Sleveen Institute to Baird: Your plan is a cash grab from taxpayers

And I am not impressed.

Mr Baird has said that Dions carbon budget is a cash grab Notice just saying cash grab and not whose cash he is referring to. Apparently Baird thinks its okay to blow our cash but hands off of industry's.

The liberal plan requires that POLLUTER PAY whereas the conservative plan is to make TAXPAYERS PAY money to industries that are posting multiple billion dollar profits.

Why should my tax dollars go to an industry in which I am not employed, own no stocks in, and goes against all my principles? I think more people should be asking why its okay for Canada's "New Government" to hand over cash to an industry posting profits that many countries have never had in their coffers?

If I were to go and but a pair of jeans, should I be expected to send a cheque to the clothing company to subsidize the cost of cleaning up the left over denim? Of course not, its part of the price of doing business. Then why is it ok for big oil to increase cancer levels, destroy the landscape and pump an obscene amount of pollution into our air and then expect money from our pockets to clean up the mess left by their bad business model? There is absolutely no reason why we should. Which is why people should not support the CPC in the next election.

I find it hilarious that Mr. Baird expects to be taken seriously on the environment. This is the same man that is in cahoots with climate change deniers. His only way of dealing with the issue of the environment is to reissue liberal programs because if you don't believe in climate change, how can you expect to address it? Only one way, use programs from people who do understand it.

This situation is confusing. Since when did the CPC think it was ok to waste taxpayers dollars? I always though they were against this especially with their feigned outrage as of late with anything to do with spending of it. The conservative party of low tax and small government is gone. The conservatives are now blowing our cash on everything they can to buy our votes and promote "an image" of being stewarts of thge environment and and the government itself is as large if not larger than ever.

If you care about your money being wasted on companies who can more than afford to pay for their own mess 5 times over then squarely plant your foot in the ass of your CPC MP/candidate in the next election. Recommend this Post

The truth about the CPC and Mr. Arar. Setting the Record Straight.

So Mr. Harper has decided to make the apology to Mr. Arar a partisan issue. He's blaming the previous government for his detainment and subsequent torture. That is strange. I clearly remember something different coming from one of his faces just 4 years ago.

When Mr. Arar was first detained in 2002, the Conservatives didn’t hesitate to convict Mr. Arar and criticize the previous Liberal government’s attempts to Free him.

During discussion about Mr. Arar in the House of Commons on November 18, 2002, Stephen Harper, then leader of the Canadian Alliance Party, accused then Foreign Affairs Minister Bill Graham of participating “in high-level consultations to defend a suspected terrorist" when Mr. Graham demanded the release of Mr. Arar.

Mr. Harper was later quoted as saying that the Liberal government "has been hitting the snooze button on security matters," implying that the Liberal government should have arrested Mr. Arar instead of the U.S. government.

During the very same Question Period, Diane Ablonczy, Member of Parliament for Calgary--Nose Hill, stated: "Arar was given dual Syrian and Canadian citizenship by the government. It did not pick up on his terrorist links and the U.S. had to clue it in. How is it that the U.S. could uncover this man's background so quickly when the government's screening system failed to find his al-Qaeda links?"

Then, on November 19, 2002, Stockwell Day, also then member of the Canadian Alliance, said in reference to the detention of Mr. Arar: "There is a lack of vigilance in the country on terrorism.” He also called for a Parliamentary inquiry to determine why the Liberals were defending a man suspected of links to al-Qaeda when U.S. officials were accusing him of terrorism charges. (“PM Demands release of Ottawa man,” Ottawa Citizen, July 29, 2003.)

So, lets get our facts straight shall we.

Awfully tough crow to chew on hey Harper, Day, and Ablonczy? Stop propogating your lies. Everyone knows better and they are getting sick of it. Recommend this Post

Comparison of cancelled Liberal Programs to Rebranded Conservative Ones

Keep in mind that the Liberal policies were cancelled because the Conservative Government said they were ineffective without doing an audit. Here's the comparison.

On Wednesday, Jan 17, 2007, the Conservatives announced Research and Development for Clean Air Research.

Conservative Program
$230 Million

Cancelled Liberal Program
$200 Million

---------------------------------------------------------

On Friday, Jan. 19, 2007, the Conservative will announce funding for Renewable Energy Projects.

Conservative Program (Eco Energy Renewable Power Initiative)
$300 Million over 4 Years for Renewable Energy Projects - 4,000 KwH energy

Cancelled Liberal Program
$300 Million over 5 Years for Renewable Energy Projects - 4,500 KwH energy

This represents energy for 1.5 million homes.

---------------------------------------------------------

On Sunday, Jan. 21, 2007, the Conservatives will announce a revamped Energuide under a new name.

Conservative Program
Energuide relaunch under new name (without the final audit which ensures it was done properly)

Liberal Program (announced in 2005 budget)
continued and enhanced Energuide.

---------------------------------------------------------

So...

Exactly how ineffective were the Liberal Programs again?

I don't see really any difference, except nothing was in place for a year.

A year lost.

Can you see much difference? If so, I 'd like to hear about it.

Looks to me that they stole Mr. Dion's ideas. Recommend this Post