16, 2012, Campbell said.
Guité, who left the federal government in 1999, was in charge of the federal sponsorship program, under which friends of the federal Liberals were given government contracts and paid for little or no work.
A jury convicted him in 2006 on all five charges he faced in connection with allegations he defrauded the federal government of about $2 million.
The National Parole Board said Guité will be required to follow rules "over and above the normal parole conditions."
Upon his conditional release, the former civil servant will be asked to provide a monthly financial account of his revenues and expenses to a parole officer, Jolly said.
The Quebec Court of Appeal upheld the conviction and the 42-month prison term last July.
The court ruled the evidence against Guité was so overwhelming there was no reasonable chance of a different verdict being handed down in his case.
Guité was hoping the court would bring his jail term in line with the sentences given to two other major players in the scandal, advertising executives Jean Brault and Paul Coffin, who were given sentences of 30 months and 18 months respectively.
But the three appeals court justices pointed out that Brault pleaded guilty, while Guité didn't even bother testifying at his own trial.
The court also cited Guité's misuse of public funds as an aggravating factor in his fraud conviction.
The sponsorship program was supposed to promote national unity in the wake of the narrow victory by federalists in the 1995 Quebec referendum.
© The Canadian Press, 2009 |
| | Canadian Political Free-for-All | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| From: DeplorableIrredeemableRedneck | 1/4/2009 11:29:18 PM | | | | | | 'Ignatieff-mania' fails to sweep nation: poll
Norma Greenaway, Canwest News Service, Published: Saturday, January 03, 2009
OTTAWA -- Michael Ignatieff scores significantly better than Stéphane Dion on a range of leadership questions but still trails Stephen Harper on almost all fronts, according to the findings of an Ipsos Reid poll.
Results of the poll, conducted for Canwest News Service and Global National in late December, show 43% of Canadians said they believe the Conservative leader would make the best prime minister, compared with 33% who picked Mr. Ignatieff of the Liberals and 23% who selected NDP leader Jack Layton. Mr. Harper's score was down seven points from the last survey, which was conducted when Mr. Dion was still Liberal leader. Mr. Ignatieff's score was up 13 points from Mr. Dion's last tally.
Mr. Ignatieff's score was up between five and 10 points over Mr. Dion's on every leadership measure, the poll said. By comparison, Mr. Harper's rate dropped in almost every category, with 51% - an increase of 10 points from the last survey - saying they believe he has a hidden agenda.
Darrell Bricker, president of Ipsos Reid, said Mr. Ignatieff has given the Liberal party a bit of a bump in public opinion. "Ignatieff has at least got people to start thinking a little bit more positively about the Liberal party's leadership," Mr. Bricker said. "But he's not a game changer, at least at this stage." Mr. Harper is still well ahead of his chief rival by most leadership measures. "Is there Ignatieff-mania breaking out across the country? The answer is no," Mr. Bricker said. "Harper hasn't crashed and Ignatieff has not taken off."
Mr. Harper outscored his opponents on all leadership questions except when those surveyed were asked to name their choice of "someone who is open to the ideas of others." Mr. Ignatieff was selected by 33%, Mr. Layton scored 32%, and Mr. Harper was picked by 30%.
On managing the economy in challenging times, Mr. Harper was the top choice for 44% of those surveyed, down six points from the last survey, but still well ahead of Mr. Ignatieff at 32% and Mr. Layton at 20%. Mr. Ignatieff scored 10 points higher than Mr. Dion on the same question. Mr. Bricker described the gain as significant, but not enough to threaten Mr. Harper at this time. "A 12-point lead over the new leader of the Liberal party is still pretty good," Mr. Bricker said on the question of economic leadership.
The poll, conducted Dec. 18 through Dec. 21, involved an online survey of 1,021 Canadians. It had an estimated margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points, 19 times out of 20. |
| | Canadian Political Free-for-All | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| From: DeplorableIrredeemableRedneck | 1/6/2009 11:18:53 AM | | | | | | The Liberal leader is a man of magnitude. So where is he?
Globe and Mail
LAWRENCE MARTIN - January 5, 2009
Michael Ignatieff has been completing a book over the holidays, the
last chapter in a family saga. That's fine and well, but there are
Liberals who wish he'd chosen another time - a better moment than the
immediate aftermath of becoming party leader.
With the departure of Stephane Dion, it was thought there would be a
rush of momentum for the Grits, heady sensations of relief and
revival. With the eloquent Mr. Ignatieff as the new regent, hopes were
further heightened.
By comparison to his predecessor, he is a man of magnitude. But where
is the new dynamism? And where is he? At a volatile political juncture
when the moment needs be seized, Iggy's off to a quiet and rather
unremarkable beginning.
It's not so much his own doing. Circumstances have not been kind.
There was no leadership race. That meant no high-profile campaign, no
media-saturated convention, no hallmark speech. His overnight
enthronement served the good purpose of quickly terminating the Dion
stewardship. But coronations cannot be said to be democratically
edifying. Rather than bolstering credibility, they can bleach it.
Iggy's investiture had the added disadvantage of coming just before
the Christmas break. It meant that, with all the holiday distractions,
he couldn't showcase himself. Instead, Prime Minister Stephen Harper
has maintained the higher profile with his year-end interviews and
hockey tournament photo-ops.
The public discussion centres not so much on the new lord of the
Liberals but on the continuing aversion to the idea of a Liberal-led
coalition. Archduke Ignatieff, perhaps for good reason, has not wanted
to disown the coalition concept.
But it's hard to stake out a leadership image that's crisp and
gallant when you're seen as flirting with the concept of hooking up
with others.
Iggy's quick ascension also deprived him of the opportunity of
developing and brandishing a new set of policies to accentuate his
differences with Mr. Dion. On events since his takeover, he has been
reluctant to put out firm policy positions. He is seen as strong on
foreign policy, but developments abroad have brought him more
unhelpful news. The renewed Israeli-Palestinian clash highlights an
area where his credibility is, at best, suspect. On the invasion of
Lebanon in 2006, the reputed wordsmith stumbled over his words twice,
first saying he wasn't losing any sleep over civilian casualties, then
saying the Israelis had committed war crimes.
The party he inherits is not in the gruesome shape that some suggest.
The last election was actually far from its worst performance. In four
other elections, the Liberals finished with lower seat totals. In most
other defeats, the party didn't hold the winner to a minority as it
did this time. Its record low score in the popular vote total was
misleading because five parties competed in this election, whereas
there were three in many of the others.
But the Liberals' image has to be turned around, and the thinker
doesn't have the luxury of much thinking time. He has to move quickly.
At least thus far, unlike in Mr. Dion's case, he has been spared the
bite of Conservative attack ads. He warned Mr. Harper against
resorting to that kind of garbage and the PM, pilloried over his bid
to strip parties of public funding, is perhaps reticent to unleash his
dogs of war, at least for the moment.
He may feel he doesn't have to, considering all the negative
publicity over the coalition. Mr. Ignatieff is in a bind on this. It
isn't exactly a sponsorship scandal he has been handed, as was the
case for Paul Martin. But it's an albatross just the same.
Public opposition to the coalition idea has been allowed to cement.
No concerted attempt by Mr. Ignatieff or his followers has been made
to discredit misconceptions surrounding it. If Iggy really wants to
keep this option open, he should be loudly making the case of how
coalitions have worked in Europe, how they are more democratically
representative than single-party governments, how the Bloc Quebecois
could be kept at arm's length with no veto power in a coalition.
It's probably too late to succeed with such a campaign. But the
coalition question is one on which Mr. Ignatieff has to fish or cut
bait, lest he be Dionized. He has to get himself out of the early
limbo. It needs to be emphasized that he has only just begun his
leadership journey. But it also needs to be emphasized that opening
steps are steps remembered. His low profile speaks too much of a party
inclined to stay the course, as opposed to being in a rush to change
it. |
| | Canadian Political Free-for-All | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| From: DeplorableIrredeemableRedneck | 1/7/2009 10:34:35 AM | | | | | | Ignatieff's inner circle starts
taking shape
By Joan Bryden, THE CANADIAN PRESS
OTTAWA - Michael Ignatieff is starting to put a Toronto-heavy stamp on the Liberal party, surrounding himself with loyalists who helped him secure the leadership.
Almost a month after being installed as leader, Ignatieff has begun filling key posts in the Opposition leader's office, the party and its campaign machine.
He has yet to hire a chief of staff to run his office. But insiders say former New Brunswick MP Paul Zed will effectively take on that role - without the title - until a permanent top aide can be found.
With the notable exception of Zed, Ignatieff's inner circle thus far appears to be top-heavy with Torontonians, most of whom played key roles in the Toronto MP's two leadership campaigns.
Ian Davey, who was instrumental in wooing Ignatieff back to Canada from Harvard and who ran his 2006 leadership campaign, has been named principal secretary.
Sachin Aggarwal, operations director during the leadership campaigns, will take on the job of deputy chief of staff.
Jill Fairbrother and Leslie Church, both of whom handled media relations for Ignatieff's leadership bids, will share communications responsibilities in the Opposition leader's office as well.
Ignatieff is also poised to name another Torontonian as the party's new national director.
Rocco Rossi, CEO of Ontario's Heart and Stroke Foundation, is expected to assume the party's top administrative job, replacing Greg Fergus. Fergus, who was appointed national director by former leader Stephane Dion, tendered his resignation Monday.
Rossi's expertise as an innovative fundraiser could be a huge asset for the cash-strapped Liberals, who've been struggling to adapt to the ban on corporate donations imposed in 2004.
The Tories have proved much more adept at raising small amounts of money from thousands of individual donors, raking in almost five times more money than the Liberals in the last few years.
Rossi is also an experienced political organizer and longtime Liberal.
Two more Torontonians are expected to take key roles on the Liberal election team.
Don Guy, a former chief of staff to Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty, is expected to be named campaign director while Warren Kinsella will manage the war room, as he's done in the past for McGuinty and former prime minister Jean Chretien.
Ignatieff has not yet put his stamp on the Liberal shadow cabinet and Fairbrother said there has been no discussion about the various roles caucus members will play. She said Ignatieff may choose to make no significant changes to the lineup of critics assigned by Dion.
Privately, some Liberals are wondering why Ignatieff has waited almost a month to start assembling his team.
After a tumultuous fall parliamentary session that almost toppled the Harper government and led to Ignatieff's hasty coronation as Liberal leader, Fairbrother said: "I think everybody took a break over the holidays and I don't think we need to apologize for that."
Now that he's started pulling his inner circle together, some Liberals are privately worried that Ignatieff is simply importing his leadership team into the Opposition leader's office - much as former leader Paul Martin did, with disastrous results. Leadership campaign organizers aren't necessarily best suited to policy development and preparing to govern.
Moreover, some Liberals are grumbling that Ignatieff has made little effort thus far to include supporters of his former leadership rivals, Bob Rae and Dominic LeBlanc, in his inner circle.
|
| | Canadian Political Free-for-All | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| From: DeplorableIrredeemableRedneck | 1/7/2009 10:55:43 AM | | | | | | Flaherty considers additional tax reductions
Updated Tue. Jan. 6 2009 3:13 PM ET CTV.ca News Staff
Finance Minister Jim Flaherty says the "number one concern" he's heard in pre-budget consultations has been the lack of access to credit.
Flaherty, who is meeting with the Canadian Taxpayers Federation in Montreal Tuesday, said a working group has been formed to help ensure the adequate availability of credit and financing in Canada.
"The access to credit issue I would expect we would address in the budget because it is the number one concern," Flaherty told reporters Tuesday prior to his meeting.
Flaherty said to help stimulate the economy there is a need for more infrastructure investment and additional tax reductions.
"What I've been hearing across Canada and also from my council of economic advisers has been that we need to invest more in infrastructure," Flaherty said.
"That is one way of course of supporting the economy, of stimulating the economy, but also we need to look at tax reductions, additional tax reductions, as another way of supporting the economy."
Flaherty said his main goal is to keep the economy in good shape.
"We need to take some steps in the short term to provide stimulus in the economy but we also have to, during this time of economic turbulence, take steps to build capacity in the economy so we come out of the slowness in a position of strength," he said.
On Monday, Flaherty met privately with senior bankers and Bank of Canada governor Mark Carney yesterday but only commented on the discussions at Tuesday press conference.
"I encouraged the heads of the banks, the CEOs to work with the government... to ensure the systemic strength of our banking system in Canada," he said.
Still, according to the Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF), Flaherty should do all he can to cut taxes and table a balanced budget later this month.
"Unfortunately, the one thing the finance minister was very clear on today is that he fully expects to run an important deficit this year," CTF spokesman Kevin Gaudet told CTV Newsnet Tuesday.
"It looks like taxpayers will be on the hook for the first deficit in some 15 years."
Key to the deficit spending is $4 billion in loans to the moribund domestic auto industry, which has already received $782 million of public funds over the past five years, said Gaudet.
"The government has a long history of throwing money at industries that are failing," he said.
However, Gaudet added that funding the automakers could be a waste of taxpayer's money, because two of the companies could end up bankrupt regardless of any federal loans.
"If you listen to what (President) George Bush said in his statement, he's planning for a structured bankruptcy of two or three of the Big Three. That means the Canadian tax money that's provided to these companies could very easily be flushed away."
While Gaudet said that "an alphabet soup of interest groups" has been pressuring the government for subsidies, he noted that Flaherty has recently signaled that tax relief for Canadian households may also be included in the budget.
Gaudet said the Tory budget will have to appease both Conservatives and the left-leaning opposition parties, meaning a mixed-bag of measures.
"So I think you're going to see the finance minister do a delicate dance between spending and tax relief."
Flaherty has already held pre-budget consultations in Saskatchewan and Atlantic Canada. He will be in Toronto on Friday and in Vancouver next Monday.
Meanwhile, the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA) released its Alternative Federal Budget (AFB) fiscal stimulus plan.
According to the report, the one-year package would create 407,000 jobs and boost the economy by 3 per cent.
The plan calls for an injection of $32.9 billion, or 2.1 per cent of GDP, into Canada's economy to protect Canadians who experience loss of income, as well as strengthen and build hard and soft infrastructure to address the challenges of climate change, income inequality, and aging populations.
"We've laid out a bold and achievable set of initiatives that can protect Canada from the economic storm while building for future generations," CCPA Senior Economist Armine Yalnizyan said in a press release. "Our plan creates jobs and gives the economy a jolt of life just when it needs it -- now."
|
| | Canadian Political Free-for-All | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| From: DeplorableIrredeemableRedneck | 1/8/2009 9:54:38 AM | | | | | | Liberals need to deal with fruitcakes in the ranks
Posted: January 07, 2009, 5:00 PM by Kelly McParland - National Post
When Stephen Harper won the leadership of the newly united Conservative party, he put considerable effort into chasing the worst of the right-wing loonies from Tory ranks.
Nutbars had done untold damage to the party over the years. Liberals, and Liberal-friendly press hounds, knew that at some point in any campaign, some right-wing fruitcake could be counted on to spout off about gays or God or the abomination of allowing women to wear pants, and a few million votes would go “poof”, just like that. Harper did his best to put a lid on it, earning himself much abuse for “muzzling” party members, especially from Liberals and hacks upset that their fun would be spoiled.
Michael Ignatieff might want to consider something similar, though, considering the trouble a few Liberal bloggers are causing over the situation in Gaza. Liblogs, a site that aggregates blogs from writers identifying themselves as Liberals, has become alarmed enough to post a notice distancing itself from the venom being spewed by anti-Israeli bloggers on the site.
Posted by Jason Cherniak, who runs the site, it reads:
Liblogs is not affiliated with the Liberal Party of Canada. It is a non-profit organization without charitable status and we provide an advertising service to bloggers who identify themselves as Liberal Party supporters. We take no responsibility for what those bloggers write and only remove them for actions that go beyond reasonable discourse. Such decisions are made by a Board of Directors and I am only one vote out of five.
As President of Liblogs, I speak on behalf of the organization. While I will never force bloggers to adopt my view, I feel it is my responsibility to lay out the official position of Liblogs on the fighting in Israel and Gaza. Individual bloggers are free to disagree as long as they do so in a mature and civil manner.
I have very strong views on the history of the Middle East, but it is not necessary to consider such historic arguments when talking about Gaza. Instead, we can focus on relatively recent events. I believe that those events prove beyond any doubt that it is Hamas, and not Israel, that is responsible for the current fighting.
In the summer of 2005, Israel withdrew from Gaza. This was a complete and total withdrawal, where even settlers whose families had lived in Gaza for decades were withdrawn to Israel. It was everything the world had ever asked from Israel as far as the Gaza strip was concerned. No matter what you might think of the past, Israel clearly made a decision to disassociate itself from Gaza and give the people of Gaza a chance to set their own destiny.
And they did. In January 2006, the people of Gaza elected Hamas. Hamas is an organization that denies Israel’s right to exist and has used suicide bombers to attack civilians even in times of absolute peace between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Even after this provocation, Israel stayed out of Gaza.
In June 2006, Hamas attacked Israel and kidnapped a soldier while killing two others. In June 2007, Hamas began an internal civil war in which they rooted out and killed all representatives of the elected Palestinian president and the opposition party, Fatah. Eventually, by June 2008, Israel was able to negotiate a cease fire with Hamas, the “State of Calm Agreement”, brokered by Egypt. That agreement fell apart in December 2008 when Hamas once again began attacking Israel with rockets imported from Syria and Iran.
Israel showed nothing but restraint from the summer of 2005 until December 2008 in its relations with the people of Gaza. There can be no reasonable disagreement that Israel has the right to defend its citizens. The undeniable truth is that if the elected government of Gaza had not attacked Israel, then Israel would not have attacked Gaza.
People who do not like the response need to evaluate who is truly responsible, and demand that governments around the world start to take action to save the people of Gaza from their own elected government. It is time to stop blaming Israel for being attacked by a government that wants to destroy the Jewish state.
Liblogs has been under assault for several days by Ezra Levant, a Conservative blogger who knows something about causing havoc. Levant posted an “anti-semitism round-up” that quoted liberally from Liblogs, setting off a fierce anti-Ezra counterattack from some of his targets. Saner Liberals have been unimpressed by the whole ugly display. Jeff Jedras, who blogs as “A BCer in Toronto”, issued a plea for calm, writing:
“I am getting increasingly frustrated at some of the garbage I’ve been reading of late on the Liblogs aggregate though. I’m staunchly in favour of people’s right to free speech, even if what they say makes them look stupid, and luckily that same right to free speech also allows me to speak-up and say so when people are saying stuff that is pretty dammed stupid. And there’s been a lot of that the last few days.”
Liblogs appears to have cleaned out the worst of the hate messages. But it has to be worrying to a party that is accustomed to viewing itself as the voice of middle-of-the-road reason, and which makes a habit of portraying Conservatives as extremists and cranks, to discover so thoroughly healthy a nest of fringe-dwellers infesting its ranks.
Ignatieff's own position doesn't differ much from Stephen Harper's, but the lack of backbone in the party leadership in recent years has opened the way to the type of indiscipline that used to plague the Tories. The new leader should get out the pest control spray fast. Industrial strength.
Kelly McParland
National Post |
| | Canadian Political Free-for-All | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| |
