National Post: “MPs fear uproar if Atlantic deal dies with government”

17 Comments

1. I find it amusing that our two Conservative MPs are doing exactly what they came down on John Efford for. They’re working for their party, instead of working for their constituants.

   Comment by Kenny — 5/17/2005 @ 6:56 am

2. I find it difficult that anyone in their right mind would want to see Paul Martin and his Liberal band of liars not be defeated on Thursday. It sickens me to no end to see Mr. Williams kissing Martin’s backside over a deal that will also pass under a Conservative government. Also consider the fact that the Liberal band of stalling jellyfish will not separate the Accord from the Budget. Why not shoot your mouths off about our Liberal MPs who would not support yesterday’s motion to sever the Accord from the Budget?

   Just my two cents….

   Comment by Evan — 5/17/2005 @ 7:20 am

3. I find it difficult that anyone in their right mind would look at history and say, with absolute conviction, “let’s go with a promise from a politician running for office” over a real piece of 2$ billion legislation.

   This part of the campaign effort is a reaction to what’s before us: the practical fact that if the budget goes down, the Atlantic Accord deal becomes only a promise. Couple this with the fact that an election can be called later this summer, and I believe any sensible person would vote for the deal in front of them now. The risk isn’t justified. We can’t predict the political landscape after an election: why would anyone presume to know that the Accord is safe? Even the MPs are struggling with that. Spare me absolute certainties born from party loyalty alone.

   Comment by Kevin — 5/17/2005 @ 7:37 am

4. Kevin, you are so right. Try to keep your position above the venom spouted by persons who can’t see beyond one party or another. The focus here must continue to be the accord not party politics. Hang in there.

   Comment by Jeremiah — 5/17/2005 @ 7:45 am

5. From listening to VOCM open line, the majority of Newfoundlanders want this budget approved. And with good reason.

   I don’t believe for one minute that the Accord will go through with a new government. And if the Bloc Quebecois become the official opposition (and they very well might), you can DEFINATELY cross the Atlantic Accord off the ‘to do’ list. If the Quebecois had their way they’d claim Labrador and her resources for themselves and set the island portion of the province adrift in the Atlantic.

   They’ve raped Churchill Falls for 55 years and the last thing any Newfoundlander wants to do is give them the opportunity to take our oil income away from us too. And they will, if they can.

   We absolutely do not trust the Conservatives and especially the Bloc. Why is it okay for the Bloc t o look out for their own best interests, but when -we- do it, we’re being greedy?

   Our natural resources aren’t ours anymore. Our fishery is gone, mismanaged and basically handed on a silver platter to the Europeans. Our Hydro power is sold for pennies on the dollar to Quebec. The oil money is the only thing we have left going for us… and people seem surprised that we don’t want to let it slip through our fingers.

   We KNOW the liberals are slime for not allowing the Accord to be seperated from the budget. It’s a bargaining chip for the liberals so they have a chance cling to power for a little bit longer. You’d have to be blind not to see that. The liberals CAN be voted out another time. The Atlantic Accord is a one shot deal, because we don’t trust anyone else to give it to us.

   You have to be from here to understand, I guess. That’s all I can say.

   Comment by paula — 5/17/2005 @ 8:30 am

6. I must say I find this distressing. It is a simple exercise to click your mouse button on an automated email without giving any thought to the issue, based on a feeling or snippits of information here and there. Making an informed decision requires effort, thought and reflection.

   In today’s fast paced world, sound bites and a columist’s view, are gospel.

   Over the last year Harper has tried to get a fair deal for Newfoundland and Labrador and Nova Scotia. It has always been his belief all Provinces owned the resources within their borders, and that the equalization formula for wealth transfer between provinces was flawed and set out to fix the way our country works.

   Harper, Doyle, Hearn and the CPC have fought hard for Newfoundland and Labrador to get what is rightfully theirs, including trying to get this deal fast-tracked after Martin took his sweet time signing the deal. You remember the flag incident? I am just curious what makes you think Harper or the CPC have any plans to blow off Newfoundland after they are elected? Show me anything that would indicate this…any proof at all. Something like, “I plan to screw Newfoundland once elected.”

   Martin is the guy in power.(Debatable now since the majority of the House voted in effect that they had lost CONFIDENCE in his leadership through constitutional convention, not once but 6 times, and that is the ONLY thing in our Westminster system that gives him that right to govern.)

   I have said this before, the guy you should be pressuring to get this deal passed isn’t Doyle or Hearn, it is Martin.

   But hey don’t take my word for it, making an informed decision requires effort, thought and reflection.

   http://www.parl.gc.ca/Search/Advanced.asp?Language=E&Parl=38&Ses=1&search_term=Atlantic%20Accord

   Below is a link Hansard’s oral Question Period, with Harper, Doyle and Hearn’s stand on The Atlantic Accord and Martin’s response during the 38th Parliament.

   http://tinyurl.com/cocuq

   Ill informed people will make ill informed decisions.

   Comment by Darrin — 5/17/2005 @ 10:04 am

7. Throughout the discussions, re the Atlantic Accord (not on this site) but by the Politicians involved, many have stated that the deal is retroactive as of the promise in June 04 or as of the signing in Feb.05, others have said something to the effect, whats the difference its retroactive anyway. Have not heard the word retroactivity mentioned during this last squabble, was this just a lot more hot air emanating from the Politians or what? just a question.

   Comment by Otto M. Verge — 5/17/2005 @ 10:49 am

8. Darrin:

   It’s certainly possible many people on the fairdeal bandwagon hit a button because it was easy. But, I suspect, because of a slow start and not the tsunami of letters I expected initially, that many more considered before sending off their letters. I know I did. It took me two days’ worth of considering before I decided that, despite all my reservations about keeping the Liberals, I would participate in a pressure campaign. And perhaps, by your standards I’m ill informed, but I can guarantee you I’ve read a great deal about the Accord, and the fallout of an early election, a Conservative goverment, the Gomery inquiry and the implications of keeping the enemy we know. I tried to consider facts versus spin - looked at records rather than listened to pundits. And after all that, I made my decision, not only to hit the easy button on the fairdeal website, but to write letters and e-mail Conservative MPs in other areas to ask them not to force an early election, and support a budget forged with considerable input from all parties. I want the best for my province and this region. But I also want the best for my country.

   I think the campaign is being undertaken with more thought than you give partipants credit for.

   Comment by Debra — 5/17/2005 @ 11:22 am

9. Ironic. When Hearn and Doyle both voted against the extension of marriage rights to same-sex couples, I believe the rationale was that they were reflecting the views of their consituents. I would strongly doubt that they received this many letters from the residents of either riding instructing them to vote in that way.

   So if the will of their consituents was the right course of action then (even though most polls show that a slight majority of residents of the city of St. John’s support same sex marriage) how is it that it isn’t the right course of action on the budget vote?

   Comment by Mark — 5/17/2005 @ 12:36 pm

10. Otto Verge (above) raises a very good point.

    Easiest to address this by first defining what the Accord really is. It is NOT, as most people seem to believe, a deal giving the provinces more oil revenue, as the federal government does not and never has collected any oil revenue.

    This deal, to be accurate, is a one-off Equalization entitlement, which means it is a transfer from Ottawa to the provincial treasury. They have front-end loaded it so that the province gets a lot as an up front lump sum transfer. If this money, as earmarked in the budget, is not transferred within a certain time frame, then it must go towards the debt. That is not a Liberal position or a Conservative position, it’s the law of the land. Monies not spent by the end of the fiscal year go to the debt.

    So even if you believe the Conservatives, or the NDP for that matter or anyone else who gets a turn at running this sometimes dysfunctional yet charming country of ours in saying that they will honour the commitment, the Premier’s fear seems to be the loss of that massive amount of money from the province’s treasury for one whole fiscal year. 2 billion dollars, whether invested or applied to the province’s debt can either save or earn the province untold millions in interest.

    So even if the “deal” were “retroactive” who wants to miss out on a year’s worth of money and a year’s worth on interest? Certainly not a premier about to hit the mid-point of a four year mandate.

    If I were the Premier I’d be anxious too.

    Comment by Mark — 5/17/2005 @ 12:45 pm

11. A bird in the hand applies here. The Accord is historic and vital to Newfoundland, and should be protected while we know it will become a reality. The claims of global corruption in the Liberal party may or may not be true, and I am willing to wait for Gomery to report. To wait for an election, with an enactment of the accord in the interim makes the most sense. The righteous rush to topple the government on the part of the conservatives and Bloc is as self serving as the Liberals desire to stay in power, so what is the difference between the parties warring in Parliament? Lest we forget, Brian Mulroney, a conservative, led one of the most corrupt governments in the history of Canada and doubled the national debt. The $100,000,000 misuse of funds being investigated by Gomery pales in face of Mulroney’s 250 billion addition to the national debt when he promised to reduce it. So self righteous pronouncements by the new conservatives seem inappropriate. We should look out for our interests for a change. We have that opportunity, and Newfoundland conservative MP’s should be reminded of where their loyalties should lie. If the government should fall, and the accord with it, then the Newfoundland conservative MP’s who voted non confidence in the budget should be removed from office in the up coming election.

    Comment by Rob — 5/17/2005 @ 2:45 pm

12. I find Darrin’s comments above both presumtuous and insulting. Does he presume to suggest that any thinking, intelligent individual could only support the Conservative position on this issue. This issue is not about one political party or another, it is about Newfoundland, and which course of action would be in its best interest at the present time.

    Do I sense a Conservative bias in Darrin’s post.

    I gave my response only after personal reflection on the issue, and resent Darrin’s position that only ill informed lazy people, would encourage Mr. Doyle and Mr. Hearn to vote to pass this budget.

    A suggestion such as put forth by Darrin denigrates Newfoundlanders as a group and is unacceptable.

    To respond in kind, are Darrin’s comments an example of Conservative thinking at its finest.

    Comment by Max — 5/17/2005 @ 4:53 pm

13. It appears that those of you who oppose defeating the Liberal Government, may possibly get your wish if the count in the house goes to a tie.

    I really do hope that you also get the money and everything you are counting on Martin delivering if he does win the confidence vote.

    Time will tell; someone, perhaps it was your Premier said that you are counting on the money by the end of June. If that does not come to pass, will you still want to keep the Liberals in power?

    Comment by Julie — 5/17/2005 @ 5:05 pm

14. Darrin: “Ill informed people will make ill informed decisions.”

    That’s a blanket statement if I ever heard one.

    This campaign has generated, at rough count, about 65,000 email letters to elected officials since last January. Given that our society has a free press and a remarkably educated population, I’d call the chances slim that most of these people qualify as “ill-informed", whatever the hell that means. I imagine it means something like “does not agree with Darrin".

    Disagreement is not just cause for condemnation.

    Comment by Kevin — 5/17/2005 @ 5:34 pm

15. Pass the Budget, get the $2.8 billion and then let’s elect Belinda Stronach QUEEN of Canada! Had she won the PC leadership, those of us terrified by what Harper may do to our country, probably would have listened to her. Furthermore, she wouldn’t be pushing so hard for the reigns of the country right now had she won. She’d have recommended a Justice to assist Justice Gomery and then (as with most fair non-partisan tribunals) the two Justices would have chosen a third Justice (or dare I say it, an educated layperson) between them to insure fair, unbiased, fully-informed and ethical conclusions were arrived at.

    She wants to keep Canada in one large piece instead of what could be known as Harpers’ – Kanata[’s] – land[s] of lodge[s], cabin[s]… home[s] (1) splintered by the bad timing of an overzealous wannabe, with aspirations way bigger than his abilities.

    The Peter Principal run amuck, yet once again, in Canadian politics! Surprise…

    This is our country from coast to coast, stop pitting red against blue and vice-a-versa. They are mostly all self serving (for either cash or legacy) systemically enabled abusers. Well, we are getting to the point where we punch back but not until we get our share out of the accounts. ($2.8+ billion to be exact. We cannot let these abusers take that away from us!) And after we get our just desserts, then we’ll wait for Justice Gomery to start draining THEIR back accounts to repay the stolen, fraudulently-used, sponsorship money, plus the tidy little sum required to pay off Canada’s bill for the Gomery Report!

    Liberal’s get out your cheque books cuz Belinda’s the only one who won’t have to pay! Because, in my honest opinion, YOU ALL KNEW!!! Every last one of you, and it will come out in a book very soon! Who’s going to race to restore the appearance of social responsibility and print their tell-all book first? There’s lots of money in it… (bait, bait.)

    Fred from CBS

    PS - Darrin you hack, was Belinda ill-informed? Here’s hoping you were informed and entertained…

    (1) http://www.kanatavillage.net/

    Comment by Fred Harris — 5/18/2005 @ 1:14 am

16. Kevin,

    What part of my statement about ill informed people making ill informed decisions do you not understand?
    Of course it is a blanket statement.
    Setting aside this particular issue regarding the Accord… a judge doesn’t make a decision only listening to the prosecutor’s arguements without hearing what the defense has to say. One doesn’t make decisions based only on part of the story or half truths, does one?
    Going back to your example of your $10000 Honda, what if you were not told that the car did not have an engine?

    Would you not agree that getting only part of the salesman’s story would make you ill informed? And as such you would make an ill informed decision about buying said car??
    That was my point.

    I have read many posts here claiming they know what Harper would or would not do. Based on what? A feeling? Good grief….

    There was no condemnation in my post. I was merely pointing people to sources of information to balance out their decision, as I said it is much easier to spend 10 seconds clicking the link as opposed to 10 hours researching the issue. Gathering your information and then emailing is a much different, than just emailing. Right? RIGHT??

    I love how people say all of these emails are from your constituencies. Give me a break people.

    Thousands from across this country outside of Newfoundland and Labrador and Nova Scotia were part or your last campaign to get this fair deal, and to even SUGGEST that every email in this current campaign comes only from your 2 provinces is disingenious at best.

    You have the addresses by province of every partipant in this latest campaign. Prove to everyone that this is the case, that the majority
    are from only your Province. As for me being a partisan Conservative, it has less to do with my point of view than does my belief that Harper’s way of handling the inequities of equalization in this country is a hell of a lot better than the way Martin has handled it over the last year.

    Can I be any clearer?

    Thanks.

    Comment by Darrin — 5/18/2005 @ 1:29 am

17. darrin:

    If I were you, I would only suggest that I was better informed than others if that was the case.

    I can back up every comment I can make about Harper policies and Conservatives polcies with quotes and facts.

    I doubt you can do the same.

    The overwhelming majority of e-mails in ther FD campaign came from the two eastern-most provinces. As I can gather from some of the posts here in the past few days, some of the others who joined in did so for purely partisan reasons - to screw Liberals - since they ought to have knwon their party’s position was substantially differne than what this campain was about.

    Gimme break Darrin. I put you in that category.

    Disingenuous is another word you shouldn’t toss around without some reasonable fear of having it tossed back at you and, apparently, rightly so.

    Comment by Ed Hollett — 5/18/2005 @ 6:05 am

Leave a comment

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.