tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941800.post115202401127838309..comments2023-08-20T22:22:17.248-07:00Comments on caterwauls: We told you so ...Caterwaulerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08117645893107625111noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941800.post-1153235642222835912006-07-18T08:14:00.000-07:002006-07-18T08:14:00.000-07:00What were you all expecting from a slimeball like ...What were you all expecting from a slimeball like Emerson?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941800.post-1152549808792722442006-07-10T09:43:00.000-07:002006-07-10T09:43:00.000-07:00curiosity,Your points might be a little idealistic...curiosity,<BR/>Your points might be a little idealistic if not impossible. The deal was NAFTA, and the US has never honoured the intent of NAFTA, starting with the very first company to leave Canada and terminate all it's Canadian employees: Gillette. They simply didn't need to actually BE in Canada when they could ship their product from America, keeping Americans in jobs.<BR/>Weyerheiser closed Canadian lumber mills in order to keep Americans working in Washington State with a steady supply of raw logs. Therefore getting their own 'value added' product to the US market and destroying ours.<BR/>You are right about Canadian MPs with guts. They need to take a stand and be polite but firm with an intent to call an end to the Free Trade Agreement and start from scratch.<BR/>Royal Commissions only amount to friends of friends dipping into taxpayers' money and accomplishing nothing.<BR/>Backbone of a Prime Minister of Canada? I am waiting for that to happen. Sadly the only one close to that was Chretien but he couldn't resist the 'moron' talk.<BR/>Of course the laxity on politicians' part to change anything regarding trade with America is a direct result of American companies doing business in Canada. It is all important, sadly more so than Canada first.<BR/>I say we need to be patriotic even to the extent we are hurt a bit but let our trading partners know that we want a fair deal for Canadians.<BR/>Who will take the lead? It seems none of the current players?<BR/>Hmmm.Caterwaulerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08117645893107625111noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941800.post-1152489235564187472006-07-09T16:53:00.000-07:002006-07-09T16:53:00.000-07:00The alternative to the craven New Tory party's cap...The alternative to the craven New Tory party's capitulation to Bush on the softwood issue is very simple.<BR/><BR/>The NDP, Bloc and Liberals have the majority votes in Parliament. They could agree to pass legislation which would direct the government to table the following revised proposal with the Bush government:<BR/><BR/>1. Term - The term should be ten years, with no early termination possible unless both sides agree, and the Canadian government is to agree only if a majority of MPs through a free vote (on a non-party basis) in Parliament for an earlier renewal.<BR/><BR/>2. Automatic renewals - Renewal period should be for automatic five year periods, unless notice of termination is given by either side 12 months before the end of a term (and the Government of Canada would need a majority vote of MPs to give such notice, through a free non-party vote).<BR/><BR/>3. Payment - Full payment of the $5 billion (yes, that is right, the amount owed under the applicable laws), plus interest on overdue amounts at 5% p.a..<BR/><BR/>4. No litigation - American lumber companies to agree not to litigate the settlement.<BR/><BR/>5. Reaffirmation of NAFTA - American government to reaffirm its commitment to the NAFTA treaty.<BR/><BR/>6. Failure of US to agree - <BR/><BR/>a. Should the US government not agree to this proposal, then Canada to continue with litigation. <BR/><BR/>b. Canadian government to fund such litigation by Canadian companies. <BR/><BR/>c. If the USA takes steps to penalize lumber imports from Canada due to failure to reach agreement as above, the Canadian government is to appoint a Royal Commission with a mandate to review what steps should be taken by the Canadian government to uphold the NAFTA, including whether to terminate the NAFTA (what is the point of an agreement with a government which does not honour its commitments?).<BR/><BR/>d. Royal Commission to report by February 28 2007.<BR/><BR/>e. Canadian government to review the findings of the Royal Commission and take such steps as the majority of MPs agree to through a free non-party vote.<BR/><BR/>f. Canadian government would use taxpayers money to assist Canadian companies who needed assistance due to the non-payment by the Americans of the debt they are refusing to pay.<BR/><BR/>So, you see: the answer is really simple. All you need is a bit of backbone as the Prime Minister of a country which entered into a treaty with another government in full expectation that the other government would honour its obligations, and not welsh when it suited it.<BR/><BR/>Our MPs would be in a position where they could reflect the views of their various constituents, as the later votes would be a non-party vote on the issues set out above.<BR/><BR/>Who will take the lead to stand up for Canada?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941800.post-1152469014888020782006-07-09T11:16:00.000-07:002006-07-09T11:16:00.000-07:00Didn't you know Emerson speaks only to himself, th...Didn't you know Emerson speaks only to himself, then answers.He is such a loser.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941800.post-1152204033681051572006-07-06T09:40:00.000-07:002006-07-06T09:40:00.000-07:00The deal Harper has cobbled together in his rush t...The deal Harper has cobbled together in his rush to curry favour with Bush is an appalling one, for the reasons mentioned, and others.<BR/><BR/>When Harper takes this deal to Parliament, it deserves to be altered. The Bloc, NDP and Liberals have the majority of the seats in Parliament, and it is the duty of their MPs to act in the interests of Canada and their constituents.<BR/><BR/>If the Liberals allow this deal to go through (either by ineptitude – such as the last budget debacle, or disorganization – due to the leadership campaign absorbing so much of their efforts), then they deserve to be punished by the voters come the next election.<BR/><BR/>If course, if by their conduct Liberal MPs (especially the contenders for leadership of the party) show that their failure to stand up to Harper on yet another rushed exercise, springs from cowardice, then the voters should take note of this, and not grant them a government minority or majority until they acquire some intestinal fortitude.<BR/><BR/>This softwood deal is more of a test of the calibre of the Liberal leadership contenders, than of Harper. We have measured Harper, and he is wanting.<BR/><BR/>Now let us measure the Liberal Party, and see if they deserve the votes of Canadians.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941800.post-1152046308371279132006-07-04T13:51:00.000-07:002006-07-04T13:51:00.000-07:00We knew it right? We all knew that David Emerson w...We knew it right? We all knew that David Emerson would screw up as soon as he had the first chance. He is only interested in himself. Anyone with integrity would have stood up for Canada. <BR/>And if Harper told him to sign it because he was meeting Bush next week, he is just as bad! What's the matter? Is he afraid to face Bush and demand fair play?<BR/>Yes he is.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941800.post-1152037138187537932006-07-04T11:18:00.000-07:002006-07-04T11:18:00.000-07:00how are the conservatives going to dress this one ...how are the conservatives going to dress this one up? We won every court battle in world trade and nafta. we needed to have the guts to just stop sending our raw logs to america. when are canadians going to smarten up and start rebelling? dump these guys! I'd sooner have the old liberals back whio the us didn't like. I'll go back to calling them morons any day instead of selling out to secret ego shit for emersan.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8941800.post-1152030096583138702006-07-04T09:21:00.000-07:002006-07-04T09:21:00.000-07:00Well cater, what did you expect from a man who scr...Well cater, what did you expect from a man who screwed his party for his own glory.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com