Monday, June 15, 2009

Iggy Threatens, Markets Drop!

So, we all know Iggy is threatening an election, over EI. He wants people to work 45 days and get paid for a year. NICE! He has the slackers vote all wrapped up with that one.

Hearing this "threat" the markets fell by over 250 points.

It shows that international markets have no faith in a Liberal government. Oil is on the raise, usually if oil is going up so is the TSX, but today, with the political uncertainty the Liberals unleashed, the markets fell badly after weeks of an upturn.

Liberals stopping the economic recovery in an attempt to gain power. SAD.

Atlantic Canada should be enraged! Iggy obviously doesn't understand the problems our fishing industry faces. Lobsters are selling for pennies a pound, how can they survive? They do not want charity from the Liberals, they want real support for their markets. We are planning a lobster party in support of PEI lobster fishermen. How about the Liberals?? No mention even by Wayne Easter, PEI Liberal MP, he is too busy with making sure hogs are protected. Shame on PEI, the guy is an idiot, you have better people to represent you than this brainless wonder.

Did you know that the Conservatives missed getting a majority by around 9000 votes? Think about that, 9001 more votes would have lead to a Conservative majority, and stopped this ridiculous, an election if necessary, but not necessarily an election BS from the lefties.

There is a coalition of the left, but they are hiding it. If the Liberals win a minority, who are their natural supporters? The NDP and the Bloc. Both will demand huge amounts of money to keep them onside. Quebec is a blood sucking province that the Liberals are pandering to, meaning that they will suck more money out of Ontario and Alberta to gain power.

An election, I don't think so! If they fail to count properly on Friday, election it is, and the Conservatives are going to remind the voters about the coalition attempt to take power. Democracy denied, or democracy perverted.

66 comments:

maryT said...

Our dollar lost value today also. I knew the markets would fall, unless Iggy had said, no election.
Then they would maybe have gone up and libs would get some credit for making a sound decision. But, we know Iggy has never invested any money so why should he care.
But, what if his donor lost money today. Remember the cry about the income trusts and libs having an outrage over lost money for our seniors. Now Iggy can wear it.
I laughed at how he and the media tried to put the blame on the PM if we go to an election.
I can't see someone working over 1800 hrs a year wanting to use their money to support those that only want to work 360 hrs/year.
Even if they made 20.00/hr in that 45 days, there are another 320 days to make it last. And how much would they get on EI.

maryT said...

Our dollar lost value today also. I knew the markets would fall, unless Iggy had said, no election.
Then they would maybe have gone up and libs would get some credit for making a sound decision. But, we know Iggy has never invested any money so why should he care.
But, what if his donor lost money today. Remember the cry about the income trusts and libs having an outrage over lost money for our seniors. Now Iggy can wear it.
I laughed at how he and the media tried to put the blame on the PM if we go to an election.
I can't see someone working over 1800 hrs a year wanting to use their money to support those that only want to work 360 hrs/year.
Even if they made 20.00/hr in that 45 days, there are another 320 days to make it last. And how much would they get on EI.

Patsplace said...

Well, bring it on!! Let's get right after an election. Iggy, Mini-Marx and the Frenchman, you know, the guy that drives around Quebec and calls himself a federal minister, yeah, that one.

It's not rocket science that the coalition is alive and well, just waiting for a chance to slither into the room. That being as obvious as the nose on your face, lets put it in front of the Canadian people to see just what the reaction will be.

Southern Quebec said...

GlobeInvestor - TSX tumbles on LOWER COMMODITIES. oil...down...gold...down...CDN$...down

OMG the Arabs heard about IGGY and they lowered the pice of oil OMG! OMG! Gold on Sale! IGGY! IGGY! Buy lobsters!

9000 votes! WTF!

Southern Quebec said...

"Remember the cry about the income trusts and libs having an outrage over lost money for our seniors."

Some of us lost money in our RRSP's because Dim Jim LIED about the income trusts, Mary the T. The conservatives lie about everything!

"...we know Iggy has never invested any money so why should he care."
Proof...

Alberta Girl said...

"Some of us lost money in our RRSP's because Dim Jim LIED about the income trusts,"

Geesh SQ - don't tell me you were stupid enough to sell. You do know that - as with most things in the market - if you had held on you would have seen them rise up again, don't you.

Too bad.

Or you are lying and you never had anything in income trusts.

Jen said...

A G. wasn't it John Manley, a liberal, who told PAUL MARTIN that bringing in the INCOME TRUST was a wrong move and to get rid of it. But, as usual, the liberals thought of no one but themselves.
How about that leak from Goodale's team which drove the markets up.

Jen said...

Hunter, I sent an email yesterday, and yes, I was at the BBQ.

East of Eden said...

I never saw any conclusive information as to how many people lost money and how much. Same for the 40-year mortgage. Those who were screeching about it failed to ever provide any statistics. IMHO - the two "crises" are not that huge.

People lose on their investments every day, just as people gain every day. Personally, I invest in no-risk vehicles for my RRSP. I lost some money in the high tech market and I do NOT blame anybody except the idiots who were running the companies...and myself.

I've noticed, SQ, that you seem to experience everything. Funny how life is screwing you right left and center...if you can slag the CPC, that is.

mystereeoso said...

Re:"So, we all know Iggy is threatening an election, over EI."

Huntsy, is that ALL there is to it, or are you accidentally leaving out a few issues? Doesn't he also want PROOF (you guys like proof) of how much stimulus money has been spent by PMSH's team? Doesn't he also want to see a plan for paying down the deficit? And finally, doesn't he want some accountability on the nuclear isotope shortage? Or didn't you hear those parts of Iggy's presser?


But back to EI and what you are calling the "slacker" vote. How on earth do you link theoretical changes to EI and the "slacker" vote to a market drop? That would be a primo example of an illogical strawman.

Re"Liberals stopping the economic recovery in an attempt to gain power. SAD. "

That depends if you think the Conservative government is doing ANYTHING about our nation's economic recovery, besides spending money on flashy economic action plan propaganda, hiring American PR agent's so Stiffy can get on American tv , and a five million dollar round of truthiness pre-election campaign ads. Shovel ready? Not so much.

Re"We are planning a lobster party in support of PEI lobster fishermen."

You personally, or the Conservative Party?

Re"There is a coalition of the left, but they are hiding it."

Where are they hiding it, out back of the HOC - or maybe they left it on a file in some dressing room at CTV for future MSM fanfare and FUN!

Re:"Quebec is a blood sucking province that the Liberals are pandering to, meaning that they will suck more money out of Ontario and Alberta to gain power."

Calling Quebecers names again eh? Bloodsuckers. That'll wow head office.

Jen said...

Hunter, do you have that article regarding to the E.I. scandal and what the liberals did to it how they used canadians E.I etc.

Ignatieff and the liberals for that matter want the PM to clean up erase the liberals' scandals corruption etc, etc.
Will the liberals ever take responsibility for the mess which they themselves created. NEVER!!

mystereeoso said...

Jen, if you read Huntsy's blog, you know she just referenced material about the Liberals and EI, the other day. But EI is not the only issue on the plate - the other three are as follows:
How much stimulus money has actually, demonstrably been spent? What are the conserve plans to pay down the deficit? Finally how do they plan on dealing with the medical isotope problem?

mystereeoso said...

Go Read:


Some movement on making employment insurance (EI) more accessible. In the past, Ignatieff has said the threshold for eligibility for EI should be the same across the country and set at 360 hours, or 60 hours below the lowest level today. Yesterday, Ignatieff made it clear that figure is negotiable.

More transparency on what the government has actually spent (as opposed to "committed" or "announced") on infrastructure projects. Last week's economic update from the government was opaque on this point.

A timetable and a plan for pulling the budget out of the red when the recession is over. That timetable appeared to disappear in last week's update, and the government has offered no plan for deficit reduction, although it has slammed Ignatieff for suggesting taxes will have to be raised.

An alternate plan for supplying hospitals with medical isotopes in the wake of the shutdown of the Chalk River reactor. To date, the government has responded mostly by blaming the previous Liberal government for the crisis

http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/651213#

East of Eden said...

There is one thing with which I agree: EI should be uniform across the country. It is a federal program and the regional differences only complicate matters. As for EI reform - it sure needs it. We have no choice but to pay into it so our access should not be hampered. The two-week waiting period is a terrible factor. It's hard enough to be dismissed and losing two weeks only makes it worse. As far as I know, there is no two-week grace period when it comes to paying the premiums - the first paycheque has the deduction so why should we, the contributers, have to lose the two weeks.

The processing time is criminal - there is no processing lag when it comes to deducting premiums so there should be no lag when it comes to paying them. The system is automated and only requires review and approval from an officer.

I agree that the system needs reform - beginning with the "reforms" which were ushered in by the Chretien government.

I agree that EI contributions should be held in a seperate account and NOT be lumped into general revenues. I agree that there should be a cap on the total account so that if it reaches that cap, premium rates decrease to a maintenance level. I agree that the total fund should NOT be used to create a false surplus because that money was contributed by workers who believed that it was there for them, when needed.

High unemployment would not cause a deficit if the account were on its own. That money belongs to people who contributed to the fund and not to the general public.

Oh yes, we do need EI reform but it should NEVER be used as a political tool for a grandstanding politician. It should never be used as a threat. That, IMHO, is an insult to all of us who work and pay premiums.

Fay said...

Right on, East of Eden!

Alberta Girl said...

"Yesterday, Ignatieff made it clear that figure is negotiable."

You mean he waffled, right mysty er....Ron Mr. Dithers III. What is it about the Liberals and picking ditherers for their leaders.

You do know that the spending is a long term process, right mysty. Committed means just that - they have committed to spending those dollars; projects are starting up. There is a map showing just where all the money is committed. What that means, mysty, is that those projects, those municipalities are planning for that money, getting workers in place, putting it in their budgets. It isn't a - well here is a cheque for 5 million dollars - you can start any time. There are conditions on the monies.

I would say the EI is a non starter - even Iggy has backed down.

Working for 45 days then collecting EI - yeah that makes sense. Of course, you are probably one of those who sees it as a scheme to be taken advantage of.

Isotopes - I believe they announced some more isotopes Mysty - as you suggested

READ!!!

Jen said...

Chretien brought TWO MAPLE REACTORS in the 90's. To date, these reators have not produced one ISOTOPE.

Gayle said...

"It's not rocket science that the coalition is alive and well, just waiting for a chance to slither into the room. That being as obvious as the nose on your face..."

Do you think that saying something is obvious makes it so? Because it doesn't.

Mary - your suggestion that it is Ignatieff's fault the dollar fell is false:

"It's just political posturing at this point in time but I don't think it's going to have an undue effect on the Canadian dollar," said Jack Spitz, managing director of foreign exchange at National Bank Financial.
"At this stage in the game I can't see it having a huge effect on the Canadian dollar."

http://finance.sympatico.msn.ca/investing/news/breakingnews/article.aspx?cp-documentid=20401743

But even if it were true, I hope you realize that Harper is the one with the ability to avoid an election. Perhaps you should call his office and express your concern about the economic fall out should there be an election.

Ted said...

Hunter, do you know anything about markets? Or are you actually claiming that Ignatieff saying he needs more accountability from Harper brought not just the Canadian markets down 250 points (about 2%) but also the AMERICAN markets by AN EVEN BIGGER margin (roughly averaging 2.5% down yesterday) as well as oil prices and commodity prices.

With a man as powerful as that, with the world hanging onto every utterance of Ignatieff like that, we really can't afford NOT to have such a powerful leader as our Prime Minister, now can we!!!

liberal supporter said...

Chretien brought TWO MAPLE REACTORS in the 90's. To date, these reators have not produced one ISOTOPE.
How do you people continue to simply make stuff up? They have in fact produced isotopes during tests. Link

Jen said...

listening to john maccallum on david rutherford yesterday at
10:Am,
David told him that he did not have a recession to deal with
John said that they had- SARS and some other infectous virus to deal with. UH?
What plans do liberals have
A. ????????


http://www.630ched.com/other/audiovault.html

wilson said...

'I hope you realize that Harper is the one with the ability to avoid an election.'

No no Gayle,
Iffy created this situation.
Iffy gets to decide if PMSHs 'answers' are good enough.
He said so, again that HE will decide if Harper can please him.

It was hilarious to watch Iffy go from puffed up peacock in the morning,
to prairie chicken by 5pm yesterday!!

Chantell Hebert blogged that after that performance, maybe it's time to put coin on a Conservative majority....

wilson said...

The Toronto Star (gasp) is picking up on the REALLY interesting passage in the Raitt tape:

''...Raitt describes how, at a closed-door meeting of politicians and corporate CEOs last January, bank presidents threatened to cut off funding to the deeply indebted Liberal party if Ignatieff voted against the Conservative budget:

"They did it at the Canadian Council of (Chief) Executives, there was three presidents of major banks who stood up in the room – and this is not from cabinet so I can talk about it – stood up and said, `Ignatieff, don't you even think about bringing us to an election. We don't need this. We have no interest in this. And we will never fund your party again.'"

It's hard to know what to make of Raitt's comments. She wasn't at the meeting, which suggests she may have heard about it from the CEOs – possibly from bankers boasting they had Ignatieff on a tight leash? ...''
http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/651248


Jack Layton will stuff this little 'big banks own Ignatieff' jewell in his pocket for the next election.
Only thing Iffy can say to combat that is 'Dippers were willing to give bankers what they wanted in exchange for cabinet seats'....yes, remind us how that coalition thing worked !LOL

Alberta Girl said...

"But even if it were true, I hope you realize that Harper is the one with the ability to avoid an election."

Um Gayle - no....The Bloc and the NDP have stated they will vote against. Iggy is the only one who can decide one way or the other whether to pull the plug.

Will he or won't he........

East of Eden said...

"Do you think that saying something is obvious makes it so? Because it doesn't."

Very true. But...in this case, it really is obvious. Your point, although true, is moot.

As for Ignatieff's effect on the dollar - he, himself, has about as much effect as a gnat on an elephant. However, political uncertainty does affect the dollar and the stock market. Ignatieff's posturing makes us look unstable and, thus, the dollar and stock market take a bit of a tumble. If he pulls this shtick of his often enough, it won't create the merest of ripples. I loved the cartoon in this week's Hill Times. Kind of showed us Ignatieff's influence.

mystereeoso said...

Um, Jen, could you flesh out your point a bit? You don't remember SARS?

Re ABG:"You mean he waffled, right mysty er....Ron Mr. Dithers III. What is it about the Liberals and picking ditherers for their leaders."

Was he waffling or being conciliatory and diplomatic in tone? What should Iggy have said? Wah give me my demands or I'll hold my breath and puke?

Re: "Committed means just that - they have committed to spending those dollars; projects are starting up. There is a map showing just where all the money is committed"

I'm pretty sure Iggy's had a good look at that worthless map of abject propaganda. The money - as "stimulus" money is supposed to be more than committed or earmarked for projects. It's not supposed to be conditional. It is supposed to put people to work actualizing projects, not waiting for them. The money is supposed to show on a budget as spent or else being well in the process of being spent. It's called accounting and it's where you show the DETAILS of your activities in DOLLARS and CENTS not pictograms of shovels.

Re: "Working for 45 days then collecting EI - yeah that makes sense. Of course, you are probably one of those who sees it as a scheme to be taken advantage of."

I agree with the amendments Iggy wants to make. What is the point of a social safety net people in need can't take advantage of? Let's broaden the point. Why develop nuclear science and nuclear medicine if the government is just going to drop the ball on the industry? You feel sick - you think you're going in for a cutting edge MRI and presto! They slice you open with a twenty year old surgical procedure instead. Aaahhh health care in the developed world. So great, I love it.

Re:"Isotopes - I believe they announced some more isotopes Mysty"

What's this an unsupported factoid or a squib?

Alberta Girl said...

Mysty - I am sure you know how FAST beauracracy works.....I am sure you know that most of these projects need time to get workers, get materials etc. This doesn't happen overnight. They cannot do it until they have a commitment that the money will be there. That is what the PM means by "committed" monies. How could the money be "spent" already when the majority of projects are not even started.

And why would you call the map of projects "propaganda"? It shows clearly just how many projects have been committed to.

maryT said...

Just think, working a 10 hr day during the election campaign, as a paid worker for elections canada, and you could get EI for a whole year, till the next election.
I heard on cbc that they had thousands, of e-mails saying, NO ELECTION. A very few man in the street interviews in, downtown Toronto say YES.
Catch the article in the Lethbridge Herald today, announcing a 60 million irrigation project, cost shared with the Province. Wonder how many jobs will be created to manufacture all that plastic pipe, 4 feet in diameter. Then the jobs for the installation of said pipe.
I know, Iggy thinks it can be done by Friday. Just doesn't say which Friday or what year.
Layton for leader of the opposition, and liberals with no party status after the next election. LOL
Notice how the trolls are upset that we use their agruments against them. Re the drop in the markets. And they refuse to believe, as Iggy does, that unless the estimates are voted on, no money will flow. And an election will stop it all. Didn't anyone tell Iggy the rules. As for not meeting with the PM for 6 months, it is up to Iggy to approach the PM, not the other way around. And, if the PM throws Iggy a fragment of a bone to stop an election, it will be the PM who will get the credit for avoiding an election, as Iggy slides down that hill. It is getting steeper by the day. No way can liberals say the PM will wear an election, it will be Iggy alll the way.

Gayle said...

wilson - I am surprised you know so very little about Canadian democracy, what with all your attempts to come across as some sort of political strategist.

Let me dumb this down a bit for you:

Harper is Prime Minister because he commands the confidence of the majority of the House. He can only remain Prime Minister so long as he retains that confidence.

You're welcome.

mystereeoso said...

Re:"Mysty - I am sure you know how FAST beauracracy works.....I am sure you know that most of these projects need time to get workers, get materials etc. This doesn't happen overnight. They cannot do it until they have a commitment that the money will be there. That is what the PM means by "committed" monies. How could the money be "spent" already when the majority of projects are not even started."

An economic stimulus budget is designed to cut bureaucratic red tape. If the majority of Harper's projects are NOT EVEN STARTED then Iggy and Canadian's in general must wonder why we're running such a huge deficit. The budget came out in January and now it's June. What have Stevo and his pals been doing these last six months?



Re:"And why would you call the map of projects "propaganda"?

Because IT IS PROPAGANDA
. See especially disinformation, bandwagon common man, glittering generalities, halftruths and oversimplification. It's all there.











Re Huntsy:"Liberals stopping the economic recovery in an attempt to gain power. SAD."

http://www.macleans.ca/canada/wire/article.jsp?content=n155028628

mystereeoso said...

Fer gosh sakes, did any of you kids click on any of those shovels? Where does it explicitly say which projects are being implemented where, and the amount of money being spent on those projects?

Alberta Girl said...

Mysty....Grow up. Even you can't be that dumb?

Mind you - you vote Liberal so maybe......

Alberta Girl said...

Geesh Mysty....do you have to be guided every step of the way??

Sigh...

Click on the links provided mysty.

For example - here is one. Note all the projects underway???

http://www.buildingcanada-chantierscanada.gc.ca/creating-creation/atwork-encours-eng.html

You might want to spend some time actually doing some research instead of just believing Iggy when he complains that the money is only "committed".

mystereeoso said...

First off, how I vote is not something you know.

Second off, the map is retarded. Click on a shovel, find the tear drop, oh the project is getting between 100 K and 1 million in federal funding. Oh here's one for between 1 million and 5 million. How vague! And I like the disclaimer at the bottom:

This map is being updated frequently to provide you with the latest available information. If you cannot find the project you are looking for, please check back regularly.

"Funding information for each project is provided as a range, not an exact dollar amount. Map locations are approximate and may reflect the general area in which the project is taking place."
I don't think that was the kind of SPECIFIC spending information Iggy was asking for.

Alberta Girl said...

You might also want to read this

http://www.buildingcanada-chantierscanada.gc.ca/plandocs/booklet-livret/booklet-livret09-eng.html#bcfund-mic

which outlines how the stimulus (Building Canada Fund) will be done over 7 years.

Iggy and his group voted for this so they must have read the document and understood that the money would not be given out ad hoc during the month of April and May.

To say that committed monies are not the same as spent monies is simple posturing.

mystereeoso said...

Actually toady, committed means allocated to or set aside for. Spent means spent.

mystereeoso said...

There's a shovel on there for refurbishing a fisheries lab out east for get this "less than 100K".
VAGUEVAGUEVAGUEVAGUEVAGUEVAGUEVAGUE....

mystereeoso said...

Oh hey, here's one in the arctic for "greater than 5Mil"! I repeat, check it out - disinformation, bandwagon common man, glittering generalities, halftruths and oversimplification

East of Eden said...

You know, I'm glad that we have progressed to the point that we no longer call people with limitations "retarded". This way, people like Stereo can use it as an insult or to denigrate.

I guess it's people like Stereo who made it necessary to stop calling special needs people "retarded".

Stereo - you are becoming more rude and offensive with each passing day. I sure hope that if you should ever reproduce, that your child is absolutely perfect. I would hate to think of him or her being "retarded".

liberal supporter said...

Ignatieff's posturing makes us look unstable and, thus, the dollar and stock market take a bit of a tumble.
Funniest comment I've read today.

There is another country, same 2-2.5 million barrels a day of oil exports as us, double the population, which "looks unstable" too, yet the price of oil is still in a narrow range (down less than 1%), as are the Dow and TSX.

You think we look unstable because the Opposition may force an election? Do you suggest we install a dictatorship so we will look more "stable"?

Look at that other country, Iran, where they practically have a revolution under way. Yet the markets don't seem to be tanking.

"Unstable" indeed. Sheesh!

mystereeoso said...

I'm sorry if I offended you, East.I'm sorry if you think I denigrated a map by calling it retarded. Keep walking on the high road. I said the MAP is retarded.

maryT said...

Please quit arguing with you know who. Don't give that person the time of day. Libs have realized that the stimulus will stop is they vote no on Friday, and are working hard to say it wont.
Should hear all the goof being made by the opposition in QP today.
360 wks-was the worst of many. A lot of tongue tied opposition mps there today. Of course Goodale was in good form.

mystereeoso said...

The money won't stop flowing after the writ Marty. If you all would stop making mendacious statements, you'd get less argument from you know who.

Alberta Girl said...

"The money won't stop flowing after the writ Marty. If you all would stop making mendacious statements, you'd get less argument from you know who."

You are not serious, are you mysty... Of course it will stop.

mystereeoso said...

Why would it stop?

mystereeoso said...

Unless don't tell me big Stevo's going to set fire to the stimulus money if his government loses the confidence of the House? Now that would be insulting and denigrating to Canadian democracy.

mystereeoso said...

Might I suggest (once again, sigh...) Joan Bryden in the Canadian Press:

http://www.macleans.ca/canada/wire/article.jsp?content=n155028628

Heck maybe it's not mendacity on display over here. Maybe it's sheer ignorance. I thought that once before.

Ted said...

Kady O'Malley is actually checking into some of these projects. So far, many of them were already underway before any "stimulus" package was "committed" or does not need any "stimulus" until later in the year or next year.

So really, that map is just a bunch of re-announcements of previous announcements or shifting of prior funding committments from some other department over to the "Economic Action Plan" so they can call it stimulus.

Smoke and mirrors.

In both cases, the election has no real bearing because the money is already committed so an election has no bearing on it or is out there in time and well after an election so can easily be committed.

Again, not only is the map smoke and mirrors, but so is the dire warning that stimulus funding would come to some screaching halt if Harper forces an election on us.

All smoke and mirrors and spin and lies. The Harper way over and over.

Alberta Girl said...

"Liberal finance critic John McCallum suggested the government could use special Governor General's warrants to keep money flowing if necessary.

However, warrants are typically used when Parliament isn't sitting to cover the government's operating expenses."

Gee Mysty - sounds like another "the coalition is legitimate - really it is"

I would wonder if the "stimulus money" is classified as "operating expenses".

As Gayle is so often wont to say - Saying it doesn't make it so.

Besides, this is all a moot point, mysty. There is no way in H*** that Iggy is going to pull the plug. He is looking for a way out, any way out of this mess he has gotten himself into. I am sure that Stephen Harper will give him an out during their meeting this afternoon.

Of course, he will huff and puff and say that he "won" concessions and can now support it.

Watch for it mysty....I predict it will happen just like that.

mystereeoso said...

Why, ABG, do you think the money would stop?

Alberta Girl said...

"Why, ABG, do you think the money would stop?"

Because it is special projects not operating expenses.

Gayle said...

"sounds like another "the coalition is legitimate - really it is"

Well it was legitimate AG, so I am not sure what kind of point you are trying to make.

Don't make me have to give you another lesson the way our system of government works.

Oh, and I really love the argument here:

If Ignatieff forces an election he is a big meanie.

If Ignatieff backs off from an election he is a big chicken.

If Harper gives in to Ignatieff's demands it is because he is just "throwing a bone". It cannot possibly be because Harper also does not want an election...

Nice to see you have all your excuses ready. We can put that one on a shelf next to "the big bad media are out to get us".

Dear god you people get so caught in your own spin one wonders if you know which way is up.

Ted said...

The question you are being asked ABG, is if it is already committed, then the spending will happen regardless of the election. It has nothing to do with whether it is operational or special projects.

Only new currently uncommitted spending would not be spent because it would not have been approved. But as has been widely noted, almost all of this money is for actual real out the door spending 2 years from now. So there is nothing that is lost by the election since it can all be voted on in the fall. All Prime Minister Ignatieff has to do is re-introduce that spending measure.

Alberta Girl said...

"It cannot possibly be because Harper also does not want an election..."


Gee Gayle - of course he doesn't want an election.

Alberta Girl said...

"Only new currently uncommitted spending would not be spent because it would not have been approved. But as has been widely noted, almost all of this money is for actual real out the door spending 2 years from now. So there is nothing that is lost by the election since it can all be voted on in the fall"

Gee Ted - I thought all you guys were saying that PM Harper is a liar for saying that the money is spent?

You do know that "spent" means that it is accounted for on the books, don't you?

Anyway, this whole this is beginning to sound like an Iggy fest - going in circles and going nowhere.

I see the meeting is over so I am sure we will all have our answer as soon as Iggy can figure out how to make himself sound tough while capitulating on his demands.

mystereeoso said...

Why wouldn't your leader want an election? Elections are democracy in it's finest hour. Doesn't Stevo like democracy?

Why would your leader cut out special projects going into an election? Why would he switch to an operating budget?

Alberta Girl said...

"http://thestar.blogs.com/recession/2009/06/day-567--let-us-count-the-ways-canada-deserves-better-than-michael-ignatieff-as-pm-in-waiting-----1-iggy-threatened-last-we.html"

By the Way Ted - here is an article about your "Prime Minister Ignatieff"

liberal supporter said...

I see the meeting is over so I am sure we will all have our answer as soon as Iggy can figure out how to make himself sound tough while capitulating on his demands.
You mean Harper blinked?

mystereeoso said...

linky no worky ABG

Alberta Girl said...

"linky no worky ABG"

Uh - yeah it does - my goodness mysty.

S-l-o-w-l-y - take your mouse and hold it over the link. Click with your finger on the right mouse button. A little popup screen will come up - choose copy.

Now Mysty - go to the top of the screen and click in the address bar, use that same right mouse button and this time choose paste.

Click the enter button.

Got it now, Mysty?

Alberta Girl said...

"You mean Harper blinked?"

I am quite sure that is how Iggy and his pals in the media will portray it LS.

Suffice it to say, Iggy does not want an election no matter how much he huffs and puffs. Rex Murphy was right -

To be or not to be - that IS the question!

Anyhooo - nice chatting with you guys, but I have better things to do so I am off - tooodalooooo

maryT said...

One of the fundamental roles of Parliament is to review and then vote upon the government’s spending plans. On or before 1 March, the government tables its Main Estimates, which represent the government’s spending plans for the coming fiscal year.(2) They provide information on the expected financial resources needed by each department and agency and are primarily prepared by updating the previous year’s spending.(3) These Estimates are referred to House committees, which have until 31 May to consider them.(4) They are subsequently considered and voted upon by the House of Commons before the end of June. (A more detailed description of the Estimates review and approval process can be found in other publications.(5))

The Main Estimates should not be confused with the budget,(6) which presents the country’s economic condition and the government’s overall financial priorities and plans. The budget often contains announcements of new spending initiatives and tax measures. The new spending initiatives are usually not included in the same year’s Main Estimates,
which are prepared in advance of the budget. Instead, new spending initiatives announced in the budget appear in the Supplementary Estimates or in the following year’s Main Estimates
Also posted at Aardvark, for all those that say spending wont stop. It first has to be voted on and passed. I think Iggy finally got that message, from the PM. Another meeting is scheduled. Will there be a joint presser, so no one gets the upper hand. Perhaps Iggy discovered for the first time that the PM can be talked to. Hope he was searched for tape recorders and hidden cameras and the PM debugged his office first.
I wonder if Iffy will use I or we, when he climbs down that hill later today.
Do mps get paid during an election campaign, from the taxpayers, not brown paper bags. Duceppe is sure in a grouchy mood today. Maybe those mps that are short of pension time are giving him a bad time. He could also climb down that hill.

liberal supporter said...

I wonder if Iffy will use I or we, when he climbs down that hill later today.
Doesn't look like he's "climbed down that hill" yet.

Recall that the last time the Harper regime was to be defeated, Harper ran away and got the GG to prorogue. I do not trust him not to do so again, and neither should Iggy. So there may be a surprise Friday once it is too late to stop the confidence vote.

Gayle said...

"Gee Gayle - of course he doesn't want an election."

You have noticed those polls too, hey?

Southern Quebec said...

Hunter:

If one of the tags on this post is "American Iggy", shouldn't you have one "Canadian Harpo"?

maryT said...

Again I ask the liberal supporters to tell me,
Where will Iggy get 67 seats to get a larger minority than PMSH has, or the 77 seats he needs for a majority, or the 56 seats to equal Paul Martins minority.
Even the media admits that PMSH has a solid grip on the west and for him to keep the five seats he has will be difficult. If he spends too much time in BC, Quebec will turn on him. If he takes our ten seats there that still leaves a lot of seats to gain. Even if he gets back what they lost last time, that is only 97 seats. If he should sweep ONt and Que, and the Atlantic provinces, watch for western separation to rear its ugly head.
PMSH has a much better chance of getting a majority than Iggy has of getting a minority. Do the math and seat count. Gaining support in liberal ridings does not mean anything, except maybe the voters who stayed home will give them the 1.95/vote.