A Conservative Party fund raiser called recently. She said
the party needs money to support the government stave off attacks of the Opposition
and media as it undertakes to implement its strong mandate to complete
Canada’s economic recovery and balance the federal budget by 2014-2015.
The Conservative
Party maintains a very effective fund raising component that greatly outperforms
that of other parties. Since there has not been any report that it is in debt
due to election expenses I suspect it is raising money to keep the money
machine oiled.
It is
interesting to examine the ‘strong mandate’ the Government received from
the electors in May last year. It did receive a mandate and a majority of the
seats in Parliament thanks to 36.62% of the ballots cast. It is interesting to
note that only 61.1% of the electorate actually cast a ballot and hence only
22% of the potential voters actually supported the Conservative Party or were
interested enough to vote. Is 22% support a ‘strong’ mandate?
The
concept of a strong mandate, I suggest, is to imply exceptional authority since
the government already has sufficient authority by virtue of its majority in
the House of Commons.
The
Conservative Party seems to feel government leadership is under attack from the
Opposition and media. It must be said that it is the duty of the Opposition to
oppose the government and, of course, the media are responsible to inform the
public about the government activities. Is performing their duties an ‘attack’?
Well maybe from the viewpoint of a secretive and undemocratic government.
Certainly oppressive governments do not want opposition and public examination
of their performance.
It seems
to me the Conservative Party may be raising money to obfuscate the activities
of the government by weakening the Opposition and the media. This cannot be a
valid reason to raise money between elections. When they call you, please think
about it.
Well, now you have said it all. Therefore, what is the solution?
ReplyDeleteIn a sense, the governments mandate must change before the next election, or a different government should be established.
I believe that many more people are beginning to realize that Canada's economy is in dire straits — something that employed workers have been blind to, or ignorant of, before now. Therefore, items such as, immigration, austerity taxation measures, foreign affairs, and defence spending, were forgotten as long as there was food on the table. But, eventually, corruption and CEO's incomes will bubble to the surface again (The 1%), and the the 31.9% could become familiar with the ballot box again. In addition, we must remember that many of the 22% could never conscientiously have voted for the NDP ... and the Liberals were almost absent.
It is not difficult to predict a reduction in NDP members next time, and a stronger Liberal membership. But this will depend, as far as I am concerned, on maintaining a strong (If not stronger) immigration policy (Not so much reducing immigration but increasing deportations), reversing the foreign policy related to Israel, and being more pragmatic in defence purchases, e.g., the F-35.
Now, you may vote for me ... but I'll need a CEO's salary.
That being said Bernie, what party would nominate you as a candidate. No party as far as I know reflects your sentiments.
ReplyDeleteWhen I said that it will depend "on maintaining a strong (If not stronger) immigration policy ... and being more pragmatic in defence purchases, e.g., the F-35", I didn't believe, for a moment, that they would listen.
ReplyDeleteNow, let's become more focussed on the 'flea in the ointment' ... Israel.