More Conservative "Honesty" on Display

[Mike F]

We all know that we need to vote Conservative to return honesty to Parliament, right?

Well, in the wake of the revelation that the Conservative promise to give a $500 tax break to parents enrolling their kids in sports would only actually be $80 comes this revelation:

The Liberals came out attacking the Conservative platform as fiscally irresponsible:

The Liberals are also arguing that Harper's plan to redress the so-called fiscal imbalance between the federal and provincial governments could bring the deficit to between $23.4 billion and $53.4 billion over the next five years.

Goodale, in a telephone interview with CTV.ca, contends that Harper has not tried to address how this agenda would be funded.

"That question Mr. Harper has not yet even attempted to answer, and that will have a huge bearing on the bottom line," he said. "Otherwise he is leading the premiers down the garden path, implying there is a solution but knowing privately that he can't afford that solution."


The Conservatives shot back with their usual response that this is just more fearmongering:

"This is a blatant attempt to scare people again," Monte Solberg, the Tory finance critic said Sunday. "I saw their numbers, and they're ridiculous."

Shortly after the Liberals released their statement Sunday, the Conservatives issued a letter of their own from the Conference Board of Canada, insisting their program is properly costed out.

The statement contends the party platform is fully affordable in each year from 2005 through to 2011.

"In summary, we found that the Conservative Party's economic platform is affordable in each fiscal year from 2005-2006 through 2010-2011," Paul Darby, the board's deputy chief economist is quoted as saying.


Well it turns out that the economist is now washing his hands of the Conservative agenda because they decided not to include everything when they sent it to him:

A prominent economist commissioned by the Conservatives to assess the financial soundness of their election platform says major items were omitted from the version he was given.

. . . . Mr. Darby says the version of the platform he was given to vet didn't include a Conservative health-care guarantee which states patients will be transported to another jurisdiction if they can't get timely care at home.

It also omitted a Tory platform promise to redress the so-called “fiscal imbalance” between Ottawa and the provinces.

Mr. Darby wouldn't comment on whether the timely health-care guarantee would bear a significant cost.

“Talk to Harper,” he said. “It is not in the platform I received from them.”

[Zarathustra]

Yep, just more liberal fear-mongering.

[Canada 02]

The costs weren't included yet because they are still subject to discussions with the provinces should the Tories win power, he said.
"We're reluctant to put any numbers in precisely because it has to be negotiated," Solberg said.
Despite those holes, a Conservative news release says the party's platform is "fully budgeted - it maintains a balanced budget, every year, with money left over."

Hidden agenda exposed!

[CaptainCrunch]

Yup pretty much on path with Goodale going to the press about these budget figures and then admitting that he actually hadn't done the calculations and it was just a guess.

[Flame On]

Fibrals, spinners, liars crooks.

[Flame On]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Yup pretty much on path with Goodale going to the press about these budget figures and then admitting that he actually hadn't done the calculations and it was just a guess.

So they're just as bad as eachother??

[CaptainCrunch]

I never worry about parties getting into specifics in thier election campaigns because they just have never thought that far ahead, and thats the Liberal's and the Conservatives. But I certainly feel that the Conservatives will come far closer to living up to thier promises then the Liberal's ever will. And besides I certainly trust Harper and the conservatives far more then I believe anything that the Liberal Party and Paul Martin have ever said.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Flame On

So they're just as bad as eachother??

Pretty sad statement when democracy has now come down to instead of voting for the most appealing candidate and party and platform, your voting for the party that will screw you the least.

[PYroMaNiaC]

The Liberals have wasted my hard earned buck on Adscam, Gun registry, someone's chewing gum, and a million dollar logo, just to name a few.

Wasted.

For the Liberals to point fingers and say we can't afford Harper's programs, well, that's just laughable. The Conservatives could probably have funded their programs on Liberal waste alone.

[Flame On]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Pretty sad statement when democracy has now come down to instead of voting for the most appealing candidate and party and platform, your voting for the party that will screw you the least.

That's true Captain and no doubt the liberals have done a lot of screwing.
Seems like people are realizing that too.

[Red]

The Liberals are also arguing that Harper's plan to redress the so-called fiscal imbalance between the federal and provincial governments could bring the deficit to between $23.4 billion and $53.4 billion over the next five years.

The Liberals have me convinced. I am sure their numbers quoted above are correct and honest.

After all they'd never lie to Canadians

[Shawnski]

LARF!!

All headline, no substance Mike. Can't believe the author played such a heavy hand in the title and opening paragraphs without supporting quotes from Mr. Darby himself.

These two items are clearly pieces of the platform that will take time to address via negotiations with the provinces. The timely health care guarantee at this point in time would cost a rather small amount, I would expect, since the list of items guaranteed for time limits recently is A) small and B) has rather meetable timelines.

The second point about addressing the fiscal imbalance has been discussed by Harper already on many speeches and news conferences I have watched on CPAC. Again, this will be negotiated over the course of the term of office with the provinces, but some items within the platform already go directly to this aspect and clearly were in the document Darby endorsed. Take the GST cut for example. By cutting the GST, less money goes to Ottawa and in fact stays within each province. That is a HUGE step towards addressing the fiscal imbalance. In fact, all of the tax cuts in the CPC platform essentially go towards addressing it by leaving moneys in the hands of each provinces peoples.

I sense the Fiberals and their remaining fans are getting desperate. This story, and this resulting thread are two good examples.

The Fiberal spin machine was at work on CBC's Question Period yesterday too. And it was hilarious. Jean Lapierre, Minister of Transport, was asked what he thought of the CPC increase in popularity in Quebec. Lapierre said it was a "good thing", as it would mean more votes for federalists. He repeatedly said this as the votes were coming from the Bloc. The Liberals could very well increase their seats because of it, too.

The next question related to the negative attack ads running in Quebec, to which he replied "we need to show what Stephen Harper is all about".

So, on one hand the CPC taking Bloc votes is very good, but the Liberals are going to run the ads in order to ensure that... get this... people don't vote CPC in Quebec. Hil-freakin'-larious.

Ahhhh, when the Liberals are out of office, they should all become Maytag repair people. They have the spin cycle already well understood!

[Shawnski]

And just for the heck of it.... have a read at this piece, where former Liberal attack man now supports Harper, and why...

http://ottsun.canoe.ca/News/Columnis...0/1329727.html

[Resolute 14]

So where, exactly, did Martin plan on getting the money for his $30 billion in empty promises before he was turfed?

At least with the Liberals, you do know that they wont run a deficit, becuase they wont keep a promise. As much as they may like to, they cant funnel the entire surplus into their own pockets, so some would have to remain.

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by Flame On

So they're just as bad as eachother??

Yep.

Cowperson

[Mike F]

Originally Posted by Shawnski

LARF!!

All headline, no substance Mike. Can't believe the author played such a heavy hand in the title and opening paragraphs without supporting quotes from Mr. Darby himself.

These two items are clearly pieces of the platform that will take time to address via negotiations with the provinces. The timely health care guarantee at this point in time would cost a rather small amount, I would expect, since the list of items guaranteed for time limits recently is A) small and B) has rather meetable timelines.

The second point about addressing the fiscal imbalance has been discussed by Harper already on many speeches and news conferences I have watched on CPAC. Again, this will be negotiated over the course of the term of office with the provinces, but some items within the platform already go directly to this aspect and clearly were in the document Darby endorsed.

The point is that the Liberals come out saying that the Conservative platform is fiscally irresponsible, pointing to things like the cost of addressing the fiscal imbalance.

The Conservatives shoot back with, "No the whole thing has been verified by an independent economist!"

But then it turns out that parts of their platforn, including the very program they were being criticized on (or at least parts of it) weren't in the budget the economist verified. If the cost still has to be negatiated then the honest thing to do is say so, not to say that the cost is accounted for.

Lets say you go to buy a business and say, "Gee, I'm worried about the profitability, especially given how much debt you owe on inventory," and the current owner responds, "don't worry, I had an accountant look things over and he verified that we're OK." If you find out later that he left out a bunch of the debt when he gave the books to the accountant, would you say his response was honest?

[Shawnski]

What bunch of debt, Mike? Poor analogy. (And love how you cut off quoting my post when it starts to speak directly to addressing the fiscal imbalance.)

BTW, the Conference Board of Canada has confirmed it stands by its report. Speaking of responsibility, where is the costing verification for the Liberal policies? Did not the Liberals turn down the offer of the Conference Board of Canada to validate theirs too?

Again, pure desperation on the part of the Fiberals and their remaining few fans. Spin, spin, spin...

[Shawnski]

Watching Martin talk in Vancouver. He got on this issue and pronounced that in order for Harper to "address the fiscal imbalance" it would take $10 billion, maybe $20 billion dollars.

Funny, only just before Xmas, No Fiscal Imbalance, Martin tells Klein

Guess Dithers strikes again, eh?

[Canada 02]

The Liberals are also arguing that Harper's plan to redress the so-called fiscal imbalance between the federal and provincial governments could bring the deficit to between $23.4 billion and $53.4 billion over the next five years.

How can the Liberals say the Conservative plan will cost billions to address the fiscal imbalance when they don't even acknowledge that it exists?

Ooops! What he said^^^

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Canada 02

The Liberals are also arguing that Harper's plan to redress the so-called fiscal imbalance between the federal and provincial governments could bring the deficit to between $23.4 billion and $53.4 billion over the next five years.

How can the Liberals say the Conservative plan will cost billions to address the fiscal imbalance when they don't even acknowledge that it exists?

Ooops! What he said^^^

Yup...would LOVE to see a reporter ask this question straight up to Martin and then sit back and let the hilarity ensue as he mumbles and stumbles his way through the answer.

Maybe he could just use the Chretian "a proof is a proof" blather!!

Good grief is he a schmuck.