October 09, 2011
Apparently, Air Canada's CUPE-affiliated flight attendants are.
Anyone who hasn't been living under a rock over the past few months would know that there has been increasing tension between Air Canada and its flight attendants. The issues at hand (wages, pensions, crew rest and working conditions) haven't changed one iota since the federal government threatened back to work legislation if those CUPE members decided to strike.
Now, all formalities aside, I have to say that I do sympathize with the flight attendants. All they've done over the past several years is take concession upon concession "on the chin" in order to maintain Air Canada's status as a viable, solvent company. That said, I cannot imagine the federal government would ever "let" the flight attendants fully strike.
Simply put...Air Canada and its operations are too important and vital to be disrupted by labour tension. The question at hand is then: do Air Canada's flight attendants want to continue taking concessions (or, should I say, not gaining back anything they've lost) or be faced with the ever looming possibility that their jobs just simply won't be there one day.
Understandably, in this time of economic upheaval, it is rather difficult for Air Canada to keep itself "in the black" and satisfy its employees demands. On the part of the company, I can say that demanding its employees to work harder for longer while threatening their pensions and whatever else they hold dear is bad strategy, what other choice have the executives had?
With increasing fuel prices and ever increasing general maintenance costs, Air Canada has been faced with a double-edged sword. Either they can hike up fares above their already ridiculously high rates or they can try to find ways to keep costs down. Without the choice of whether to fuel and maintain its fleet or not, the company hasn't had a choice.
If fares go up much more, people will start booking with other airlines that can offer comparable services for less money (WestJet comes to mind). On that note, its a fact that Air Canada has already lost significant market share to WestJet since that company was founded in 1996.
On the flip side, if the company continues to pressure its employees into giving more concessions, it will be faced with operations-halting strike mandates on a quarterly basis. Given that, the position of the federal government is quite clear: strike and face back-to-work legislation.
So what are these average workers to do?
Well, if I were one of them, I would be simply counting my blessings that I indeed have a well-paying job with a reputable company. Those who are overly concerned should look for employment elsewhere. Because as all of us know, you cannot "bite the hand that feeds you" too many times before the day comes that you'll wake up without a job at all.
So, to the Air Canada flight attendants out there...bite the bullet and accept the fact that desperate times call for desperate measures.
September 21, 2011
Let me just get started by saying that I included a link to a very recent Globe & Mail article that will give anyone interested more details about the legislation going forward.
In my most humble opinion, I have to take notice that the Steven Harper's Conservative majority government is finally beginning to "stretch its legs."
After receiving a majority mandate from the Canadian people on May 2nd 2011, the flow of politics in Ottawa has been "business-as-usual", with a few exceptions of course. But now that Fall Session 2011 has begun, we'll begin to see things happen at a much more feverish pace.
The "Omnibus Crime Bill" is actually simply a combination of nine separate bills compiled into one, 102-page document that aims to fulfil the majority of the tough-on-crime promises made by the Conservatives during the election campaign earlier this year.
It includes everything from imposing mandatory minimum sentences for a variety of different crimes, to creating a new process which victim of terrorism in this country can seek redress.
But enough about the particulars. I included the link to the article (click on the title of this entry) for the exact purpose of giving my readers an opportunity to look into the issue further, whether you agree with it or not.
I believe that the Omnibus Crime legislation that the Conservatives are tabling this Fall session will do exactly what Harper and the Party want it to do: reduce so-called "loopholes" in the Canadian justice system.
With the particulars aside, and considering how this legislation is going to look to the average Canadian, one comes to a predictable conclusion. This legislation, though its rumoured is going to be very expensive to implement, won't really be noticed by Canadians for the most part.
What I mean to say is that the vast majority of Canadians, those law-abiding, work during the week, middle class folks won't really pay much attention to the particulars of the legislation...including the cost. It is something that will be phased in over a period of years (especially when one considers the massive retrofit project going on in the prison system), thus will not inspire too much controversy from those who don't have the time or energy to follow every last happening on Parliament Hill.
The Opposition, naturally, vehemently opposes the new legislation. It is, for lack of a better phrase, their job to oppose it, regardless of what it entails. When one considers that, and adds the fact that the Conservative Party was returned to power with a majority mandate, one begins to be able to see how the outcome will unfold.
Steven Harper and the Conservative Party promised that the bill(s) would be passed within 100 sitting days of the beginning of the Fall session on Parliament Hill. This looming deadline is something the Opposition isn't comfortable with letting the Conservatives accomplish (at least on time). This is the part that makes me smile as a Conservative myself. Sure, the Opposition doesn't want the Conservatives to be successful, but when push comes to shove, Harper, with the backing of the majority of the seats in the House of Commons, will triumph. To that there is no doubt.
The various pieces of legislation aimed at fighting crime have been circulating around Parliament Hill since midway though the past decade, when Steven Harper formed his first minority government. Each and every time the Conservatives thought they were in a position to get the legislation passed, the Opposition would band together and crush it before it could leave the House of Commons. Now, they won't be able to do that.
The Conservative Party made it an election promise that if they were returned to power with a majority mandate, they would push through all of the crime bills that had failed previously. The Canadian people they proceeded to give them that exact majority mandate. So, from a purely analytical perspective, the Conservatives are only holding up their side of the bargain.
That is not to say that Conservatives will be idle whatsoever in the coming years that they'll enjoy majority power in the House of Commons. It is my sincere hope that they begin to get this country back on track. Even if the deficit is not completely tamed by the time another election hits us in 2015, I have a solid feeling that it'll be on its way to being conquered once again.
If the Tories can keep it together long enough to get that done then they will be known as the party that was able to spend enough money (go into enough debt) to steer the country through the "great repression" intact and flourishing.
Stephen Harper's Conservatives are only just beginning to flex their political muscle, so to speak. Here's to hoping that when all is said and done and when it comes time for my evaluation of their term in a majority position, I feel as if my vote on May 2nd 2011 counted for something.
Over and out,
September 09, 2011
If the term "history repeats itself" hasn't rung true so many times before, I would have to say that Dalton McGuinty has a chance convincing Ontarians that this time he means to keep his word. But, unfortunately for our embattled Premier, the term holds fast throughout the world and throughout time.
Mr. McGuinty does have quite the battle on his hands, this we know for certain. Although his government has implemented many good things and have steered Ontario through what could have become a total economic disaster, he still has personally lied to each and every Ontarian he "represents". Now, here is the time-honoured irony: politicians lie. They have to.
Granted, almost all politicians have to lie in order to get things to work in their favour. If a politician had to walk around all day telling the truth, two things would happen. Firstly, his government would never get anything done to save their lives; and second, he would very likely be voted out of office (or never be voted in, in the first place) for not "convincing the people he's worth their vote."
The problem that Mr. McGuinty faces, arguably first and foremost, is that he is not in a position to be voted back into office for a third term as Premier of Ontario. His government is in the truly unique Ontarian position of trying their best not to be voted OUT of power. This conundrum is something that seemingly happens more often than not in Canadian politics, especially at the provincial (with the most emphasis on Ontario) level.
One could say that its because of the diversity of population and political views in this province; that the Liberals and the Progressive Conservatives each get a turn vying for power (with the odd inclusion of the NDP...yes I am talking to you Mr. Rae). Whatever reason it is, it seems that since the mid-1980s, Ontario has had this constant swing of power from the left to the right and back again that has had the effect of stalemating Queen's Park over the long term. It is yet to be seen whether Ontario will once again vote to keep a party in power for more than two terms at a stretch.
Despite the position McGuinty and his Liberals are in (and the ranting I've heard from political opponents [and friends!] of mine), that of being able to break into the third term and to continue to foster their political views with the immense economic and social power this province has, I have to vehemently disagree with him/them.
I have to admit that there are some things the McGuinty government has done that have impressed me, like the adoption of renewable power sources regardless of the cost, for example. But the scandals that have rocked his government are something I cannot ignore. And this opinion is not formed just out of my partisan alignment, but out of genuine concern for the direction of the province. There is no reason why Tim Hudak and the Progressive Conservatives cannot continue the implementation of renewable power sources, although I am simply not sure if it is something that will be on their agenda in the coming years if they win on October 6. That, I would have to say is the only aspect of the Liberal platform that I will dearly miss if the PCs win and abandon it altogether.
We, as the people of Ontario, have to start thinking longer-term. It is fine to switch up the political landscape every eight years or so, but if we don't have a set of values that supersedes partisanship, then we will continue to be a province that flops around like a fish in shallow water.
Let's hope Tim Hudak and the PCs win on October 6th, and further let's hope that they steer the government away from scandal and corruption and into the greener pastures of yesteryear.
Dalton McGuinty cannot escape the history he has made. Tim Hudak has yet to make any.
Vote Progressive Conservative, and give him a chance to do just that.
August 31, 2011
Its upon us once again folks! Its provincial election time!
There are 107 seats up for grabs on October 6th, 2011; here's to hoping that 54+ of those seats are won by the Ontario Progressive Conservatives. But, in all honesty I must get down to the business of this blog entry...
Does the Ontario PC Party actually stand a chance of winning the October 6th election here in Ontario? My answer is quite frank: yes. BUT what they have to do is focus on diversifying their message. The Liberals haven't even released their campaign platform as of yet (I believe they have plans to do just after Labour Day), so whatever the PC's have said haven't even been countered by the Liberal strategists yet.
If Tim Hudak continues to stick solely to the "change...because we all don't want Dalton back in power" message for the rest of the campaign, I fear the Liberals might just win another term...yes, I said it.
The message has to be diversified, and here are some reasons why:
1) Change-book, despite being a great platform introduction, does have the limitations of being exactly what it is: a platform. Many people (even, sadly, potential voters) will not take the time to read it and get an idea of what the Progressive Conservatives are trying to accomplish this election.
2) The Liberal Party of Ontario have built themselves a political machine that must not be underestimated. I'm saying this simply as a result of the evidence that is available to everyone. They will not go down without a fight, and to leave the PC message to voters as simple as "Dalton's bad" is not going to cut it.
3) There are many voters in this province that have political opinions closely matched by those of the Ontario PC Party, but do not believe their PC candidate can win in their riding, thus they either vote for another candidate or abstain from voting altogether. As fellow Progressive Conservatives, we have to begin to change this perception. If the past municipal and federal elections should be of any example, its that blue is a colour thats now perfectly acceptable in "the 416."
I could go on and mention a few more vague reasons why the message should be diversified, but I'll stop myself from making this entry too long. My primary reason for writing this was to express my feelings towards the direction Tim Hudak should take our Party in the coming weeks; such that we have an excellent opportunity to form the next government of the Province of Ontario.
The time is now.
We won't get a better opportunity than this.
Queen's Park shall be blue once again.
All my very best,
August 29, 2011
If I may firstly offer my apologies to those who have ever read this blog, my reasons for not posting in quite some time are various. But, I shall not bore you with them, just know that now that the summer is winding down and we're coming into another provincial election here in Ontario, I shall be writing much more often. But, I digress...
Jack Layton, the former leader of the New Democratic Party of Canada died on Monday, August 22nd, 2011 in the early morning hours. About a week ago from when I am writing this entry.
I figured I would let things return to a near state of normalcy, if you will, before writing this entry. As many in Canada do know, there has been much media coverage of the death of Mr. Layton, and a grieving period that can still be considered happening.
Our Prime Minister, the Honourable Mr. Stephen Harper, offered the MP for Trinity-Spadina, Olivia Chow, the option of a state funeral for her late husband, to which she agreed and accepted.
The offering by the Prime Minister of a state funeral to the Leader of the Official Opposition was unprecedented, and something Canadians should be very happy the Prime Minister chose to do.
The funeral itself, which occurred at Roy Thomson Hall in downtown Toronto (the corner of King St. and Simcoe St., for those who would like to look it up) drew an immense crowd from all over the country.
Inside the venue itself was assigned seating for about 1800 invitees and about 600 members of the general public.
I was one of those 600 (and still am wearing the bracelet to prove it).
After arriving at the lineup shortly after midnight on Saturday morning (August 27, 2011), my girlfriend (also a member of both the Conservative Party of Canada and the Ontario Progressive Conservatives) and I took our places as numbers 100 and 101 in the lineup that was already in place. We waited all night, until 8:00am that morning to receive the coveted bracelets guaranteeing our seats inside Roy Thomson Hall for the proceedings that afternoon.
The funeral itself was an excellent "Celebration of Life" for Jack Layton. There were many very emotional moments and others where a standing ovation dominated the venue. The sheer intensity of the entire experience is something I will surely never forget. In my opinion, I cannot think of a better farewell to as great a man and as excellent a politician as Mr. Layton.
Before I finish this entry, I feel the need to explain my attendance to those who may read this and wonder why I would bother.
You may see it in the light that I attended the funeral of a political opponent, a man whose shared next to no political ideals with me personally, and a man who I made a concerted effort to keep from office in this past election.
But I beg you to see my choice as I see it. I attended the funeral of a man who was loved by so many Canadians and respected by so many politicians. He was a man of principle and most certainly a man of his word. He held to his ideals no matter what others tried to throw at him or how hard they tried to tear them down. He spoke up for those that needed to be spoken up for, and above all he dedicated the majority of his life to the service of fellow Canadians, to a broader public that desperately needed a man such as Jack.
He gave people hope.
Not many politicians have that to their credit.
"My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world."
-- Jack Layton, 1950-2011
April 28, 2011
(title serves as a link to The Globe and Mail article entitled "Harper ramps up attacks on NDP, warns against 'smiles and snake oil'")
If you would have asked me a month ago how I thought the current election would pan out, I certainly wouldn't have even bothered mentioning the potential of the NDP. Up until two weeks ago, well, there wasn't any.
But recent polling numbers have put the NDP substantially ahead of even, now hold your breath folks, the LIBERALS. I can't say that I'm unhappy with the wind being pulled from Ignatieff's sails. What can I say? I just don't like the man.
Alas, I digress. The point of this entry is to talk about the reality the pollsters are portraying. And that reality is that the NDP have a real chance to form the official opposition to a Harper majority (or, minority) government. This revelation is quite disturbing to a right-winger like myself. I always thought of Layton's NDP as the party that would continue to form up the rear in Canadian politics, always behind the Liberals. But for a solid number of Canadians to move even farther left than the "weeble-wobble" Liberals (Mackenzie King reference for those who don't know) is a shocker in the rawest form.
I'm eagerly anticipating the results of this election and I most certainly will be staying up until everything is reported Monday night.
It is my hope that non-partisan Canadians don't get clouded by the actions of the once-Liberal supporters jumping their sinking ship and being pulled from the water by Jack Layton's NDP. It is my wish that anyone who is uncertain will look to the party platforms themselves and see which party has the more realistic and implementable plan to move Canada forward from here.
Tell me: is my bias that obvious?
The Conservative Party of Canada is the only party that can realistically get things to where they need to be in Ottawa. I'm dearly grasping to the hope that Canadians come to this realization before its too late and Tuesday morning dawns with results we will all regret.
The Conservatives need a majority.
It is the only way to ensure Canada doesn't move three steps backward before we've even had the chance to move one step forward.
On Monday, May 2nd 2011:
April 11, 2011
(title acts as a link to the Toronto Sun article entitled "Iggy caught double-talking" posted on April 11th 2011)
Well folks, another milestone has been reached by Michael Ignatieff. Apparently he no longer believes his past fits into his new "Canadian" Liberal persona.
So he is re-writing it.
Surprised? I didn't think so.
Mr. Ignatieff has been quoted saying that he has never voted outside of this great country of ours. Unfortunately his efforts to identify himself with Canadians is seriously backfiring. The Toronto Sun has found quotes from the man himself saying that he planned to vote for John Kerry in the 2004 American presidential election. Because he is a "dedicated American democrat".
Now, one could say that these allegations are only well...allegations. And they'd be right. But more proof was uncovered when looking at his political allegiances while he was living in Britain. The electoral records of the United Kingdom show that Michael Ignatieff voted for the Labour-Democrats in 1997. He even states this as a fact in a 1998 book he co-wrote with a Brit by the name of Sean Neeson.
The controversy here is quite obvious, I'd say. But I'll go ahead and delve into myself:
I would like to advise you that trying to re-write your own history is not only a poor choice, it is also dishonest and quite deceitful. If not to who you represent but to your family and your roots. But above all, LYING to Canadians is simply unacceptable.
Canadians cannot afford to elect any leader that has proven he is perfectly fine with double-talking and outright lying about who he is. The problem with being in the spotlight is that everything you've ever done will be uncovered by those intent on knowing the truth. The ideal outcome of this is that your story and theirs MATCH.
Unfortunately for you, Michael...this is not the case. If you stop lying now, you may just save yourself from be hurriedly ousted from the position of Liberal leader when you are disgraced in the upcoming Federal election.
All the best,
And that is my take on the situation. Not only has the Conservative Party orchestrated a character assassination of Ignatieff, what they miss he himself makes up for plainly lying to those he relies on to vote for him.
The political strategy, or whatever you'd like to call it, employed by the Liberals under Ignatieff already has more holes then a a fresh piece of Swiss cheese, and he certainly isn't helping their cause.
That is not how you win elections in this country.
Proof of that will be seen through the evening of May 2nd, broadcast across the country.
Thanks, Iggy for helping us Conservatives. When this is all over, I'm sure I'll accept a handshake from you...as you get on the plane for Cambridge, Massachusetts.
April 03, 2011
(title acts as link to the full Ottawa Sun article, including embedded video)
The Liberal candidate for the Ottawa-area riding of Nepean-Carleton woke up to a shocker on the morning of April 3rd.
More than 100 of his election signs had been spray-painted with messages of hate and in many cases, featured crosshairs over his picture.
I won't go into detail about the story, because I've linked the title to the Ottawa Sun article on the same matter that should serve to better explain the situation. What I will go into detail about is my feelings on the matter.
Whoever executed this effort of widespread vandalism should be ashamed of themselves. Despite the fact that I am a supporter of the Conservative Party and there is no doubt that whoever did this certainly won't be voting Liberal, there is a line that has been crossed in these acts. Purposely going throughout the riding (most definitely at night) and making the effort to deface more than one-hundred signs is not only illegal, it is shameful.
It is my hope that whoever did this will either get caught and be forced to understand the disgusting nature of their actions. Politics certainly is cut-throat in many ways, but NONE of these are meant to be taken LITERALLY. Metaphorically speaking, the message portrayed on the defaced signs is the goal of any political party in opposition to another. But this isn't done by vandalizing. Its done through structured and informed debate!
Acts like these should be viciously discouraged.
They lend a bad image to Canadian politics, and the perpetrators should realize this and apologize by turning themselves in.
Keeping any political battle clean is of absolute necessity.
I could go on, but I'll cut it short and let you, the readers, formulate your own opinions on the matter.
But before I go...
VANDALISM is ILLEGAL!
Don't do it.
March 29, 2011
The broadcast consortium responsible for the upcoming televised leaders debate has decided to exclude Elizabeth May of the Green Party.
During the last Federal election May participated in the debates, inspiring substantial controversy around the topic of who should be invited to the televised event.
In the opinion of the consortium this time around, only the leaders of those parties who have elected representation in Parliament will be invited to participate. Despite the frustrated reaction from May herself, I truly believe that the consortium is completely in the right.
Elizabeth May has herself failed to become an MP and her party has never elected a single representative to the House of Commons. That right there is grounds enough to be excluded from any kind of nationwide debate. Its my opinion that the Green Party should focus on building its grassroots movement instead of attempting to jump into the "big game" dominated by the Conservatives, Liberals, NDP and Bloc Quebecois. It seems that in the opinion of Canadians, there isn't any room for the Green Party.
Idealism just doesn't work for Canadians when there are so many more pressing issues that must be addressed. If the Greens expect to have a chance in upcoming elections, they need to broaden their appeal to the average Canadian.
Will they re-evaluate their position and consider changing some aspects of their idealistic platform to appeal more widely to the nation?
Anything in that ballpark has yet to be seen.
What's your opinion?
(title acts as a link to the Globe & Mail website article "We don't have fixed election dates, and can't")
Right above this text is an image of a flag.
Certainly not the Canadian flag.
Absolutely the American flag.
There is one thing that a lot of Canadians desire: fixed election dates. They have the potential to give Canadian politics a measure of predictability; certainly something that we do not have now.
Well that's all warm and fuzzy, but the question is what would we have to sacrifice in order to get this long sought after stability?
The answer: everything.
The way the Canadian Parliamentary system functions is such that our legislative and executive branches of government are meshed together. Our Prime Minister (whoever it may be) is only our Prime Minister because he is elected within his political party to lead it. If that political party gains the largest number of seats in the House of Commons after any election, it makes the leader of the party the leader of Canada.
That is simply not how it works in the United States, a nation that DOES indeed have fixed election dates. There, the political system is much more compartmentalized, meaning that elections for different aspects of government come at different times and are, in some cases, executed differently.
What I'm trying to get at is that for those Canadians who do understand and embrace our Parliamentary system of governance, fixed elections dates aren't even on their radar. Part of the excitement of Canadian politics is that when we're in a minority situation, everything can change in a matter of days.
This coming election is expected to cost $300 million taxpayers dollars, and while that may sting in the minds of many Canadians, seeing as how its the fourth election in seven years, it is the price we must pay for who we are: a modern, Constitutional monarchy with a Parliamentary system.
Our checks and balances are better then those of the United States, and despite the very recent fall of the Conservative minority government, our system offers a piece of mind for the future that is unrivalled in the world.
Except maybe by the United Kingdom.
March 28, 2011
(title acts as a direct link to the cbc.ca vote compass quiz)
Well folks, its Election time again!
Over the course of the next five weeks I will be posting as much as I possibly can. The reason its been so long since my last post is simple: schoolwork! This time of the year is what many consider "crunch-time", and I apologize to those who read this! I'll try to not let this happen again!
But, I digress. So with the passing of a motion of non-confidence, the Opposition Parties in the House of Commons have once again brought down the minority Conservative government. Prime Minister Stephen Harper asked for the dissolution of Parliament this past Saturday, March 26 2011. The Election date has been set for Monday, May 2 2011, exactly five weeks to the day from now.
The reason I'm posting this and also the reason why my first post in regards to the upcoming Federal election isn't about the parties or the inherent politics themselves, is because I want to spread the word about the new test the CBC has formulated. The questions in the test itself are quite detailed and they concern issues that are more-or-less common knowledge. That, in my opinion, makes the test valid and its my view that the results are quite valuable.
So, what are you waiting for?
Go to the website and do the test!
Feel free to post the results of your test in the comments section at the end of this entry!
All the best,
February 13, 2011
(title acts as a link to an article published by CTV on the ctvtoronto.ca website on Sunday, February 13th 2011)
Hm, this topic has certainly been a catalyst for debate in Ontario in the past, and to my knowledge hasn't really come up in recent years. The reason for this is definitely because of the neutral stance of Ontario's public school system, especially when it comes to religious denomination.
In the article, Premier Dalton McGuinty clearly stated that he did not want to take a stand on the issue, and for once in quite a long time, I really think our Premier got his position right. Opting not to take a stance (by quoting Bill Davis I might add) was a smart move because of the immensely sensitive nature of the issue itself.
In my opinion, Bibles should not be allowed in the classrooms of Ontario's public school system. The Bible, like every other religious text takes its own stand on the issue of religion and would thus violate the inclusivity and neutrality of the public school system in this province. I know it may strike some as odd that a conservative blogger might say something like this, but I will "stick to my guns" in the sense that I am quite happy with the system in place in Ontario's public schools.
Bringing the Bible back into the Ontario classroom is a horrendous idea in this day and age. The demographic in this province has changed (some say for the better, some say for the worse) and re-admitting religious influence into a school system that is no longer homogenous is simply a bad idea. It would start an avalanche of petitioning to allow texts from every religion represented in Ontario to be available for children. The focus on learning and the development of children into modern, productive and successful adults would be put in jeopardy if these debates were to rage.
The Ontario public school system functions well in its current state, and despite recent controversies regarding other aspects and programs, should be left as it is...to provide our children with the best education that is possible; all the while offering said education to as many children as possible.
The Bible was removed from our public schools with the intention of offering the inclusivity necessary to allow every Ontarian to succeed and it should not be brought back. No matter what.
February 09, 2011
(title acts as a link to an article published by the Globe and Mail on February 9th 2011)
With all of the federal election speculation floating around lately, this article posted by the Globe and Mail should come as no surprise to anyone following the political scene as of late. What the article is saying is pretty much what any politically-savvy Canadian already knows: that the odds point to the exact same minority government situation coming out of the next federal election, if indeed it happens in the near future.
Canadians, unfortunately, do not seem ready to embrace one particular ideology over another, lately. Many have pointed this out as a positive because it doesn't allow one particular party to run away with their ideas and drastically change the country.
Personally, I disagree with this. The entire foundation of Canadian politics is to allow voters to speak for who they want to run the country and let them run the country, for lack of better words. The political stalemate that has gripped Ottawa since the forming of Harper's first minority government has been, in a word, appalling.
Many people have criticized Harper for not being able to get many things done in the past five years he's held the position of Prime Minister. I don't think there is any doubt as to the cause of this stagnation: being in a minority position just doesn't allow for that kind of behaviour. With the Liberals, NDP and Bloc resorting to their coaliton "trump card" every single time the government tries to accomplish anything, Harper just doesn't have any space to manoeuvre, so to speak.
For a first post on this new blog, I'll keep this one short and end it here. I suppose its just food for thought: why has the federal government been more or less stagnant in the eyes of many Canadians?
Its time to break ourselves out of the cesspool of political stagnation and give the Conservatives the majority they need to prove themselves to this nation.