Author Topic: We get the governments we deserve, don't we?  (Read 29974 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline E.R. Campbell

  • Retired, years ago
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 483,270
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,360
We get the governments we deserve, don't we?
« on: February 09, 2014, 10:13:08 »
I was tempted, first, to put this in the Grand Strategy for a Divided America thread, but, based on recceguy's cri de coeur about the state of our, Canadian, politics, I decided that it belongs in a new thread in our Canadian Politics page.

Unfortunately, at this time, there is neither a good candidate in some ridings, or a good political party.

This article, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the Economist, shocked me a bit. "How," I asked myself, "could any sane, grown up legislator oppose free(er) trade?" "It is intuitively obvious," I said to myself, "to anyone who has passed even the most basic history courses, that free trade works for everyone. Only fools oppose free trade." "Wait," I reminded myself, "about half of Canadians (and Americans) do oppose free trade." "Yes, yes, yes," I agreed with myself, "but we know that that's the half of the people who are too f'ing stupid to breathe without adult supervision, much less vote."

All that being given as truth ~ and, yes, I know some people here on Army.ca oppose free trade and I affirm that they are fools who ought to be denied the vote ... as well as going out, alone, after dark ~ then what gets into Harry Reid?

Quote

When Harry mugged Barry
Harry Reid threatens to impoverish the world by at least $600 billion a year

Feb 8th 2014

From the print edition

IN HIS state-of-the-union address Barack Obama asked Congress to give him “fast-track” authority to negotiate trade deals. Shortly afterwards his most important ally on Capitol Hill hinted that he might block it. As Senate majority leader, Harry Reid can do just that: no bill gets a vote without his say-so. But would he really stiff Mr Obama? Much depends on the answer.

Studies suggest that proposed deals with Asia and Europe could generate global gains of $600 billion a year, with $200 billion of that going to America. And that understates the benefits, since the deals would spur competition in the market for services, which make up most of rich countries’ output but are seldom traded across borders. Opening industries like finance and transport to greater competition could bring great savings to consumers.

Mr Obama has never been an ardent free-trader, yet his second term got off to a promising start. The Trans-Pacific Partnership, a deal with large Pacific-rim economies, is close to completion; America and Japan are hammering out the rules for farm goods. European and American trade wonks continue to meet regularly, hoping to wrap up a “next-generation” trade agreement as early as next year.

To make all this happen Mr Obama needs “trade promotion authority” (usually known as “fast-track”), which would let him negotiate deals and then present them to Congress for a simple yes-or-no vote, with no chance for lawmakers to rewrite the details. Without such authority, America’s trading partners cannot take the White House seriously as a negotiator. Fast-track was last granted to George W. Bush in 2002 and expired in 2007. Since Republicans are generally pro-trade and Democrats are generally loyal to Mr Obama, most people in Washington at first assumed that Congress would give it to him without a fuss.

But with elections looming and lawmakers in a populist mood, that is far from certain. Late last year roughly half the members of the House wrote to Mr Obama declaring their opposition to fast-track; most were from his own party. In early January a bipartisan group of senators introduced a fast-track bill. Mr Obama spoke up for it in his state-of-the-union address, but only in passing and in mercantilist terms. The aim is “to protect our workers, protect our environment and open new markets to new goods stamped ‘Made in the USA’,” he said; without mentioning that cheap imports raise living standards.

Barely had he left the podium when Mr Reid mugged him. Answering questions from reporters, he reiterated his opposition to fast-track and advised its backers “not [to] push this right now”. Insiders doubt that Mr Reid would kill the bill outright. Haggling in the Senate may yield a new version with enough about labour standards and the environment to satisfy the protectionists. If so, Mr Reid will probably allow a vote, and the bill should pass. The White House remains publicly optimistic.

Yet damage is already being done. Michael Froman, Mr Obama’s trade representative, says negotiations have not been affected by the politicking in Washington. However, even if Mr Reid’s rebellion was partly for show (his seat is at risk in 2016), it still worries America’s trade partners. Shinzo Abe, Japan’s prime minister, may be reluctant to offend voters at home for the sake of a trade deal that America’s legislators might promptly torpedo. Similarly, the French, who have been a constant pain in talks between America and Europe, could argue that since America’s leaders seem determined to attach conditions to a fast-track bill, France’s demands for carve-outs deserve consideration, too.

At home meanwhile, Democratic opposition could harden. Some lawmakers may see an opportunity to put daylight between themselves and their Republican foes ahead of November’s elections. With corporate profits looking healthy and wages still stagnant almost five years into the recovery, some may be tempted to portray Republican backing for free trade as support for fat-cat corporations.

Mr Reid’s surprise rebuke suggests that Mr Obama needs to communicate better with his allies. And if he wishes to prevent two of the most promising trade deals in a decade from unravelling, he will need to make a far more full-throated case for the benefits of free exchange.


Sen Reid is appeasing (shades of Neville Chamberlain) his political base which, being left of centre, is afraid of free trade because it (the political left) always puts the possible immediate and short term costs ahead of the guaranteed* mid to long term gains and he is appealing to the spirit if American exceptionalism, which still resonates with many (most?) Americans: the notion that America is special and it need not, should not, even must not compromise with foreigners (those lesser breeds without the Law).

My guess is that Sen Reid, with his cynical stab in the back to free trade negotiations, better understands the American and Canadian political calculus than do I. He knows that his appeal to the lowest common denominator, his decision to pander to the uninformed ~ rather then to inform them, his plan to sacrifice the common good for his own, narrow, partisan political advantage, will produce good results for him, for the Democratic Party and for Hillary Clinton in 2016.

The Americans will, I am 100% certain, get the government they deserve in these, 2014, mid-term elections and in 2016. And it will, I am 95% certain, be a substandard government; but it will be, in that, one that reflects the level of political discourse in America.

I'm also absolutely sure that we, Canadians, will get the government we deserve in 2015. I know, also with absolute certainty, that I will oppose some/most or all (depending on which party "wins") of the government's policies. I will get a government that thinks people like Ken Lewenza, Jerry Dias and Sid Ryan have views on e.g. free trade that deserve a full and fair hearing ~ they don't. I will get a government that believes in buying your and my vote with attractive, carefully targeted tax breaks and regional corporate welfare prgrammes. I will get a government that is timid. But I will get a government that appeals to a plurality of my fellow citizens ... and I will weep.

But we will get the government we deserve; in fact we will get the government most of us want. We will get the government we elect ... freely and fairly.



_____
* Any fair, objective reading of the historical record says that free grade always does the most good for the most people.
It is ill that men should kill one another in seditions, tumults and wars; but it is worse to bring nations to such misery, weakness and baseness
as to have neither strength nor courage to contend for anything; to have nothing left worth defending and to give the name of peace to desolation.
Algernon Sidney in Discourses Concerning Government, (1698)
----------
Like what you see/read here on Army.ca?  Subscribe, and help keep it "on the air!"

Offline pbi

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 52,725
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,962
Re: We get the governments we deserve, don't we?
« Reply #1 on: February 10, 2014, 12:48:51 »
Funny how Americans can talk about free trade and never mention their biggest trading partner and their biggest energy supplier.

That aside, you are right that we will get the government we deserve. Maybe, if more people would put down the remote or the mouse and go out to vote, we might deserve a better government. But as long as only about half of the population (give or take) bothers, then we need only a portion of that half to vote in a government.

The rest of the electorate sits at home and whines about it, saying stupid self-fulfilling prophecies like "my vote doesn't matter anyway". 

So maybe the end result is that WE end up getting the government THEY deserve.
The Nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools. ...

The true measure of a man is what he would do if he knew he never would be found out...

Offline mariomike

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 497,875
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,199
    • The job.
Re: We get the governments we deserve, don't we?
« Reply #2 on: February 10, 2014, 13:12:32 »
So maybe the end result is that WE end up getting the government THEY deserve.

Reminds me of the old joke that one day the people ( of Louisiana, but could be almost anywhere - even Toronto  :) ) would elect "good government, and they won't like it!" 
« Last Edit: February 10, 2014, 13:18:39 by mariomike »

Offline E.R. Campbell

  • Retired, years ago
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 483,270
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,360
Re: We get the governments we deserve, don't we?
« Reply #3 on: May 29, 2014, 07:05:48 »
In a column in Maclean's magazine Paul Wells explains how Prime Minister Stephen Harper is changing Canada in ways that may be irreversible.

He has, cut revenue and spending and he may have painted the Liberals and NDP and all of Canada into a Conservative corner because,Wells says:

     "... the NDP and Liberals have foresworn personal tax increases. Tom Mulcair calls this “a contract with the voting public on our behalf.” Justin Trudeau says “Canadians are struggling…there is no reason to raise taxes on them
       now.” In fact he goes Mulcair one better and promises he won’t raise individual or corporate taxes.

       Two things about this.

       First, Mulcair is fooling himself if he thinks corporate taxes can be increased to make up for the shortfall in personal-tax income Harper has engineered. As the PBO points out, “Personal income tax and the federal portion of the GST/HST
       account for 75 per cent of federal tax revenues.” There’s way less room to make money off rich fat cats than Mulcair pretends. I mean, he’s welcome to keep pretending, but if he keeps his word an NDP government will remain short of
       cash. And a Liberal government, more so.

        Second, this is why Stephen Harper is in politics. I wrote a book about that. He may one day stop being prime minister, at which point the real fun begins, because his opponents are promising to run a Pierre Trudeau government or
        a Jack Layton government at John Diefenbaker prices. It can’t be done. Their inability to do it will be Harper’s legacy."

There has been an impact on national defence. The PBO report Paul Wells cites says that government revenues are down by $30 Billion, or 12%, over the past nine years. That's about $3 Billion per year that could not be spent, on anything, because it simple wasn't there. Even 10% of that $30 Billion would have bought a few ships, LAVs or SAR aircraft.
 
It is ill that men should kill one another in seditions, tumults and wars; but it is worse to bring nations to such misery, weakness and baseness
as to have neither strength nor courage to contend for anything; to have nothing left worth defending and to give the name of peace to desolation.
Algernon Sidney in Discourses Concerning Government, (1698)
----------
Like what you see/read here on Army.ca?  Subscribe, and help keep it "on the air!"

Offline Coastalchaos

  • Guest
  • *
  • 450
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12
Re: We get the governments we deserve, don't we?
« Reply #4 on: May 29, 2014, 09:14:42 »
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." - Winston Churchill

Offline ModlrMike

    : Riding time again... woohooo!

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 214,884
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,801
    • Canadian Association of Physician Assistants
Re: We get the governments we deserve, don't we?
« Reply #5 on: May 29, 2014, 10:49:33 »
On the subject of raising taxes, France illustrates that simply increasing taxation does not lead to increased revenue:

France in 14bn-euro tax black hole

The French government faces a 14bn-euro black hole in its public finances after overestimating tax income for the last financial year.
WARNING: The consumption of alcohol may create the illusion that you are tougher,smarter, faster and better looking than most people.
Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats. (H.L. Mencken 1919)
Zero tolerance is the politics of the lazy. All it requires is that you do nothing and ban everything.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 139,815
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,346
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: We get the governments we deserve, don't we?
« Reply #6 on: May 29, 2014, 11:45:59 »
Anyone who has tried importing or exporting to and from the US will know that the US is a highly protectionist state. For them Free Trade means open up your markets to us, but not ours to you.

Offline Schindler's Lift

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 18,435
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 800
  • http://goo.gl/1E5Ez0
Re: We get the governments we deserve, don't we?
« Reply #7 on: May 29, 2014, 15:26:36 »
I dont believe for a second that we get the government we deserve for I feel Canada deserves the best government in the world. 

I'd refine the statement to "we get the government we elect" in that if we elect crap, due to appethy and neglect, that is what we get.

Offline Brad Sallows

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 65,195
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,737
Re: We get the governments we deserve, don't we?
« Reply #8 on: May 29, 2014, 23:26:22 »
To be fair, at least part of the time every voter can claim he suffers from having the government those other guys deserved.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error.

"It is a damned heavy blow; but whining don't help."

Despair is a sin.

Offline Journeyman

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 542,815
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,996
Re: We get the governments we deserve, don't we?
« Reply #9 on: May 30, 2014, 00:42:10 »
     "... the NDP and Liberals have foresworn personal tax increases. Tom Mulcair calls this “a contract with the voting public on our behalf.”
I've now heard the new NDP promise at both the Toronto Mayoral- and Provincial-candidate level -- "we'll save more than we spend." 

Obviously they've caught on that the voting public doesn't trust them, knowing they'll run amok with the piggy bank, so they're promising they'll somehow now start governing with fiscal responsibility at the forefront.

    ::)

Offline GAP

  • Semper Fi
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 212,640
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,948
Re: We get the governments we deserve, don't we?
« Reply #10 on: May 30, 2014, 07:56:33 »
It's not hard to see....the voting public just have to look next door to see what the NDP have done to Manitoba.  ::)

And isn't it amazing what has happened to Saskatchewan once the NDP were turfed out.....
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I´m not so sure about the universe

Offline Fishbone Jones

    MSC -5620.

  • "Some people will only like you if you fit inside their box. Don't be afraid to shove that box up their ass."
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 276,762
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,579
    • Army.ca
Re: We get the governments we deserve, don't we?
« Reply #11 on: May 30, 2014, 08:18:06 »
It's not hard to see....the voting public just have to look next door to see what the NDP have done to Manitoba.  ::)

And isn't it amazing what has happened to Saskatchewan once the NDP were turfed out.....

Or what Bob Rae and the NDP did to Ontario,
Corruption in politics doesn't scare me.
What scares me is how comfortable people are doing nothing about it.

Offline E.R. Campbell

  • Retired, years ago
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 483,270
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,360
Re: We get the governments we deserve, don't we?
« Reply #12 on: May 30, 2014, 09:38:59 »
Just a (slightly) historical note: the old CCF was a mix of socialist, prairie populists (a breed that never dies but shifts allegiances on a fairly regular basis), unions and farmers and it had, amongst other policies, a pretty firm - and very acceptable, even to Conservative - view about fiscal prudence. The big shift came in the early 1960s when David Lewis and the labour faction, heavily supported by the Canadian Labour Congress, displaced the prairie co-op faction and shifted the newly formed NDP away from its roots and onto a new, fiscally irresponsible path.
It is ill that men should kill one another in seditions, tumults and wars; but it is worse to bring nations to such misery, weakness and baseness
as to have neither strength nor courage to contend for anything; to have nothing left worth defending and to give the name of peace to desolation.
Algernon Sidney in Discourses Concerning Government, (1698)
----------
Like what you see/read here on Army.ca?  Subscribe, and help keep it "on the air!"

Offline E.R. Campbell

  • Retired, years ago
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 483,270
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,360
Re: We get the governments we deserve, don't we?
« Reply #13 on: October 29, 2015, 17:58:28 »
 :weird:

I'm resurrecting this thread because of this article which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the Ottawa Citizen that discusses a fairly important report (in my opinion) about the organization of our government:

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/politics/public-institutions-need-reboot-to-rebalance-power-says-report
My comments included
Quote

Public institutions need 'reboot' to rebalance power, says report

MARK KENNEDY, OTTAWA CITIZEN

Published on: October 29, 2015

Canada’s key public institutions — the Prime Minister’s Office, cabinet, Parliament and the public service — need a “reboot” to restore the trust of Canadians, says a report released Wednesday.

The report by the Public Policy Forum is authored by a panel that includes former Quebec premier Jean Charest, former Alberta treasurer Jim Dinning, and former federal Privy Council clerk Kevin Lynch.

The report warns that as the PMO and political staffers have become more powerful in Ottawa, cabinet ministers and members of Parliament have lost influence and the valuable role of public servants as advisers has been diminished. Agreed.

“The problem is that our public institutions are no longer playing the roles for which they were designed, nor with the authority to be effective,” warns the report by the independent think tank. Also agreed.

“An extraordinary centralization of power with
 our prime minister, provincial premiers and 
their political advisers has become a defining characteristic of government today, frustrating elected representatives and career public servants. This is the root of the problem.

“There is a troubling antipathy toward the public service, raising the risk of long-term damage to the institution.” This is a symptom of the real problem (above) not a "problem" in and of itself.

The report notes that if cabinet, parliamentary committees and the public service were able to “function as intended,” they could better respond to “critical longer-term challenges facing Canada.” Yes, indeed.

Among those challenges: the need to diversify and expand international trade, co-ordinate environmental and energy strategies, address “unsustainable” health-care costs compounded by an aging population, and build a more innovative economy.

“Like those of other democratic nations, Canada’s public institutions have failed in some important ways to keep pace with global changes,” says the report.

“Good governance is not an end in itself, but a means towards achieving a robust democracy for the benefit
 of all citizens. This is important to Canadians both for reasons of transparency and ensuring trust in public institutions.

“Given the above-mentioned shortcomings, our political system clearly needs a reboot if it is to 
fulfil citizens’ expectations and serve the purposes of advancing our provinces and our country — and Canada’s place in the world.”

The panel has issued nine proposals for reform. Among their ideas:

– MPs should elect the chairs of Commons committees.

– There should be fewer of those committees and they should be better funded.

– Ministers and deputy ministers should regularly appear before the committees.

– Ministers should appoint their own chiefs of staff and they should be “accountable” for their political staff. 

– The prime minister should make a clear statement about the “conventions” underpinning the public service and its role with respect to policy advice. 

– The roles and responsibilities of the public service should be enshrined in legislation. No, if minister are accounatbel for political staff and the PM enunciates the conventions then this (dangerous) step is unnecessary

– The role of the “political staff” that work for the prime minister and cabinet ministers should be clarified and measures should be put in place to provide “appropriate accountability and transparency,” including a code of conduct. 

The report comes just days before prime minister-designate Justin Trudeau forms a majority Liberal government. Trudeau has promised a range of democratic reforms to restore credibility to Parliament, make government more open, and treat public servants as partners instead of adversaries.

Dinning, chair of the panel that wrote the report, said the timing of the report’s release this week, as Trudeau prepares to take office, is “just good luck” — adding that he hopes the prime minister acts on all the recommendations.

He said millions of Canadians went to the polls last week and elected MPs they hope will have clout.

“It isn’t just about the Prime Minister’s Office or the political staff. I want to know that my parliamentarian has a say in the affairs of the nation,” Dinning said in an interview Wednesday.

In addition to Dinning, Charest and Lynch, others on the panel were Monique Leroux, CEO of the Desjardin Group, and Heather Munroe-Blum, chair of the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board.

Among the problems cited by the report:

The PMO

The office now functions as the “real” cabinet on Parliament Hill, as its staff “develops and screens government policy, decides on appointments, devises communication strategies and writes speeches for the prime minister, ministers and others.

“Its reach and influence extends into almost every corner of government.” Agreed, this is the nub of the problem

The cabinet

The dominance of the PMO has come largely at the expense of the cabinet. Agreed, again

“The notion of cabinet government is now questionable. Executive governance has evolved to the point where cabinet ministers no longer play the vital role they once did.” Agreed, this is a key point!

Parliamentary committees

The committees of MPs are weakened with “constant pressure” from party whips and House leaders to follow “narrow partisan agendas.”

“Working productively across party lines is becoming the rare exception.”

The public service

It plays a “core role” in our system.

“It is non-partisan, professional and permanent, serving governments of any political party with equal loyalty and effectiveness. Its appointments are merit-based.

“However, the public service in Canada is today in danger of becoming an ‘administrative service’ whose sole
 task would be to execute the orders of politicians and their aides without informed policy advice, question or discussion.”


I oppose trying to legislate the functions of the public service. As with written constitutions, such a proposal wilkl do more harm than good.We have nearly 500 years of very solid convention to guide the public service and the relationships between politicians and public servants. The way to solve the perceived problem (I think it's only a symptom) is to hold politicians and political staff fully accountable ~ when staff screw up ministers resign (or are fired). Adscam would never have happened had Jean Pelletier stayed within his lanes ~ instead he was allowed to intrude into the day-to-day business of government, dealing, directly with e.g. Chuck Guité and the result was crime that was traced, clearly and directly to Jean Chrétien's outer office ... no one, except M Guité, was ever held accountable because they were political staff and politicians. That, with the politicians and their staffs, is where the problem lies.
It is ill that men should kill one another in seditions, tumults and wars; but it is worse to bring nations to such misery, weakness and baseness
as to have neither strength nor courage to contend for anything; to have nothing left worth defending and to give the name of peace to desolation.
Algernon Sidney in Discourses Concerning Government, (1698)
----------
Like what you see/read here on Army.ca?  Subscribe, and help keep it "on the air!"

Offline ArmyRick

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 26,040
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,957
  • What the????
Re: We get the governments we deserve, don't we?
« Reply #14 on: October 29, 2015, 20:14:26 »
Interesting read. To truly fix DND, one needs to look at how the entire government functions.
I am NOT a privileged white man by virtue of being male or white. I am privileged because I am alive and exercising my right to be who I am!

Offline Brad Sallows

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 65,195
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,737
Re: We get the governments we deserve, don't we?
« Reply #15 on: October 29, 2015, 20:44:35 »
Drilling down, the most insufferable problem is the power of the unelected temporary political staff.

>Good governance is not an end in itself, but a means towards achieving a robust democracy for the benefit
 of all citizens.

There's always at least one statement that makes me go "WTF"?  Democracy is a means of obtaining good governance.  Good governance is a means of securing ... fill in whatever you think appropriate; I'd start with "an environment in which people may live their own lives with the blessings of liberty".  "Democracy" is overused as shorthand for "institutions and associations and customs".
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error.

"It is a damned heavy blow; but whining don't help."

Despair is a sin.

Offline c_canuk

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 14,195
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 432
Re: We get the governments we deserve, don't we?
« Reply #16 on: October 30, 2015, 15:55:21 »
I feel democracy's biggest advantage is that is pits the power hungry authoritarians against eachother in a perpetual contest for the population's approval, rather than team up to extract more power from the people.
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
-John Stewart Mill

Offline Baz

  • Donor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 13,970
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 503
Re: We get the governments we deserve, don't we?
« Reply #17 on: October 30, 2015, 17:06:52 »
Is anyone else concerned that the earlier Trudeau brought a lot of power to the PAO?

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 139,815
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,346
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: We get the governments we deserve, don't we?
« Reply #18 on: November 03, 2015, 14:20:22 »
They are to busy with the current lovefest that is going on, except for grouchy old men (or up and coming grouchy old farts like myself)  like ourselves who are cursed with a smattering of history and memories of political scandals past.  ;D

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 139,815
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,346
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: We get the governments we deserve, don't we?
« Reply #19 on: November 03, 2015, 15:03:53 »
just arrived in my inbox,  don't recall getting one when the Liberals left?

Over the last nine years, my team and I have worked very closely with the Public Service of Canada to improve the prosperity, security and well-being of Canadians and improve Canada’s position in the world.

I am very proud of the remarkable work we have accomplished together towards meeting these objectives.

I would like to thank each and every one of you for the support you have shown my team and me over three successive parliaments and for the dedication you have demonstrated in delivering for Canadians.

It has been an honour to serve as Prime Minister of the greatest country in the world and I will always be grateful for the support of Canada’s world-class public service.

Stephen Harper
Prime Minister of Canada

Offline E.R. Campbell

  • Retired, years ago
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 483,270
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,360
Re: We get the governments we deserve, don't we?
« Reply #20 on: November 03, 2015, 16:09:30 »
just arrived in my inbox,  don't recall getting one when the Liberals left?

Over the last nine years, my team and I have worked very closely with the Public Service of Canada to improve the prosperity, security and well-being of Canadians and improve Canada’s position in the world.

I am very proud of the remarkable work we have accomplished together towards meeting these objectives.

I would like to thank each and every one of you for the support you have shown my team and me over three successive parliaments and for the dedication you have demonstrated in delivering for Canadians.

It has been an honour to serve as Prime Minister of the greatest country in the world and I will always be grateful for the support of Canada’s world-class public service.

Stephen Harper
Prime Minister of Canada


And the Ottawa Citizen reports on Prime Minister Harper's letter and the PSAC's churlish, low class response ... so typical of the public service union culture ... not of the public service, per se, nor of trade unions, in general; "churlish," "low class" and so on just apply, specifically, to the leadership of public service unions.
It is ill that men should kill one another in seditions, tumults and wars; but it is worse to bring nations to such misery, weakness and baseness
as to have neither strength nor courage to contend for anything; to have nothing left worth defending and to give the name of peace to desolation.
Algernon Sidney in Discourses Concerning Government, (1698)
----------
Like what you see/read here on Army.ca?  Subscribe, and help keep it "on the air!"

Offline Hamish Seggie

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 220,932
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,129
  • This is my son Michael, KIA Afghanistan 3 Sep 08
Re: We get the governments we deserve, don't we?
« Reply #21 on: November 03, 2015, 16:25:40 »

And the Ottawa Citizen reports on Prime Minister Harper's letter and the PSAC's churlish, low class response ... so typical of the public service union culture ... not of the public service, per se, nor of trade unions, in general; "churlish," "low class" and so on just apply, specifically, to the leadership of public service unions.

One of the most churlish rude things I read was that when Margaret Thatcher died, unionist said "The witch is dead". No class.
Freedom Isn't Free   "Never Shall I Fail My Brothers"

“Do everything that is necessary and nothing that is not".

jollyjacktar

  • Guest
Re: We get the governments we deserve, don't we?
« Reply #22 on: November 03, 2015, 16:34:17 »
One of the most churlish rude things I read was that when Margaret Thatcher died, unionist said "The witch is dead". No class.

Agreed.  But she did have the hate of the Miners, that's for sure.

jollyjacktar

  • Guest
Re: We get the governments we deserve, don't we?
« Reply #23 on: November 03, 2015, 16:35:56 »

And the Ottawa Citizen reports on Prime Minister Harper's letter and the PSAC's churlish, low class response ... so typical of the public service union culture ... not of the public service, per se, nor of trade unions, in general; "churlish," "low class" and so on just apply, specifically, to the leadership of public service unions.

I would have been shocked if they had responded like adults.  Their response is true to form.

Offline Fishbone Jones

    MSC -5620.

  • "Some people will only like you if you fit inside their box. Don't be afraid to shove that box up their ass."
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 276,762
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,579
    • Army.ca
Re: We get the governments we deserve, don't we?
« Reply #24 on: November 03, 2015, 17:32:51 »
I left this reply in the comments section of the Ottawa Citizen :facepalm:

I now await unemotional, factual and educational responses from members of PSAC. :warstory: [/sarcasm]

"Hmmm, how soon PSAC forgets those rosey times under the Liberals. When they had to sue them for stealing their pension trusts. Discriminatory employers, public and private, that had been given confidence to continue pay discrimination by the actions of the Chrétien Liberals, even after writing to PSAC president Daryl Bean promising to abide by the tribunal decision. Chrétien wrote: “Equal pay for work of equal value became a right with the passage of the Canadian Human Rights Act, a right that does not begin and end on the whim of the Tory government.” Another Liberal lie affecting PSAC. These aren't one offs. The misappropriation of funds, the broken promises and outright lies are massive and legendary..

Guess what PSAC, those same guys are back in charge as the PM designate's handlers, policy and speech writers as well as spokespersons for the Liberals once again. You failed to learn from history, you're now doomed to repeat it. Have fun."
Corruption in politics doesn't scare me.
What scares me is how comfortable people are doing nothing about it.