Let's talk Issues

[cakadu]

An article out of a recent edition of the Edmonton Journal states:

Business issues have gone MIA: Barely register on electoral radar
Source: EDM - Edmonton Journal
Jan 12 04:06
Page: G1 / FRONT
Section: Business
Edition: Final
Column: Gary Lamphier
Byline: Gary Lamphier

With just 11 days to go before voters head to the polls, many serious
business issues have barely registered on the public's radar screen during
the current federal election campaign.

What the parties have offered in terms of business- and prosperity-
enhancing planks hasn't inspired much excitement either. A Canadian Chamber
of Commerce scorecard released this week gives all the major federal
parties failing grades on most business issues.

Cynics might say that's not such a big deal. After all, complex business
and economic issues seldom get the thoughtful, nuanced treatment they
deserve during the heat of electoral battle, when party leaders are busy
hammering one another with any artillery available.

On the other hand, while the pros and cons of Big Bank mergers, the many
challenges faced by Canada's struggling manufacturing sector, and the
chronic shortage of skilled labour in Alberta's oilsands remain largely
ignored by the politicos, the backroom boys are busy rolling out attack ads
and lame sound bites to win your vote.

Pathetic? Of course it's pathetic. But let's face it. The voters are as
much to blame for the sorry state of our democracy as the politicians.

Two in five registered voters don't even bother to show up on voting day.
As for the rest of us, more voters get exercised by Don Cherry's weekly
rants on Hockey Night in Canada than they do about economic or business
issues, except when it directly affects their own pocketbooks.

For example, a recent survey showed that more than one in three Canadian
manufacturers don't spend a single dime on R&D, and fully 60 per cent
invest less than one per cent of their annual revenues on innovation.

Meanwhile, federal programs to boost R&D, such as Technology Partnerships
Canada, have been a monumental bust, fraught with dubious grants and even
allegations of fraud.

A big issue? Hardly. It's been a no-show during this campaign. The
scare-mongering national media hasn't helped matters much either,
simplistically blaming all of Ontario's manufacturing woes on the high
dollar and high energy prices.

At the same time, the media fixates on faux issues like Prime Minister Paul
Martin's 11th-hour pledge to scrap the notwithstanding clause from the
constitution, or Liberal strategist Scott Reid's "beer and popcorn" putdown
of the Tories' child-care plan.

These may be entertaining diversions, but they're unworthy of adult debate.
And less important than, say, removing inter-provincial trade barriers --
another subject not mentioned in this campaign -- or finding ways to reduce
exorbitant airport rents.

Remember the mad cow crisis? Where's the talk about a long-term plan to
boost domestic beef processing capacity, or to diversify beef markets
beyond the U.S.? Into the ether.

Or how about Canada's productivity crisis? For years now, Canada's lagging
productivity has been a subject of much debate among economists. Yet, the
P-word has been missing in action throughout this campaign.

Polls show Canadians just don't want to hear about it, thank you very much,
and our politicians seem more than willing to play along.

And what about the wave of foreign takeovers that's reshaping corporate
Canada? Key companies like Terasen, Westcoast Energy and MacMillan Bloedel
have already been sold to foreign acquisitors, and more domestic players
look set to join them, including Dofasco, Hudson's Bay Co. and Fairmont
Hotels & Resorts.

In fact, 2006 may well be the year when Alberta's major independent oil and
gas producers -- Talisman, Nexen, EnCana, PennWest, and Canadian Natural
Resources -- find themselves getting snapped up. I'm no protectionist, but
on the other hand, this at least merits debate.

Personally, I'd like to hear some from the men who seek our vote on Jan.
23, but so far, they've been more interested in talking about whose
proposed tax cuts are worth more.

And what about the late, great income-trust debate, the one that was
squashed when Finance Minister Ralph Goodale killed speculation about a new
trust tax in a bid to appease skittish investors?

Once the election campaign is over -- along with the RCMP investigation
into whether there were leaks prior to Goodale's announcement -- a new
government will surely have to revisit the thorny issue of whether the
trusts are bleeding away too much tax revenue from the feds.

Finally, what about the age-old proposal to form a new national securities
regulator? The concept continues to be championed by Ontario, and scorned
with equal vigour by Alberta.

It would be nice to know where the leaders stand on this. But don't expect
an answer if you don't ask.

glamphier@thejournal.canwest.com

_____

Let's also look at things like the Kyoto accord. Contrary to popular belief there was consultations that happened regarding the accord. It just happens that the two biggest contributors to GHG emissions are the two that want to be left alone to come up with their own plans. Fair enough, the point being that there were a number of consultations held.

If you are one that believes that Canada signed on without agreement from the provinces, then is it right to just get out of the agreement without said consultation with ALL the provinces? Who says all of it has to be scrapped? What things could be done to mitigate it and come up with an acceptable solution?

Think for a moment about the ramifications of getting out of an international agreement - where would that leave Canada on the international stage?

It isn't just a matter of sending a letter and we're out - the earliest we can leave is mid 2008 and even then there is a year's notice that has to be given, so it would be at least 2009 before we could effectively leave.

If it was wrong to unilaterally sign on without consultation, then wouldn't it be just as wrong to leave without said consultation and without giving any thought to Canada's standing with regard to international agreements?

Things are never as simple as they first appear.

[ivbinconned]

"Things are never as simple as they first appear. "

I think his last sentence pretty much sums up the reality that during a campaign politiians are not going to discuss the more complicated issues.

Joe six pack VOTES...and he would tune out!!

Reminds me of what P.J. O'Rourke said, "Politians are interested in people. Not that this is a virtue. Fleas are interested in dogs."

[cowman]

Linda: I don't think you picked a very good example with Kyoto? We signed on but did absolutely nothing except spout rhetoric and spend untold millions? The USA did not sign on but did twice as much, so in fact Kyoto was not worth the paper it was written on? It truly is a joke.
All the other "important issues"? I doubt there is anything any government could do about most of these problems?
The fact is we are moving closer to an integrated economy with the USA everyday despite the protectionist forces in both countries best attempts to thwart that? We are in fact being slowly absorbed into the American state?
Now I realize that might cause a lot of stress in nationalists who see Canada as a distinct society but the fact is we are one people, we share a common culture, and eventually we will be one country(if not in name at least in fact)!
For the logger does he care if he works for Macmillan Bloedal or Weyhauser? Who cares if you work for Shell or Ecana? Bank at the Royal or Chase Manhatten?
And frankly I wouldn't get too concerned about our international status? The US, China, India are not part of Kyoto...I doubt anyone would even miss us? We are like the mouse that roared in the big picture.

[cakadu]

Harper is campaigning on getting us out of Kyoto - I was merely pointing out that it isn't just a matter of saying "we're out". There are a great many who were/still are in agreement with what Kyoto represents, which is to take a look at what we are doing to the environment.

The ramifications of getting out of an international agreement extend far beyond this one. It has more to do with integrity and trust than anything else. Kyoto may seem like small potatoes to some but there is an underlying bigger picture that also needs to be looked at. I don't think it prudent to be shortsighted when dealing with international matters.

I think it was Rex Murphy who asked the question "are they talking about issues that are important to you?" If issues are too complicated for them to deal with now, what are they planning to do after January 23rd? Skilled labour shortages, lagging productivity, "brain drain", capacity to get further into the value chain to more effectively compete and many other things are being ignored and the focus is on scandal. Fine, we can all agree that there has been scandal - what are you going to do beyond that? Investigations will lead to criminal charges if necessary so let the process take care of those sorts of things. What are you going to do to ensure it doesn't happen any more?

Saying that we should have tougher laws and longer jail sentences is great, but where is the money going to come from to house these people - particularly when Harper said in the debate that we don't necessarily need to spend more money on the system - where is the money going to come from to build more jails because they are already filled to capacity etc. It is one thing to talk it, another thing entirely to bring it into effect.

I believe it was FarmRanger who raised the issue of another minority government. Even if the Conservatives manage to get in with a minority, how effective do you expect them to be when they will be fighting to stay in power? How much actual governing has gone on in the last 12 months? Have the MP's earned their salaries in that time period?

The focus is on scandals and change, but what about after the scandals and what will the change actually bring. I know that many of you will say that this is a new Conservative government, but under past Conservative governments we have witnessed interest rates triple, de-valuing of the dollar, unemployment, slow down in economic activity etc. etc. Is that where we want to go again? I'm not saying it will happen, rather we should be asking questions to gain a better understanding of just what is being offered.

[silverback]

Come on Cadaku, do you really think that the big media players in this country want to discuss the important issues to you and me???

They are going for ratings and the only way to get them is to report dirt and mud. For example: Ralph Goodale said the conservative plan is going to be a huge deficit even though the conference board reviewed it and said it would work. Now who would believe Ralph under the current circumstances?? (Besides f_s) But the media reports it to try and stir things up, they don't investigate if it is true, they just put it out on the air. Taxes and other important issues get shoved aside if they can smell blood with the social issues.

[ivbinconned]

"Investigations will lead to criminal charges if necessary so let the process take care of those sorts of things. What are you going to do to ensure it doesn't happen any more?"

You are oh so wrong here cakado...with out a change in government the "process" will be narrow and limited and justice will not be done.

[ivbinconned]

If another party winning the election does nothing else but clean the crooks out of the system and bring some sense of accountability to government it will be an improvement over what we have now.
Today Martin is promising the gas tax rebate to cities etc. will be a permanent fixture, where in hell has he been for the past 12 years when municipalities both rural and urban have been hard pressed to maintain and replace necessary infrastructure.
Running around promising the moon a week before the election is too little too late in my view.
If Harper does form the next government I am sure his feet will be held to the fire by Canadians to deliver on what he is promising now.

[ivbinconned]

it is going to be interesting to hear what Jack Layton has to say after the election about private health care. He had a hernia repair at the Shouldice clinic and when the media became aware of the news he said he didn't know the Shouldice Hospital was a private clinic.
The Shouldice Hospital has been in existance as a private clinic for over 55 years...in fact, many of my friends that are RN's or LPN's were well aware of the international reputation the clinic has for hernia repair during their training some 30 odd years ago. It will be tough for Jack to sqirm out of that one.

[ivbinconned]

Oh come on Emerald...give the guy a break, there is probably alot, that Jack Chow doesn't know.

[cakadu]

Wouldn't the questions be better posed to your own MP and/or the wannabes that are knocking at the door as opposed to waiting for the media to report on them using whatever slant they might use to sell papers?

Some of the questions and issues are tough, but if there is going to be a change, then the elected folks better have some answers before they get in there and are expected to produce some sort of results.

Cowman, the issue isn't one of whether or not Kyoto is a good example, it's a matter of two wrongs not making a right. If the Liberals were wrong to sign us on to Kyoto because there was no perceived consultation prior to signing us on, then wouldn't it be just as wrong to sign us off without the consultation, if we are speaking from a "change" in government stance?

I more than understand that people want a change - lord knows I want one too - but we need to know what we are changing to and changing for.

Sending career criminals or those convicted of more hienous crimes to jail for a longer period will cut down on the revolving door at the jails, there isn't much doubt of that. Remember though - it isn't as easy as you would think to close the loopholes that allow some criminals back on the streets. Many can afford the legal help necessary to get back out there or not even get sent to prison in the first place. Make the laws tougher and you have lawyers that can find ways around the laws. It is all subject to interpretation and who can make the better case. Rarely does it ever go as neatly as it does on TV or on the big screen.

It would appear, from the polls, that the Liberals are loosing their grasp and that the Conservatives will get in - whether it is with more or less power remains to be seen.

[shamus]

All of the socialists spout healthcare until someone gets sick in their own family. Then off to the private clinic. They ain't dieing on a waiting list; no sireeee. They all make me sick...

[shamus]

Linda, some of the loopholes in the judiciary system may be closed with amendments to the criminal code,and also by appointing judges that are lest liberal in their thinking.

I am waiting with interest to see who Harper puts in cabinet if he does win the election.
I am betting that Monty Solberg will get a cabinet post, and no doubt Jim Prentice will be Minister of Aboriginal Affairs but other than that I don't know who will make cabinet from Alberta.
I would suspect that Rahim Jaffer will be considered a bit young for the responsibility but will no doubt get some high profile position as will Diane Ablonzy.

Interesting week or ten days ahead for this country. I agree Linda, there has got to be a plan to follow up on election promises and that plan cannot include raising taxes or piling on more beaurocracy or it will be a rough ride for the party in power.

[cowman]

Linda: The latest CTV poll on Kyoto say 65% of Canadians favor scrapping it! Now without a doubt a poll is just a poll but 65%? I would think just about any party in the land would have a hard time ignoring a 65% majority? I don't remember ever getting a vote on whether I wanted Kyoto or not? Maybe we should have a referendum or something...democracy and all?
The fact is the Liberal government signed this thing without any say by the people, spend millions and millions on it, and achieved absolutely nothing? In fact they were about the worst country in the developed world! The USA, who did not signon, outperformed them twice as well!
Just another Liberal crooked deal that needs to go.

[Horse]

Cowman you had better not crow too loud about the USA time will tell wheather or not if they are as clean as it is reported , there has been conflicting reports before and I bet there will be after about the good old USA.
As for koyoto being good or bad I cant see anything wrong with cleaning up some of the polution we have made just because we live in Alta and it might affect some or the plunder to be had here in Alta rich resource. I dont think it would hurt to mabey slowdown and mabey find some more planet friendly ways to extract the resources or this country.
As for the election what we realy need is for all ministers of the last govmt to take all the senior buricats with them when they leave ,most of them are empire builders anyway.

[cakadu]

Cowman, there were consultations on Kyoto - they may not have been widely publicized, but I know that they took place. Emrald may have a bit more information on that than I do.

As far as getting out of it, as I pointed out earlier it isn't just a matter of saying we want out. There are a good many things to consider and timelines for doing it. If it is true that 65% of Canadians want out of it - which should be noted that generally anywhere from 1,000 to 2,500 people are polled - then should the Conservatives win, they should talk to at least the provinces before getting out. They are saying there was no consultation with the provinces and if they stand for change, then it would stand to reason they would consult the provinces at a minimum before going.

Who says we have to get out entirely? There are 2 provinces leading the charge for not being involved with Kyoto and both of them are the largest contributors to Green House Gas emissions. Is it any wonder they don't want Kyoto?

Making campaign promises is one thing, acting on them is something entirely different and often not easy to do. If the Conservatives are in with a minority, then they will be doing everything they can to stay in power, with little room for much else, which is what has happened for the last 18 months.

As far as appointing judges, who gets appointed depends on whether they need a liberal thinker or not. Personally, I wouldn't want a supreme court limited in their thinking as that could work against people just as easily as it could for them. Oftentimes it is the thinking of the day that prevails in the end -- witness the recent decision on allowing swinging etc. As social values crumble, so do the laws surrounding them.

Amendments to law have to be carefully thought out so as to try and avoid any kind of manuvering. For every law and amendment, there is some lawyer who can figure out the loophole - even the stuff that is supposed to be foolproof.