Would you rather be on the Good Sinking Ship liberal? Or look to a bright flowery future? Vote smart on the 23rd.
I listened to the debate-plea’s-cat fight between three federal candidates for the Labrador ridding this morning, CBC radio. If one had no knowledge of the three gentleman’s history then the winner of this exchange was by and far the NDP candidate.
If one does have knowledge of the candidates and their party’s policies and history, then the winner by and fare again was the NDP candidate.
Mr. Russell for the Liberals had trouble defending the indefensible, that of his party’s history. He also was not convincing with his portrayal of the Liberals being the only party to defend rural and Aboriginal rights, just look at the record.
Mr. Goudie seemed not to be very informed, or pretended too be ill informed, on the Conservative Party’s policies on the same subjects. He seemed to be relying on his past go around in provincial politics, and that was some time ago. He also miss informed the listeners by saying that the Conservatives had committed to a 50/50 funding program for upgrading the Trans Labrador highway.
Mr. Larkin, the only new face to Labrador politics, sounded very informed on the NDP policies that would affect this region and its people. He also articulated them much better than the other two candidates. As a bonus, Mr. Larkin was not intimidated by Mr. Russell, who, when wound up can talk the legs off an iron stove.
Given the fractured state of provincial-regional relationships, I can see no harm in voting for, and electing the NDP this election. It may go a long way in bringing the different regions of Labrador, and Labrador and the island together. Mr.Russells victory can only be a negative for unity given his past public statements and actions.
On the national front, a strong NDP seat count would help offset any of the other parties getting carried away with either their corrupt ways, or their overly conservative ways.
6 comments:
The NDP have some really great policies, I agree. I can't speak for the candidate in question, but overall they have a great message to spread.
I just hope that they do what they say they would do. Some of thei MP's have had trouble with that in the past.
Stephen
http://newfoundlandgreenparty.blogspot.com
Hi Stephen,
I do not know what going back on promises you reference; I guess it’s a matter of an occupational hazard in this ‘occupation’.
It sure is no fun seeing a political leader disintegrate before ones eyes, Mr. Dithers has hit one big sort of a wall. Let’s just hope there will be enough of a third party seat get that the whole political process can be changed over time.
I'm afraid your wrong in dismissing Mr Goudie as being wrong on the commitment by the CPC cost sharing the TLH 50/50.
"On the Trans-Labrador Highway, there is a commitment for a 50-50 cost share of support for the Trans-Labrador Highway, which is a major undertaking which our government is committed to do," Williams said.
Read the entire CBC article here
http://www.cbc.ca/nl/story/nf_harper_letter_20060109.html
Hi NL-Ex,
Yes, I have heard Mr. Williams say 50/50 cost shared. CBC has also reported the 50/50 ask and committed.
Alas, in Mr. Williams letter to the leaders he does not ask for 50/50 cost shared. Nor does MR. Harper’s letter commit to 50/50 cost shared.
A verbal agreement is not worth the paper it is written on.
Jack Layton’s reply to Mr. Williams letter commits to cost shared, no mention of 50/50 there either. Layton’s letter mentions the provincial government’s commitment of 50 million dollars for the TLH. Now one is tempted to ask were that 50 million came from in the first place, besides the back pocket of Canadian tax payers that is.
If OUR PREMIER has some committment it is a Billion oh wait we are NL Million times better than a policy statement or some of the cuff promise by a local candidate.
That is his job to make sure any promises made to NL are kept.
That is why I have stated that whoever OUR PREMIER supports will be who I support because he will hold their feet to the fire on issues affecting NL. Long after we as indiiduals forget about the issues and stop demanding integrity from our politicians.
From reading all of the responses to OUR PRMIERS list of isses affecting NL it would seem that the CPC and NDP are about the same and are on side with basically all of the list of issues.
Now the Liberal response spends more time stating that we gave you 2 billion than anything else.
News flash the federal government didn't give us anything that wasn't already ours. The 2 Billion was just retroactive taxes being given back to NL not a gift to be held over our head until the end of time or until the Liberals are ousted.
They quote lots of incidences where NL was given 10 20 30 million, but the only time we were even given any substantial amount was when they were forced during the Atlantic Accord to give back OUR Non-Renewable resource revenues.
http://www.releases.gov.nl.ca/releases/2006/exec/0103n01.pdf
http://www.releases.gov.nl.ca/releases/2006/exec/01harper.pdf
http://www.releases.gov.nl.ca/releases/2006/exec/01layton.pdf
http://www.releases.gov.nl.ca/releases/2006/exec/01martin.pdf
http://www.releases.gov.nl.ca/releases/2006/exec/01mclellan.pdf
I'm sorry but millions don't cut much mustard with me. More often than not they aren't even hundrens of millions.
So the normal joe can understand the difference between Millions and Billions just remove three 0's 000 from each and than compare them.
1,000,000 million 1,000,000,000 Billion
1,000 thousand 1,000,000 million
For a province that gives three times more to the GDP of canada per capita we deserve more. I'm sick and tired of being used like a colony of Ontario by the Liberal party and scape goat for Quebec because of their leanings towards separation.
Your right about the Premiers request for a 50/50 commitment not being include in his original list. It was a request made later on separately.
But if you read their response you can see that each party responded to the separate 50/50 request in their responses.
50 million was what OUR PREMIER put up when he requested a committment from the Federal parties.
So if the NDP has committed 50 million that would mean they have agreed to the 50/50 committment.
Maybe I'm reading more into this but it would seem that the CPC mentions the entire TLH and not just the section from Lab West to HVGB like was in our premiers original request?
Post a Comment