Happy Canada Day …. Time for Harper to Go!

This was the last straw: I have now decided … I will NOT vote for Harper/Tories

The Harper dictatorship has gone too far.

On the eve of Canada Day, as WE were gearing up to celebrate the freedoms we THINK we still have, the Tories in Ottawa, just prior to the Senate’s Summer recess,  were pushing through a last piece of legislation …  one that violates not only Canada’s Constitution, Canada’s Charter of Rights but takes away Canadians’  basic right to privacy and specifically singles out Canada’s Unions for discriminatory rules/legislation.

Bill C-377 …  a Private Member’s Bill sponsored by BC Tory MP Russ Hiebert … would require Unions … and ONLY Unions … to disclose details of all expenses they make over $5,000.  Separate out and compile lists of  EVERY expense over $5,000!  From organizations that annually manage more than $5 BILLION. Outline EVERY expense over $5,000! An incredible and unacceptable burden!!!

Just imagine the huge red tape/costs/paperwork for every union to compile, collate, disseminate details of EVERY such expenditure …from buying office supplies and furniture to doing mailouts to members or just carrying out union workshops or organizing activities   … EVERY expense!

The Bill would also require Unions … and ONLY Unions … to disclose remuneration to anyone (wages, benefits, expenses) totalling more than $100,000.

What this Bill really constitutes is a TORY GOVERNMENT attack on Unions themselves … for no other reasons than to satisfy the Tories’ far right wing base, to pander to anti-Union lobby groups, and to cripple Unions’ operating abilities by draining away large sums of money just to comply with the legislation.

And anyone who dares to argue this was just a Private Members’ Bill and not the responsibility of Harper and the Tory government/caucus should read the history of how the legislation was manoeuvered and manhandled through the Senate this week in a disgraceful, undemocratic manipulation of Senate rules  …and rushed off to the Governor General to sign immediately.

It looked like one of the last desperate destructive move by a party/government that knows it is going down … and is trying to extract revenge on its perceived opponents before they are liberated from the dictatorship.  What’s next .. stealing the art work from the walls/halls of government?

No wonder that no less than SEVEN provincial governments condemned/opposed the proposed  legislation over the years it has been debated  as unconstitutional, and the federal privacy commissioner has raised serious concerns about whether it would be legal.

For those Harper apologists who might argue What’s wrong with transparency and the public’s right to know etc? … I have only one response:

Why ONLY Unions?

Why not demand the same of Corporations who spend millions trying to fight or keep out Unions?  Or why not force the exact same disclosures by the various “Business” or “Industry” or “Chambers” or “Employers” associations or groups that do exactly what the Unions do …except for the bosses, instead of employees?

Wouldn’t we all like to know how many of  the leaders and spokespersons and analysts and consultants for these business lobby groups are paid over $100,000 a year in total remuneration?  Wouldn’t we like to know the details of EVERY expenditure THEY make over $5,000?

” C-377 ushers in an era of transparency and accountability for Canadians unions. It allows union members and the general public to evaluate the effectiveness of unions,” said Hiebert in a news release after the Bill was passed.

Too bad his devotion to transparency doesn’t extend to the corporate lobbyists, business groups and their bosses.

If there is any good news it’s that the new “law” doesn’t go into effect until the end of 2015.

It will also no doubt be challenged in Court and there’s almost doubt in my mind it will eventually be ruled un-Constitutional.

But there’s an easier way: throw the dictatorship out.

This disgraceful attack on working Canadians was the last straw for me: I will NOT vote for Harper/Tories.

Bring on the alternatives…

Harv Oberfeld

This entry was posted in British Columbia, National. Bookmark the permalink.

59 Responses to Happy Canada Day …. Time for Harper to Go!

  1. lou says:

    I thought the union members wanted this as some the the union brass were making too much.

    (Response: I wouldn’t object to unions publishing their top salaries …if all the business groups, employer associations, lobby groups and anti-union consultants did too! I have never heard a single union member call for this kind of legislation. It was pushed by “a BC lobby group that advises companies on how to de-certify unions” according to news reports. And if it’s fair to LEGISLATE Unions to make public EVERY transaction/expense over $5,000 … why not require all these other groups by LAW to do the same? h.o)

  2. Internet Stranger says:

    I have now decided…”

    You’re about 10 years too late.

    Welcome to OUR reality.

    (Response: I guess I’m different … I evaluate leaders/parties AFTER they’ve served …rather than just from some arbitrary partisan bias before they are even take office. And frankly, looking at the Opposition, I didn’t mind Harper/Tories too much …agreed on some things, disagreed on others … for the first few years. BUT this past few years I believe he/team have betrayed the public trust, became more and more dishonest and arrogant … so time to go. h.o)

  3. Splashdancer says:

    Harvey Oberfeld…Gobsmacked, you made my day.

    Yes indeed, of all the pressing needs of Canadians, of all the legislation that died on the order table, to feed this raw meat to the reformacon base…Especially when unions are a mere shadow of times gone by..

    Time to give change a chance, Prime Minister Thomas Mulcair, why not!

    (Response: Well, to be honest, not enthusiastic about any of the other leaders yet either …but at least they have not defaced the dignity of Canada by singling out any single group for arbitrary rules that they don’t apply to everyone else. Now will have some time to seriously evaluate the policies of the NDP/Libs/Greens to make a choice ..and then hope, whoever is elected, they won’t be as crass and dishonest and against working people as the Tories have become under Harper’s dictatorship. h.o)

  4. 13 says:

    Harvey, this is a tough one. I have found the two out of the three private sector unions I have belonged to deserve this sort of legislation. For that matter one of the two was so corrupt that the government took over their finances for quite awhile. But your right. One or two corrupt unions ( a very low estimate) doesnt merrit such anti union legislation.
    Slightly off topic but maybe not, has anybody else wondered how the BCGEU didnt protect the 8 fired government reasearchers. I heard that the union was less than stellar in their efforts.
    So , this particular law as you state will likely get tossed out down the road, it has given Mulcair some ammunition to use in the election. Unless the NDP federal types are as inept at opposing as the BC NDP.

    (Response: If there are corrupt unions …or overly political unions ..go after them, expose them etc. BUT that should apply also to corrupt businesses and business organizations and lobby groups. When a government passes ANY law that singles out ONE particular group ..whether by business association or ethnicity or race etc …it stinks of outright discrimination … not something I could EVER sanction by voting for them. h.o)

  5. Gene the Bean says:

    Last piece of legislation before the election is like taking that last drink at closing time….it never leads to anything good.

    I have been a Conservative supporter for years and have aggressively supported them but…it is time for a change. That being said, they have done some great things…but the stench is now too great.

    Attacking unions is the lowest form of conservatism.

    If only the Liberals had a real leader…..

    (Response: Have to admit it…I HAVE voted Conservative several times(even have a personally autographed pic of Dief and two with Mulroney on my den wall) … but have also voted NDP federally when I lived in Saskatchewan and also Liberal and even Green …so I’m not tied to any party. But hardly a day goes by now that we don’t learn of despicable legislation like this, or some MP going to jail or on trial or being investigated or yet another Tory MP spending $500,000 a year of taxpayers’ money on expenses: it’s as if they have lost their moral compass…and have a hate on for ordinary taxpayers/workers. h.o)

  6. workforfun says:

    Can’t agree more with you Harvey. Your stint as union rep at BC TV must have exposed you to a lot of “stuff” most people don’t even think about.

    Personally, I have found that the unions have protected many people I would fire for incompetence. However, it isn’t lost on me that the unions from the early 1900’s made way for safe and good working conditions in all industries. Allowed worker to have rights and freedoms that they never had before. Unions were instrumental in making the work place a much safer working environment. I was a union member until I retired, but did not thrust it in any one’0s face. I worked hard and honestly and tried to treat everyone fairly.

    I have worked union and non union and have seen more than my share of nepotism and politics in the daily work place.

    That being said, the government has no right to single out the unions for special treatment – same can be said of charities too.

    ABC come October – kick Harper’s arse to the dogs.

    Thanks for the write up – I enjoyed it and agree 100%.

    (Response: Readers of this blog know when I support some group or the rights of people, that never means I automatically agree/support everything they say/do. So I agree with you on unions: they are not all perfect, and even I sometimes don’t like the way they will defend/protect incompetent or even dishonest workers. However that also applies to business people, professionals and even … can you imagine, politicians …so I abhor when any governing body, especially our elected officials who are supposed to work on all our behalf, single out ONE group for SPECIAL laws/rules/regulations. That’s VERY dangerous ..and to ram it through hours before adjourning for Canada Day, on top of all the other crud/waste the Tories are mired in, is simply TOO MUCH . They have to go. h.o)

  7. e.a.f. says:

    When Steve and his Cons put this piece of legislative xxx through they forgot that the hockey players have a union. Wonder if they will comply with the legislation? Dr’s have their associations and don’t like to be referred to as unions but they are. They negotiate rates of pay and working conditions. So lets see how they feel when they have to start producing the required documents. Lets not forget the baseball and basketball players unions.

    When Steve said we would not recognize Canada when he was through with it he wasn’t kidding. The only thing he has not managed to dismantle is our health care system. He is saving that for 2017.

    Unions are what made the working class the middle class. For all of those who think unions aren’t needed today, have a look at how far pay inequity has become an issue in this country. It was unions which started the fight for medical, dental, family leave, maternity leave, etc. Non-union employers quickly followed to ensure they didn’t become unionized. What many today think has always been there, well somewhere a trade unionist started the fight for it. As one of my collegues once said, as he walked a picket line in a fabulously tailored suit: My Dad went on strike for a 15 minute coffee break back in the day, I owe him this.

    With this legislation Unions will have to spend thousands upon thousands of dollars to meet the requirements. They won’t have time or money to meet the needs of their members and that is what Steve wanted. It may also be Steve’s down fall.

    To those who criticise Unions, if you don’t like how your union is being run, go to a meeting and run for office. Its not that hard.

    From the time we were quite young, we knew our father’s salary was what it was because he was a unionized employee. Our parents were very clear, we lived well because our father belonged to the IBEW. Because of that union we had post secondary education, health care, and when our father became very ill he received wage loss insurance until his pension kicked in, and our parents’ lives continued without being financially destroyed.

    If you have a look south of the border you will find states which have “right to work legislation” or as I call it “right to poverty”. Those are the states with the lowest wages, worst education systems, little to no social network for their citizens. Some have the highest rate of unemployment and the highest deficits.

    Canada is the country it is because Unions fought for the benefits we all take for granted today. If people don’t think so, read a history book and look at how well things went for people prior to the major strikes in this country. I can remember walking a picket line in the early 1980s so women could have improved maternity leave provisions in the collective agreement. There are “right to work” states in the U.S.A. that women still don’t have any protection for job security if they go off on maternity leave.

    Its too bad the women in Bangledish didn’t have unions. They might not have died when that building collapsed and they were killed. Do people really think mine safety was something employers “gave” workers? No they fought for it and some died for it.

    Like them or not, countries without strong Unions do not have a high standard of living. And yes, I know there are corrupt Unions and corrupt Union officers. There are laws to deal with that. Its just up the police, crown counsel and union members to do something about it. Its just easier to bitch.

    So Harvey thank you for this post. Happy Canada Day!

    I’m enjoying it with my Union won pension!

    (Response: Actually, the NHL Players Association is among the groups that have opposed the law … many, many groups. It’s so discriminatory and such an invasion of privacy and a violation of the Charter of Rights, I have no doubt it will lose out in Court after years and millions in legal fighting. Much more cost effective (don’t the Tories like that?) to just throw them out in October and have a new government do away with it. h.o)

  8. larry Bennett says:

    Unions are democratically run !!!!!? I recall while working as a contractor for Telus many years ago, that the union had voted for recognition ( of the rights for homosexual unions.) When I asked about how the acceptance of same had gone through with such a majority I was told that they often stick this sort of social crap in the middle of a major labour matter, and most would vote for it unknowingly, because workers, many of them too lazy to read through what they are voting for, would vote for it because their union told them it was “all good”. Many good men and women voted against their conscience in order to get better wages/benefits. You pays your penny, you takes your choice!

    (Response: Notice you didn’t respond to the actual topic. Just curious …do YOU support government’s making laws that single out ONE particular group and force them to comply with laws/rules/regulations that others need not? h.o)

  9. Barry says:

    “They came for the trade unionists and I did nothing because I was not a trade unionist.”

    Ever notice how fascist governments can’t wait to curb the powers of unions, but do no such thing for the corporate sector? Could it be they are following the first rule of war: Don’t shoot your own troops in the back.

    I thought Harper was all about getting the government off people’s backs what with the long form census cancellation, abolishing the wheat board, closing down coast guard stations, etc. The only way this legislation makes any sense that he isn’t interesting in governing, but pandering to the extreme right wing.

    Well, if you support Harper, don’t come crying to me if his version of the stormtroopers come to your door to take you away in the middle of the night.

    (Response: I think you’re being extreme and alarmist: no stormtroopers will be coming to our doors. However, another concern I also had with Harper was C-51 and some of its potentially excessive provisions and implications: I didn’t go into that on the blog because so many others were already discussing that across the country. But this latest attack on human rights …by singling out a single group for special laws … IS dangerous and frightening, and MUST be negated: fastest way to do that is by getting a government that will do that. h.o)

  10. larry Bennett says:

    Harve, I don’t think the “government” is asking for anything different than they ask of large corporations. Government is intrusive, some would say “too” intrusive, but then there are a lot of people, both business and labour who are bobbing and weaving constantly to avoid letting legitimate information be revealed. How many so-called working class guys and gals, who are receiving E.I. or welfare and other benefits while working under the table for cash? Oh, but that is okay … but companies trying to get away with not paying benefits or taxes by hiring same, are evil.
    On the same matter, why is it that I, as a dues paying member must pay to rent buses to transport a bunch of feminists to travel to Victoria in order to demand abortion-on-demand? What has that got to do with working rights? Make Larry pay for the brother/sisterhood, and keep quiet in the meantime. By the by, after some 30 years as a union man, I have now no pension whatsoever. When members tried to bring that up, along with the lack of shift differential, you’d be shouted down by the “brothers”!

    (Response; I gave you credit for more intellectual honesty than you display in this response: name ANY law that requires ANY corporation to disclose to ANYONE who asks for a list of EVERY expenditure made over $5,000?????? Such an imposed requirement would cripple and almost bankrupt some companies …which I suspect is the ultimate goal of this anti-union legislation. And really, this targeted law in a democratic society should be opposed by all who have any sense of fairness; shame on those who try feebly to excuse it. h.o)

  11. Internet Stranger says:

    Please note that the BC Liberals introduced ‘disclosure’ laws in BC back in their early days.

    iirc: the legislation also covers public & Crown employees too.

    The unions here are also required to publish fairly comprehensive financial statements each year… to which unaccountable front groups like the (un)Canadian Taxpayers Federation take a gleeful rip.

    (Response: Correct me if I’m wrong…but I don’t believe any province has anti-union laws like this …specifically targeting them alone to disclose EVERY expenditure over $5,000? h.o)

  12. EllBee says:

    Well #10 you threw a bunch of **** at the wall in the hope that it would stick. Anecdotal stories from one who may have never been to a meeting in his life just doesn’t cut it. Look to the right to work states in the Excited States if you want to see where this leads. The majority are at the bottom of the heap in all indicators that show quality of life, work and services to their citizens, and at the top of the heap in taking Government handouts from the Feds. It’s a race to the bottom now with Harpo and his merry band of sycophants leading the way.

  13. DBW says:


    The article as a whole is worth reading but what struck me was this:

    Only about five to seven per cent of non-Conservative voters would consider them as their second choice.

    We can argue all we want about the validity of polls but I believe that this statistic is likely accurate and significant.

    In our FPTP system we usually get governments with less than 50% support, often around 40%. But, usually, say in the cases of Trudeau, Mulroney, and Chretien, those governments had a large % of second choice support. Mulroney likely had a lot of right leaning Liberal support and Trudeau and Chretien likely had some NDP supporters (me for example).

    60% of the people may not have voted for them, but likely 50%+ of us were OK with them.

    BMCQ has made the perfect storm scenario of the Liberal and NDP splitting their vote and the Conservatives managing a majority which is possible under our system.

    And that would be horribly wrong. From the article. “About 60% of Canadians feel the Conservatives are taking us in the wrong direction.”

    Harper’s Conservatives are not a party with begrudging support from some who put their votes elsewhere. They are despised by pretty much everybody except their base.

  14. larry Bennett says:

    EllBee – one can only suspect that you are full of the stuff I am accused of throwing at the wall. I won’t ask where you find all the “indicators” you speak of, but wishing to take away my right not to join a union is just plain wrong.
    But it is all academic anyway, as the young dauphine will solve all of our problems by appointing to his cabinet, an equal number of men and women. And won’t that be nice! Or maybe he can converge with Mulcair’s little gang of airheads that won seats in the last election even if they don’t know their ass from a hole in the ground! It’s all so thrilling – isn’t it? – No, really?

  15. morry says:

    Welcome Abroad H.O! … for me Harper has broken our true for over 5 years now…The list is long. He has shown plenty of signs of being a bully …cant wait to kick him and the rest out.
    Had a great Canada Day ! I was in Red and many others were in Orange. no one present was in Blue.

  16. morry says:

    by the way why do some responders make statements that are unsupported and from all indications are fantasy tales? Simply state your views. no need to “embellish” with nonsense

  17. Mark says:

    Sorry Harv but I think unions in Canada have it pretty good compared to other countries in the world.

    Just look at how the union dues are collected for the unions. I would like to see at least a 3-4% administrative fee for unions not having to collect from their members after they get paid rather than docking their pay.

    (Response: You seem to miss the point: NO government should EVER single out ANY particular single group for laws/rules/regulations that others don’t have to follow. You say unions have it good …but I’d say the evidence show corporations/executives have it better. Take a look at the biggest homes, high-end recreation properties, the big cars, the yachts … it’s NOT union types owning those! Why not a law forcing THEM to reveal every expense over $5,000 or THEIR remuneration? All I want is fairness …and you should too. h.o)

  18. Crankypants says:

    The thing that bothers me most by the actions of the senate regarding this bill is the disdain the Conservative caucus forced approval. If the Conservative Party loses the upcoming election and either the Liberals or NDP form the next government will the Conservative controlled senate use their majority to sandbag any legislation they feel could provoke another election?

    I’m all for a level of government that provides a sober second thought on any legislation brought forward by the party in power but only if their input is based on the merits of said legislation. I’m not sure the current crop of senators are up to such a task.

    (Response: Actually nothing the current Senate does/would do would surprise me. But the fact that Harper/Tries would push this through so sleazily, just before an election and only hours before adjourning for Canada Day, shows me how low and how arrogant they have become … totally disdaining our Constitution and Charter of Rights, just to pander to the extreme right and big business organizations and anti-union lobby groups. Disgusting. h.o)

  19. Hugh says:

    The Conservative’s China-FIPA: Let’s allow Chinese investors and corporations sue Canada over Canadian laws and policies they don’t like.

  20. D. M. Johnston says:

    Anti-union rhetoric and anti-union legislation is the last resort of a Fascist government.

    Herr Harper is smelling so bad at this point that some of his loyal stormtroopers are abandoning ship, before it hits the electoral rocks.

    Today we are living under an invented and cynical economic system, which in reality is a vast ponzi scheme, where the 1% grow fabulously wealthy on the backs of the 99%. Unions of course want to “spread the wealth around” and must be checked, for fear th ponzi scheme will collapse under its weight of pure greed.

    Herr Harper and the Christian right (which has largely forgotten what Christianity is all about) desperately do not want to change the status quo and will do anything, legislate anything to keep power and profits within the 1%.

    It is time to take back Canada from those who grow rich on the pain of others and it is time for change.

    (Response: Must confess …I do worry about the economy under Trudeau and Mulcair especially: my retirement/travels are tied highly to my investments. I suspect that is what Harper/Tory strategists are counting on ….better the devil you know than fear of the unknown. But this latest law, in addition to Bill C-51, just goes too far in abrogating civil and human rights …have to stop him/them NOW. h.o)

  21. Curly Gagliardi says:

    It’s disgusting, but certainly not surprising. This is the worst bunch of inept crooks to ever sit in Ottawa.
    Don’t worry though, I’m sure the incoming federal NDP government will kill/reverse this bill.

    (Response: I don’t know about the worst …. but certainly watching this government in action has become similar to watching the tv series The Sopranos. h.o)

  22. harry lawson says:


    i wonder if people truly understand how unjust and discriminatory this is is.
    are they asking churches , non profits business groups , service clubs to do the same? no they are not

    this is all about politics.

    if we were to say that all ( pick your ethnicity had to report any expenditure over X$ amount. everybody would rightly yelling discrimination .

    is this any different? i think not
    this is just a end run around electorial funding reform.

    (Response: That’s what makes this Bill so awful: it singles out ONE category of people/business/organization. How can anyone who supports freedom/democracy condone a law like that!! It’s appalling and in my case it became the ultimate deciding factor …above even all the other arrogance/woes/scandals. I hope others will take a stand also … ABH! h.o)

  23. RIsaak says:

    Political contributions have become a plague on our system. Be it corporate or labor, all political donations need far more scrutiny IMO. I have voted Conservative in the past, as I have voted Liberal on occasion. The current Liberal brain trust has lost me almost 20 years ago and the whipping of the C-51 vote just reinforced that view. The Harper govt. has surpassed it’s usefulness as well. The corruption of power is absolute and just like jr’s diapers we need a change. I am strongly considering voting for Mad Tom. The next few months will be very important for my vote, we’ll see who has the goods to sway me. This is the first time in my life I’ve not had my mind made up far in advance of the election. The Liberals are the only option I rule out at this point, and Mad Tom is in first place rounding the clubhouse turn. Your mileage may vary…

  24. G. Barry Stewart says:

    (This is a copy of a letter to his MP Mark Strahl that blog reader Barry Stewart sent me. Hope others send letters like this to THEIR Tory MPs too! Thanks, Barry! h.o.

    > I learned on Harvey Oberfeld’s blog that your government rammed through legislation that singles out unions to report expenses of over $5,000 and wages of anyone making over $100,000. Why not churches and businesses as well? Is the Fraser Institute also exempt? (It would seem so.)
    > I also read in the Tyee about PM Harper’s orchestrated photo-op at BCIT — at taxpayers’ expense — to create a bit of propaganda without having to dip into party coffers.
    > I’ll add the anti-terror bill and the reprehensible treatment of Omar Khadr to the list of things that make me think the Conservative party needs a rest and a reset.
    > You will not be getting my vote in the coming election.
    > Yours,

    Barry Stewart

  25. Lew says:

    Bill C-377 defines the organizations subject to this legislation in part:

    “labour organization” includes a labour society and any organization formed for purposes which include the regulation of relations between employers and employees…

    Here is the vision statement of a labour association here in BC:

    “We assume the responsibility of making that voice heard. Toward this end, the principles of the open shop, which we have adopted as the basis for our organization, are as follows:

    We believe that employees and employers should have the right to determine wages and working conditions, through either individual or collective bargaining as they choose, within the boundaries of the law.

    We believe that the employer must have concern for the general welfare of the employee and that there must be fair compensation for the work performed.

    We support sound legislation and regulation which is fair to both employers and employees in the areas of labour relations, employment standards, apprenticeship training, worker’s compensation, safety, and unemployment insurance.

    We oppose violence, coercion, intimidation, and the denial of the right of free choice of working people.

    We believe that fiscal responsibility is the obligation of all branches of government, and, accordingly, that government should award contracts to the lowest bidder qualified to perform the work.

    We believe that work opportunities should be available to all persons regardless of race, ethnic origin, religious belief, gender, age, and membership or non-membership in a labour organization.

    We oppose any form of monopolies or any kind of price or wage fixing.

    We believe that the destiny of all Canadians can be served best by democratic government and the maintenance of a free enterprise system.”

    I have no doubt that this association is an “organization formed for purposes which include the regulation of relations between employers and employees” and therefore trust that Philip Hochstein and his Independent Contractors and Business Association will comply fully with the new legislation.

    (Response: Don’t bet on it!!! But if unions are forced to …so should Hochstein’s organization …and the Fraser Institute and BC Employers Association too. A vow to make them do that would almost be enough to make me vote NDP! h.o)

  26. Gene the Bean says:

    Harvey, has Larry answered your question yet?

    (Response: Not that I can see. h.o.)

  27. e.a.f. says:

    Being a fairly frequent letter writer to my M.P. John Duncan, I know the response. NOTHING! The two times there was a response, it was one of those form letters the PMO has for the occasion. M.P.s don’t respond to their mail.

    At least the Greens and NDP send an auto received response until they answer, if that is what you are looking for. The Cons can’t even manage an auto response.

    I’ve written open letters to our Con. M.P., which the local paper has published. No response from John Duncan and I’m not the only one who doesn’t get a response from his office. They just don’t care what you think about an issue. its their way or no way.

    when the Cons “re-designed” the riding, the Comox Valley was split in 2. Half went in with Tofino, the other half with Powell River. Can only conclude it was to save John Duncan’s job, at which he sucks. He will be running in a the new riding of Courtenay/Tofino. To split the Comox Valley was just plain stupid. We now we have to cross a bridge to Courtenay but its a ferry ride to Powell River. What Courtenay has in common with Tofino is beyond me and is a couple of hours drive away, but I’ve got an idea a review of the last election results reflect John Duncan would stand a better chance of being re-elected under the new improved Con division.

    Now with Arthur Porter dead in a Panama jail there is one less thing for the Cons to have to worry about. He and Del Mastro both learned a lesson. When you are of no use to the dear leader, you are “gone”.

  28. Jay Jones says:

    Certainly wouldn’t surprise me at all if “standing on the shoulders of mannequins sinking in quicksand” becomes a popular saying throughout Canada in the not to distant future.

  29. art smith says:

    The largest and most politically active unions are public sector unions such as teachers, police, gov’t workers, I think we as employers have every right to know how these unions are spending money to get favourable gov’ts elected. Also very scary when police are involved as some gov’ts are giving them more and more power via traffic control where they act as judge, jury and executioner with no option for appeal.

    (Response: I understand your feelings about transparency … but it is certainly hypocritical pass a law that says employers or the public have the right to see EVERY expenditure by Unions over $5,000 … BUT the public and employees HAVE NO RIGHT to see the same by the other side …by the employers, the employer associations, the employer lobby groups etc. Itt’s the one-sidedness that’s the problem …and NO true believer in democracy and equal rights can possibly defend that law. h.o)

  30. larry Bennett says:

    Well, I was wondering how long it would take to condemn the “Christian” right for all mankind’s ills. Am I to be allowed to discuss the “Jewish” left for their handiwork with unions, communist and radical demonstrations throughout our country! Jews have, for ages been associated with leftist movements. Of course not all Jews, but what the hell, we’re not talking about taxing synogogues, just churches, of late. Besides, out of the less than 15 million Jews in the world, a goodly number of them are secular, and mostly anti-Christian. And don’t we know that Pius XII was accused of aiding the Nazis during the onset of the Third Reich, even though the Cheif Rabbi of Rome (not Poughkeepsie!) converted to the Catholic faith, and took as his name – Eugenio, after Eugenio Pacelli – Baptismal name of Pius XII!
    By the way, are we talking about Tommy Douglas when discussing the Christian Left? So only socialist ministers will be viewed as relgious left, and be therefore, non-taxable for their charitable deeds?

  31. Jason says:

    This law is nothing more then a way to sway public opinion against unions and further debilitate them. I cannot stand Harper. Eventually this law will be struck down at the SCC but only at great expense to the taxpayers. Hasn’t Harper set a record for the number of laws he has shoved through and ended up getting struck down due to being unconstitutional?

    (Response: No idea about that …but I’m sure defending this law and fascist style targeting on ONE group of people WILL cost MILLIONS … for the Unions and for the taxpayers ….but unfortunately NOT for the anti-Union agitator and corporate mouthpiece groups who are really behind it. Let your MP know how terrible and unfair this Act is. h.o)

  32. Greg says:

    So, if we turf the bums in October, with a stacked Senate, how can this law be repealed? Think this and other odious legislation are going to be around until the court deals with it.

    (Response: Would be easiest for a Liberal government: they already have 20 seats and there are 20 more vacancies … at total of 49 …exactly the same as the number of Tories …and I’m sure there are a number of them fair-minded enough to repeal it once the dictator is gone. And there are also seven independent Senators too among the 105 total. A piece of cake …hopefully one made with union labour. h.o)

  33. EllBee says:

    #14. Show me in my post where I said that you have no right to NOT join a Union. It’s not there, it wasn’t said nor intimated. People like you twist the message to suit your own agenda with no regard to what’s real. I ask again, where did I say what you suggested? It’s possibly in that parallel universe you inhabit though.

  34. larry Bennett says:

    It is truly frightening to consider who Canadians will pick if and when they reject the Conservatives. In a recent poll revealed in one of the local papers (it doesn’t matter which, they are all the same) that if Canadians had a say in the up-coming American federal elections, the would vote strongly for Hillary Clinton !!!! Roll that around in your heads a bit and then tell me that our electorate is well informed and able to judge the honesty of our leaders.

  35. RS says:

    Congratulations on your epiphany H.O. I too will be pinching my nose (much as I do whilst reading Larry Bennett’s diatribes) as I cast my ballot this fall – Harper’s fall.

  36. Gilbert says:

    Though I’m a Conservative, I don’t support Bill C-377. I agree with you, Harvey. The rules should be the same for everyone. Let me also say I don’t think Prime Minister Harper is perfect. He’s spent too much, his cabinet is too big, and he isn’t very open with the media. However, I truly believe he has been quite good on the economy, has a principled foreign policy, has recognized victims’ rights, and is a very hard-working leader. Justin Trudeau and Thomas Mulcair are tax and spend liberals, and I don’t like their foreign policies too much. Though the prime minister is far from perfect, I think it’s best to stick with him.

    (Response: I aw well aware of the danger of going from the frying pan into the fire: would the others be worse …and I believe that’s what makes deciding so difficult for so many people. But this last move …passing such a discriminatory law hours before the Canada Day adjournment, twisting and manipulating the system to do it …had Harper’s hands all over it. That just spoke to me so loudly of arrogance and nastiness … just before an election no less … made me think of how much worse he will be if given another mandate!! Not if I can help stop it. h.o)

  37. BMCQ says:

    Before I comment here I freely admit I have not read Bill – 377.

    I will attempt to do that in the next day or so.

    I wonder just how many that Post and read here have actually read what the Bill proposes?

    Are your opinions informed opinions or are they just Anti Harper biases?

    I am also going to assume that H.O. has read the Bill and I am sure he has valid reasons for his concern.

    I will assume that like many Federal Bills there will be some things that the majority of Canadians will embrace and there are others that will not be acceptable to many which would include Union types.

    I believe very much in Unions and what they mean and have meant to the improvements to Workers. I do not think there is anyone anywhere in The Western World that would not recognize that Unions played a very important part in making life better for all of us.

    Unions also improved Working Conditions, Wages, The Standard of Living, and numerous other Work Place conditions for everyone that puts in a days work Union or not, no doubt about it.

    I was a Member of three different Unions when I was fairly young. Between about 17 and 20 years of age I worked about 20 hours each week at various Safeway Stores. I thought I had won the Lottery!

    The company I run is Unionized and I could not be happier with the Union we are affiliated with. Fair, Honest, Supportive and easy to negotiate with.

    Again I HAVE NOT read the contents of the Bill but I believe Unions Members and others should have more transparency from Unions.

    You may well be correct and the Bill is what you say it is but do you not think there should be more Accountability to Union Members.

    I have friends and family that are BCTF Members and they were/are disgusted with what past and present BCTF Execs have done with their hard earned Union Dues.

    How many Millions did The BCTF squander on silly Political stunts to unseat a sitting Government. Unacceptable!

    Why should Unions not be more accountable?

    Harvey could very well be right here but I believe something should be done to make the Unions more transparent. Maybe we should not worry about some of the smaller expenditures, perhaps it should be higher than $ 5K. But I believe each and every Union Member and the General Public for that matter are entitled to know what Unions are doing with the hard earned Union Dues of Members.

    Private Companies are really only accountable to various Tax Authorities and their own conscience.

    Publicly traded Companies are obliged to File with The Provincial and Federal Governments and are accountable to their Share Holders of which many are Unions!!!

    Just ask the Ontario Teachers Federation, one of the largest Unions, one of the most Fiscally Responsible and Professionally run Unions in the World!

    Trust me the Professionals at the Ontario TF would do an excellent job of holding Corporations they invest in accountable!

    If you are correct and the Bill is too cumbersome and will do great harm to The Union movement or if it is Unconstitutional as some feel it to be the Courts will make a decision.

    If not and the Bill stands the only answer for people like Harvey and most here is at the Ballot Box in October.

    Perhaps I should not have even posted until I had read the Bill through and had a better informed opinion but I did not want to look like I was ducking the subject. As if any one really cares!

    Lew – 25

    As usual, informative post.

    I am going to guess that you are either a current or past Union Member.

    It is not my place to offer up an Invitation to Post here but I would like to hear more from you on Bill – 377.

  38. Lew says:

    BCMQ, the bill is a very short one. Won’t take you long to read. What it does is amend the Income Tax Act to impose a set of onerous reporting requirements that only labour organizations have to file, and makes it a requirement that the Revenue Minister make that additional tax filing information public in a searchable format on the internet.

    Why wouldn’t that wonderful service be provided to the public through Revenue Canada for organizations like the Independent Contractors, the Law Society, the Doctors of BC (formerly BCMA), religious associations, etc.? Why not open up every organization’s tax filings to the public? Why specifically just unions?

    According to Elections BC the Independent Contractors Association has contributed $200,000 to the BC Liberals election campaigns in the last few years. If it’s fairness we’re after, why shouldn’t we have access to that labour association’s tax filings so we can view what else and who else it has paid? Why should that labour association have its tax filings kept secret by Revenue Canada, but others have theirs posted on the internet?

    Incidentally, your surmising about whether I’m a current or past union member has a sort of McCarthyistic ring to it. “Are you now or have you ever been…” But just to satisfy your curiosity, I’ll say that I’ve been retired for twenty years, but belonged to many unions over my career, and all of them had warts. But they were better than the alternative for working stiffs, and continue to have a valid role in our society. Russ Hiebert and his masters don’t think so and want to single them out for special treatment. I think it’s despicable.

  39. BMCQ says:

    Lew – 38

    Still have not read the Bill but thank you for the info.

    I agree that there could be more transparency for the groups you name.

    I just cannot see any problem with asking any of those groups that you have also included for more transparency, why not?

    In reference to your comment regarding the $ 200K from the ICA to the Libs.?

    I believe that it should be illegal for any Union or Business to make Political Donations of any kind to any Federal, Provincial, or Municipal Party.

    By implementing that type of Legislation we would put to bed many concerns that many have.
    At the same time it would be much easier to Police if the Ban was Total as I have stated.

    Just imagine if “Big Pharma” as an example was banned from Political Contributions!!

    I have not given this any thought but should “Big Pharma” be permitted to Lobby individual Physicians or should there be more controls there? I think that it would be very beneficial for “The Great Unwashed” and The Tax Payer if there was an investigation into that as well.

    Imagine what “Stinking Heap of Garbage” the Lobby Culture has created after generations of entrenchment in the U.S.!!

    My surmising (or guess in my world) about you being a former or present was just that a guess and not meant to be anything more.

    Nothing sinister in my reason for asking , I simply feel that from reading your past Posts that you would give me honest, thoughtful more than unlikely unbiased and objective feedback regarding the question from your viewpoint as Trade Unionist. Which you did!

    You could take that as a compliment.

  40. Greg says:

    I have my doubts that the senate vacancy situation will provide relief from c377.


    (Response: If there are too be new “high calibre” Senate appointments, forgive me if I don’t have confidence Harper would be the one to appoint them! In fact, with his “record” on appointments, he might even select Conrad Black because he has his own “record”! LOL. h.o)

  41. Noneck says:

    “Big Pharma” already lobbies doctors via “professional development” opportunities. Sign up for a conference – all expenses paid – and be subjected to the drugs we’re pushing this year. You’d be surprised who subscribes to what, how, and when.

  42. larry Bennett says:

    RS – Keep the pincer action on the nostril ’cause it is going to get a lot more putrid around town when the Libs and Socialist take B.C. out of the ship building business and return it too their friends in the maritimes and Quebec!

  43. Sestly48 says:

    Just a friendly warning: Do not say goodbye to Harper yet; he’s crafty and tricky. When it comes to politics, I’ve seen/heard bloggers/commenters get a bit smug close to what they think is the end for a party, only to be very disappointed after election time. BC ring a bell? The last one in UK ring a bell? I expect the PCs have been saving some sort of dirt on Mulcaire/Trudeau or will toss out some sort of huge wedge issue in the next month or two. Just watch! It’s going to get dirty.

    (Response: I definitely agree. The campaign hasn’t even officially begun…. and although I have decided personally not to vote for him/Tories this time … I wouldn’t write him off …esp after we saw how Christy Clark pulled a victory out not that long ago. h.o)

  44. Laura says:

    A BC Liberal supporter concerned suddenly about where our ships are built? You’d rather they were built in Germany or Poland than in BC or eastern Canada.

    Your hypocrisy knows no bounds.

    (Response: By the way, a tiny Sun story Saturday noted that on Friday an actual $7.6 million contract to a Delta company for Coast Guard rescue boats. h.o)

  45. Laura says:

    Harvey, how did the BC Liberals allow a boat to be built in BC? Could they not find someone in Poland or Mexico to build it cheaper? Perhaps some pigs can fly…

    (Response: Maybe some working media types should investigate the ownership or political donations of the winning bidder! 🙂 h.o)

  46. Laura says:

    Sestly48, Christy winning in BC was not that big a surprise. Yes, the polls showing the NDP ahead by between 5 and 7% were wrong but when you remember that the Socred/Liberals have won almost every election since the early 1950s its not exactly an earth-shattering surprise that they won again.

    As for Britain, the Conservatives were picked to win a plurality by most pollsters, but not a majority. Many times in the campaign I read about what Labour was going to do with Milband after the election, it being a given Labour was not going to win.

    The thing is, with the SNP, Lib-Dems, UKIP etc all vying for votes its almost impossible for pollsters to predict vote splits in such a multi-party environment. So a party with only 36% of the vote winning a majority is a surprise but certainly not a statement against polling. After all, the pollsters did correctly say that almost 2/3 of voters would not be voting Tory.

    Pollsters in Canada are telling us that any one of the 3 major parties in Canada could win the next election with a majority and yet not get even 40% of the vote. Which should be a stark reminder on how badly we need electoral reform.

  47. BMCQ says:

    DBW – 13

    The Harper or Conservative Government has a much “Broader Base” than you might think.

    There are thousands of people from all walks of life that support the Cons because of their record over the past several years. Keep in mind that they have really only had a majority Government for what, 4 years?

    Many Voters that could normally Vote for The NDP or The Libs support the Cons for their Law and Order Platform. People want Accountability from The Criminal Element and The Cons are the only place they will get that.

    Most of those same People regardless of income want Employment and they see The Cons as they best option for that. Sure there will be some “Bright Bulb” jump in here and point out that the Economy is not vibrant.

    to them I say this, have a look at Greece today, Italy, Portugal, Spain, France and more tomorrow. That is what People look at and trust me neither of “The Muldeau Twins” care about what is going on in The EU, they just want to make promises that will assist in the Election of their Party.

    Take notice That Harper is not ending over backwards to offer a “Pie in the Sky” Scenario. Harper is taking a stand on several issues and some of them are not popular, do thin k he might realize that but he is putting ALL CANADIANS FIRST, regardless of the risk.

    The EU is imploding right before your eyes!!

    I spoke to dear friends in Greece earlier this week and they are very concerned about what they believe will be the no vote and the following consequences.

    Are you willing to take a chance on electing either of “The Muldeau Twins” and risk the chance of their policies?

    Keep in mind that much of The Conservative Base now comes from New Canadians Rich, Poor, and somewhere in between.

    The Libs once had that demographic but long ago those New Canadians learned who was their best option to keep a firm hand on the Tiller and power ahead!

    Jacques Parizeau figured that about 20 years ago when he lost the biggest Election of his Career. Many of you reading here heard him blame as he put it “The Ethnics”!!

    D.M. – 20

    I think we are a “Long Long Way” from a Fascist Government!

    I understand you are upset but Fascist?!!!

    I also find it hard to accept your comments about “The Christian Right”!!


    Look around the so called Developing Nations” World Wide my friend.

    Who is really doing the “Heavy Lifting there?
    Who is always first to respond with help in a natural disaster or a Genocide/Ethnic Cleansing?

    Those Evil Americans, Various Red Cross type organizations and Christian Charities!!

    You paint with a very Broad Brush!

    Don’t you think you are a little quick to judge? Just asking.

    Neck – 41

    Yes, that is why I mentioned it.
    A good friend/neighbor of mine is a GP and over the years he has mentioned a few of the perks offered by “Big Pharma”.

    As I stated up the page I had never really given it any thought but now that this has come up it only makes sense to tighten up on what is offered to Physicians from “Big Pharma”. At least there should be more Scrutiny/Accountability.

    Makes one wonder just how much an affect some of the Perks have on Docs.

    Unless I am mistaken it is unlawful for Unions or Corporations to donate to Federal parties.

    This whole thing of “Transparency and Accountability” could be looked at under the up coming new Parliament.

    Might be wise for any of the three Parties to address just that.

    That would provide The Voter even more information to consider before Voting Day.

  48. E. Johnson says:

    Unfortunately there are no guarantee s that any of the other leaders and or parties will be able to do any better. We need someone who can can stand up for what is in the best interests of the country as a whole rather than pandering to partisan politics and the multitude of special interest groups. If someone with those qualifications exists in this country he/she will probably be steering clear of politics.

    (Response: There’s never a guarantee. In fact, it’s almost a tradition that people vote more often to throw an unpopular incumbent out than actively vote in favour of someone else. And Harper certainly seems to fit that mold for many Canadians now than ever before. Sometimes, though, an imaginative campaign or policy platform catches on. Can hardly wait for it all to unfold.

  49. Laura says:

    By every measure Harper’s economic policies have been making Canada worse off.

    They claim to be “strong on the economy” but stats show that’s a myth.

    The right-wing policies of austerity and trickle-down economics haven’t worked any better in Canada than they have in Greece.

  50. DBW says:

    Hi BMCQ

    You accused another poster about not understanding what you had said (and to be honest I too have a hard time following some of your posts) so let’s be absolutely clear here.

    You said

    DBW – 13

    The Harper or Conservative Government has a much “Broader Base” than you might think.

    What did I say their base is? What do you think their base is?

    According to the article I linked, all three parties have around 30% . (We can argue polls another time.) The Conservatives, according the polls only have 5-7% of voters considering them as a second choice. That means they could have as much as 37% support which is, given margin of error, about the same support that they had during the last election (39%).

    Are you suggesting that they have a wider base than that? Fair enough if you do. We will just have to wait until October.

    In reality, I was just advancing Harvey’s analysis. Harper is doing things that many people disagree with (all part of the democratic process) but he is also doing them in ways that are not part of the democratic process.

    For Harvey the passing of c377 was the tipping point. For many it was the passing of c51. For others it was the proroguing of parliament or the shutting down of debate or the shackling of scientific/expert opinion or omnibus bills or his fear tactics and attack ads. It is not just his policies that upset me and others. It is approach and that includes law and order and terror bills.

    And look at your own defense of Harper. Your fear of Canada becoming another Greece under Trudeau or Mulcair is just another fear/attack that really has no basis. Just like Harper’s speech in Calgary where he implied that Canada was only safe from terrorists with him as PM. It’s a desperate tactic.

    Some people know when to get out. Trudeau left and poor John Turner gets beaten up. Mulroney leaves and poor Kim Campbell is crushed. Chretien retires leaving poor Paul Martin to suffer the consequences.

    The Conservatives will not be decimated because of vote splits, but if they lose it is all on Harper’s approach, his undemocratic ways that will be the cause.

  51. BMCQ says:

    DBW – 50

    Thanks for the kind words!

    If you read my exchange with Laura and you honestly did not get the fact that I had finished one point and I was then was simply pointing out the Krauthammer Book as something some here may enjoy I feel you are being somewhat disingenuous.

    I challenge you to re-read that exchange and then put it here in writing that you “Did not follow” the meaning of my post.

    I may disagree with you but I certainly would not use Laura’s pathetic attempt to deflect as a weapon against you under the same circumstances.

    Frankly I am a little disappointed!

    Three of my friends and my Wife all understood it the same way as I meant the Post to read.

    I believe most everyone that Posts here have the same opinion of what the Conservative Base is.

    I accept that but I also believe that a very high percentage of shall we say New Canadians also support The Conservatives.

    I read what Harvey Posts and I do understand why Harvey has come to the conclusion that The Harper Conservatives do not deserve his support.

    I still feel that The harper Cons offer us the best possible Government for Canada.

    Yes they have their Warts but……

    My concern of Canada experiencing Economic problems if we somehow take the Path of The EU under Trudeau or Mulcair is not “Fear Mongering” at all.

    It is simply a genuine concern I have that if we increase the size of Government, Tax and Spend, increase Entitlements, and increase The Debt to ridiculous levels we will experience an uncertain future.

    I sincerely hope you do not have a hard time following this Post.

  52. Laura says:

    I can’t believe I have to do this.

    Post #22 : You (BMCQ) make a bunch of silly statements about economics.

    Post #41 : I point out to you that your ideas have been discredited.

    Post #51 : You make more outlandish statements about economics.

    Post #55 : I again point out to you that you’re wrong and your ideas are well past their best before date.

    After that you claimed that you weren’t discussing economics, you were only talking about a book.

    I agreed that you weren’t discussing economics rationally.

    After that you claim the whole conversation was your suggesting a book, nothing to do with economics.

    I think to myself you need an appointment with a shrink but don’t post that.

    I have to assume english is not the first language of your wife and friends and perhaps not of yourself either. Which is fine.

    Its simple, post nonsense about economics and I’ll challenge you. If you can’t defend what you say then perhaps don’t post it until you can.

    Have a good day.

  53. BMCQ says:

    Laura – 52

    You can ATTEMPT to spin this as much as you wish but the TRUTH is just up the page here for any one to view if they so choose.

    The facts speak for themselves!

    Why would I recommend a Book of Krauthammer’s that I have read that I know contains a compilation of various columns and musings from his work over the years as a Book about Economics?

    I have given at least 24 of them out as Gifts to friends and family, and I then somehow would believe the Book is about Economics?

    Ask yourself those questions

    As to your assumption that English is not the first language of my Wife and Friends?

    Should that and does that really matter?

    As to your point about me needing a shrink.

    Krauthammer just happens to be a Psychiatrist, perhaps you could arrange to contact him your self. He has very impressive credentials!

    It is obvious to me and to others that read here that “The Last Word” is very important to you.

    Therefore this will be my last comment on this topic.

    Harvey has many more important things to attend to than worrying about Posting the Juvenile comments between you and me.

    Go ahead, fill your boots, have the last word.

    Oh and by the way keep this in mind.

    “The Truth Will Set You Free”!!

  54. BMCQ says:

    Laura – 52

    Once again and for the last time.

    No matter how you attempt to “Spin” your story you cannot escape the fact that the “TRUTH” is contained in my Post is for all interested to view.

    How could I recommend a Krauthammer Book that I have already read that contains a compilation about several of his Columns, some of his Life Story and other musings as a Book on Economics?

    As stated I have also gifted about 24 of the Books to friends and family. We have also discussed much of the contents of the Book. Trust me I know it well.

    As to you comment about my Wife and Friends having English as a second Language? Really?!

    It seems to me that “Having the Last Word” is very important to you.

    I am going to close off here to allow you to have that last word.

    Harvey has many more important things to do than continuing to Post a silly fight between the two of us.

    Oh and don’t forget one last thing………

    “The Truth Will Set You Free”!!

    Now I am going to take a few moments to search The Internet for the name of a good “Exorcist”!!

    Hopefully Larry Bennett can recommend a good one!

  55. BMCQ says:

    Sorry for the repeat Laura.

    I sent the first one very early from Home and I did not think it went through.

    Now that I read them both they are more or less the same message.

  56. DBW says:

    Hi BMCQ

    I don’t know if Laura wants the last word or not but maybe a third party will do and seeing that you did suggest I get involved perhaps I should be the one.

    First the “truth” is not up the page as you claim but in another thread.

    Second, quite ironic for somebody who often apologizes for not proofreading his work, to be overly sensitive that somebody might have misread your post.

    Third, go back to the exchange.

    Laura: read Picketty.

    BMCQ: Picketty?! Yikes! But if we are suggesting books, may I suggest Krauthammer.

    What assumption is somebody supposed to make about Krauthammer? I had heard of neither author so in my limited sphere I assumed Krauthammer was an economist.

    Sorry BMCQ, had you recommended the Bible or Steven King or Steven Harper’s book on hockey, the response would still have been what has this to do with economics?

    And you would have had to respond “Nothing – just heading off in another of my stream of consciousness directions.”

    Fourth, you have a darling wife. Mine would roll her eyes if I asked her to waste a second of her time reading a pointless exchange between me and some internet stranger. I know this because she rolls her eyes when I try to describe some of the inanities here. (No offense Harv if you are foolish enough to still be reading but there are some inanities here.)

    Fifth, you still haven’t answered my question about the Conservative base. Did I underestimate at 37% and by how much?

    Sixth, seeing that it is Ringo’s birthday.

    Peace and Love

  57. BMCQ says:

    DBW – 56

    1. Correct the “TRUTH” was on the other thread!

    2.If you knew me and if you were aware of my background you would be well aware that I am not sensitive at all. I do however pride myself on being forthright and honest so therefore I can become irritable if I feel I am not being judged or criticized when it is not necessary.

    The reason I sometimes apologize for not proof reading the Post is because I do a lot of my Posting very early in the Morning at work.

    I arrive sometime between 4 AM and 5 AM, the Business is operating 24 hours a day so there is always a crew there and I am very busy.

    I read some Business Publications and the Metal Markets as well as take some phone calls from almost anywhere in the World.

    I can then may take a break, begin to Post here and sometimes I am interrupted during the typing of that Post. I also type very quickly. Then quite often I do not have the time to Proof Read. Sorry, I suppose I should take a minute to do that but……..

    3. To be factual here Laura did not mention a book. She told me to read Pickety. I know who Pickety is, I have read much of what Pickety has to say and to be honest I would have just as much interest in following the Teachings of Marx. My honest opinion.

    I then went onto the next point as far as I was concerned and I then said something like, “Now that we are recommending Books I would like to suggest that some here regardless of their politics might enjoy The Krauthammer Book etc/”. That is from memory I did not go back to read.

    Sorry I just assumed many or most here would know who Krauthammer happens to be.

    In all honesty I felt the point was clear and once again I have read the Book completely and know what the full content of the book is. Simple.

    I cannot help it if others that I know that have read the Post got what I was saying, sorry.

    4. I am very fortunate to have My Wife. She actually enjoys reading the Posts.

    She is very honest when she says she understood my reference to Krauthammer Book.

    Trust me she would not even Lie to The Police to protect me! She is a person of very Good Character!

    5. How does one measure The Federal Cons Base? All I can say is that we could use the estimate some Polls appear to Show. I then feel that there is a very large silent Majority that do not wear their party Affiliation on their sleeve.

    As stated I believe that a huge number of new Canadians support The Harpers. I also believe that a very large number of Blue Collar Workers Union and Non-Union support harper.

    As stated Law and Order, Economics, Foeign Policcy, Small government, attempting to hold the line on Entitlements and a variety of other reasons.

    You said it yourself We will find o0ut if I am correct after the next Elections Results ae tallied.

    I am aware of the scrutiny I receive here and that is fine. I do however attempt to answer any questions the best I can.

    You may not always agree but I do my best to be open and honest.

    I hope I have given you what you want here.

    Once again, I hope you are able to follow my Post.

    I would be interested to see if you agree with my point I made on the latest Blog that H.O. put up regarding The Media Bias when I speculated that Harvey would not get many comments because so many that post here are not supporters of Israel.

    From what I see so far I am correct. Kind of Sad really.

    I believe you are an honest person and I for one would like to hear your opinion on my comment there.

    More importantly I would like to hear what you say about Harvey’s Assessment!

  58. BMCQ says:

    If you are aware of “The Drudge Report’ you may want to seek out some Columnists like Krauthammer, Kruger, and perhaps 40 others through it’s Linking Service. Many are also Archived past Columns

    At the same time there are perhaps another 30 or 40 Newspapers and Magazines that can be accessed.

    (Response: Thanks ..it takes time/effort to search out the other side in many disputes, but people who are really interested in the truth and see the consistent bias …pro or con … in what passes today for “news” should make the effort. And they’ll probably conclude, as I often do, the truth lies somewhere in the middle ..both sides in any dispute worthy of being criticised. h.o)

  59. larry Bennett says:

    Coming in just a tad late here Harve, but a poll in today’s N.P. suggests that 62% of Canadians support Bill C-377 (67% in Quebec) that would force unions to disclose all expenses ove $5,000 and salaries over $100,000 in unions. This can be found on Blazing Cat Fur or through theambler.com or presumably at N.P. sites.

    (Response: Govern just by public polls, blacks in Mississippi might still be riding at the back of the bus. h.o)

Comments are closed.