Thursday, March 09, 2006

Comment on Alberta Liberals

Though I have a hard time defending the Federal LIEberals _ the Provincial Liberals are a different story. First it should be noted that the Provincial Liberals distanced themselves and did not support the Federal LIEberals.

To quote a reply: "... only too often we get lumped in with the federal party, and too many people forget that we don't have anything to do with them. Our leader, Kevin Taft, did in fact tell the media that he would not support or endorse the federal Liberals or Paul Martin in the last election campaign. And he was quite serious about it."

Personally, I think they should change their name, to something like The Progressive Party of Alberta. I had always thought they were like the Federal LIEberals, now it is a party worth researching with an open mind.

When King Ralph threw the liberal book at the page WITHOUT READING IT, and called it "crap" showed that he has only one vision _ his. I went to the Provincial Liberal page and requested a copy:

I suggest that one reads it before commenting on the suggestions. One of the suggestions that I like is the following:

= = = = = = = = = = =

"The provincial government, by its own admission, expects to generate approximately $281 million per year in new revenue thanks to the recent increase of $2.25 per pack in tobacco taxes.

In March of 2002 a coalition of stakeholders from a broad variety of sectors came together under the banner "Wellness Alberta" and advocated the establishment of a wellness fund financed by tobacco tax dollars. The Alberta Liberal Opposition supports this initiative.
The Alberta Liberal Opposition would phase in a Wellness Fund, to eventually distribute $200 million a year to projects aimed at improving health and wellness.

The amount of this fund could be adjusted upwards in future years based upon tax revenue and Alberta’s increasing population. If the tobacco tax eventually becomes inadequate to sustain the fund, then other sources of revenue (such as liquor taxes) could be used. The Wellness Fund would under no circumstances take revenue away from other programs (i.e. acute care, chronic care, etc.)."

= = = = = = = = = = =

Why would King Ralph not impalement such a policy? At least the money generated by this tax would be a better method going to health care, than by placing the generated tax into general funds.

I am not saying that everything presented by the Provincial Liberals should be implemented, but at least some things could be adopted by King Ralph to make their proposal acceptable to Albertans. This should not be a "one party" policy, it should have input from all three parties - Conservative, Liberal and NDP. Such narrow-minded attitude is not good for any political party - one just has to look how the Federal LIEberals ran things. Perhaps the Alberta Conservatives need to be out of power for a while - like the Federal LIEberals.

The Conservatives have been in power too long under one leader - who did a lot of good - but should not be afraid to work with the opposition, and not be afraid to say, "Let’s look at this more closely." Isn’t that all the opposition parties want - both Provincially and Federally - to at least be listened to? Give the Provincial Liberals a chance to be listened to.

The Federal LIEberals always mocked the opposition - I hope that Harper at least listens to the opposition.

Friday, March 03, 2006

Regional Leader?

This was an interesting post, and this is my respons:

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

"An Ontario Leader?"

No comments yet. -Hide Original Post
A question I pose to you, my loyal readers: Seeing that regional conflict is dominating Canadian Politics more and more, with every region upset that they do not get enough of a seat at the federal table, would having a leader from Ontario be overall negative to the party, and more importantly, to the country? Note that even Dalton McGuinty is arguing that he doesn't get enough representation in Ottawa! Guidelines for response: Try not to relate your posts to specific candidates, this is about the issue above; and please keep it civil.

= = = = = = = = = = = =

(PERSONAL COMMENT: It is about time the LIEberal's see this problem in Canada. Too bad you had to lose the election to see it. For years this has been brought up and the need for electoral Reform. Now will the LIEberal government bring about some form of representation by population? You want real representation, then do as the Clown Party of Canada suggests _ redraw the political boundaries by population. Ontario would probably be the biggest portion, with Quebec and Alberta following. This would not only be for Members of Parliament but also Senate reform _ my personal view is tat Senators should be voted in.
This is one area in which ALL political parties should agree upon _ and when it comes to their own ridding _ please remember this will be for Canada NOT the particular party. The simplest way would be one MP for X number of voters _ though at the present I have no formula for smaller population Prov. But at least work together _ this would benefit Canada.)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"...would having a leader from Ontario be overall negative to the party, and more importantly, to the country?"
I see this as one of the most decisive issues _ where the leader comes from. I will use the last election as an example (I will try to keep to the issue):
The political/regional differences are very strong and certain political parties are stronger in some areas and weak or non_existent in others. This was used by the political party that was in power to suggest that a Prime Minister from the West could not represent ALL Canadians. While at the same time the West was saying that the Central Canadian politicians did not understand them. Same country with opposite views. Even near the end of election the Quebec Bloc said they didn't want to be told what to do by Calgary. This also had an effect upon the way smaller Prov. and Territories voted.
This is the problem of having the "Leader" from a different area. What would happen if a leader from a political party was from the Yukon?
It should not matter where the leader is from - the question to ask is; "Does this person represent Canada’s best interest?"
The two major parties do make this an issue. At the present where the leader comes from is more important than what the party has to say. The last election was based somewhat on policy - yet the major differences was on where the leader came from. Yes, the leader should be able to inspire people to follow them and ideas, yet it is how that person responds to Canadians as a whole. This is where the regions come in. The region where the person comes from will - on the whole - rally around and support him/her, while the other people say that it doesn’t represent them.