Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Canadian Political Free-for-All -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DeplorableIrredeemableRedneck who wrote (3439)	12/27/2003 12:07:29 PM
From: Cogito Ergo Sum	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 37256

Didn't we import ours from them ?

To: DeplorableIrredeemableRedneck who wrote (3439)	12/28/2003 8:13:28 PM
From: Threshold	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 37256

Nothing the US administration does surprises me anymore. Maybe the animal did originate in Canada, but that doesn't prove it got mad cow in Canada. This incident has brought out many facts that the meat industry, in the US and Canada, has fought to suppress for a long time. It's up to the public now. They either eat the meat and support the current system, or they don't and it changes. They only test 20,000 cattle per year in the US, and have refused to release the results for the past 6 months. If they don't like the results from only 20K animals, then ones imagination should be sparked a little. There are millions of cattle in the US and only a small percentage are fed naturally. If you look at this administration's credibility with regard to public health announcements, it's gotta be close to zero after they came out and said the air around ground zero was safe to breathe.

To: DeplorableIrredeemableRedneck who wrote (3439)	1/7/2004 9:15:38 AM
From: DeplorableIrredeemableRedneck	Respond to of 37256

Ottawa hinting at gas-tax retreat Two Toronto MPs point to 'intellectual problems' with plan Anne Dawson, Chief Political Correspondent, with files from Siri Agrell, National Post CanWest News Service, with files from the National Post Wednesday, January 07, 2004 OTTAWA - Senior Liberal MPs say Paul Martin's proposal to hand over a portion of federal gas-tax revenues to municipalities is too expensive. An opposition MP said the MPs are floating a trial balloon on the Prime Minister's behalf. Toronto Liberal MPs John Godfrey and John McKay said sharing Ottawa's $4.8-billion would be a huge cost to the federal treasury at a time when there is not a lot of extra money to spare. "There are some intellectual problems with it. You go through this whole drill of isolating out your gas tax and diverting it away from the general revenues and putting it into what? Is it a free-standing infrastructure program [for cities] which is continuously replenished by the gas tax? In [that] case, why even bother going through the exercise," said Mr. McKay, Parliamentary Secretary to the Finance Minister. "I take the Prime Minister at his word when he says it's a new deal for cities. I just don't know that this is the best way to go." Mr. Godfrey, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister with special emphasis on cities, said it may simply take more time than initially thought to fulfill Mr. Martin's promise. He said there is a fear that if the plan is not well thought out, the provinces will simply claw back the money. "There may be other alternatives which will get the job done and may be easier to implement. Right now we're at the exploration stage," said Mr. Godfrey, who is travelling the country to meet with mayors about this issue. "We need to show some sign of good faith and indeed some money in the short term. We've got to do something ... the gas tax if necessary, but not necessarily the gas tax." For Toronto, the loss of federal gas-tax money follows a decision by Dalton McGuinty, the Liberal Premier, to renege on his plan to share 2 cents a litre of provincial gas-tax revenues with municipalities. Alliance MP Monte Solberg suggested yesterday the Liberals' criticism of the gas tax might have been made at Mr. Martin's behest. "I think it would be one way for him to weasel his way out of a promise," Mr. Solberg said. "This may be two MPs doing his bidding after he's realized it's not a promise he's going to be able to fulfill." Mr. Solberg said the Martin government might also be reluctant to commit a large amount of money to something that will bring it little political glory. "It's something that will be expensive for them and won't bring them any credit because it will ultimately go through the province," he said. "I think if Paul Martin can't deliver on this, he's going to have to explain how we can fix cities that are crumbling at a time when there are no other solutions on the table." Mr. McKay said Ralph Goodale, the Finance Minister, will lay out a grim economic picture of Canada's finances when the caucus kicks off a two-day retreat today. He is expected to say the fiscal situation has not improved since last November's economic update that pared the surplus to the bone. Although the government expects a $2.3-billion surplus in 2003-2004, $2-billion of that will be transferred to the provinces for health care, leaving only $300-million for other programs. "The biggest challenge is not only scaling back the public's expectations to suit the cloth of the financial realities, but scaling back caucus expectations as well," Mr. McKay said. The Federation of Canadian Municipalities has asked that one cent of every litre's worth of gas and diesel tax collected by Ottawa -- or $615-million a year -- be given to municipalities for infrastructure programs. Jack Layton, the NDP Leader and a former Toronto councillor and one-time president of the FCM, has accused Mr. Martin of stalling. He said the Prime Minister, who campaigned extensively during the Liberal leadership race on a "new deal" for cities that specifically touted the gas tax, should have been ready to roll out his plan immediately upon his coronation last month. © National Post 2004 canada.com