Thursday, December 27, 2012


I don't know what to say so I think I'll post Thomas Mulcair's speech in the House of Commons in response to Bill C-45.

Here's a noteworthy excerpt:
 In response to a question, the hon. member for Saint Boniface asked us earlier if we were aware of the global recession. I would remind the member that it was her Minister of Finance who, in the middle of that global crisis in the fall of 2008, denied its existence and refused to take action. Talk about arrogance.

    Their complete lack of priorities means that instead of trimming the fat from government as needed, they are hacking and slashing away with a rusty machete. They have never defined their priorities, quite simply because they are just happy to be in power. They like to be in power, but they do not like to govern. What is the difference? One is the mere fact of occupying the most seats in the House, while the other requires competence in public administration in the interest of Canadians, and not in the interest of their Conservative cronies.

    They do not have any priorities. Their most recent 450-page budget bill affects 64 other bills, including 20 that were not even mentioned in last spring's budget. As we just demonstrated, the Navigable Waters Protection Act, like 19 other acts, is not even mentioned in the budget.

    As I said earlier, it is a question of credibility for the government. Let us look at some of the facts. Let us look at some examples of its public administration and measure them against what should be considered public priorities.

    What could be more important than protecting the health and, indeed, the lives of Canadians? If we look at the whole pyramid of public administration, it ultimately exists to provide one thing: a service to the public. What service could be more important than public protection?

    What is in the budget bill is a $46.6 million cut to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency. That is in here, word for word. The Conservatives talk about things that are not in here, but I am talking about things that are in here, and this is at page 261. It is in there.

    Mr. Brad Butt: Is there a carbon tax in there?

    Hon. Thomas Mulcair: One of the brilliant members of the peanut gallery has just asked a question that I am pleased to respond to. His question was, is there a carbon tax in there? That is interesting, because where we will find a cap and trade system proposed is in the 2008 platform of the Conservative Party.

    An hon. member: Say it isn't so.

    An hon. member: That can't be.

    Mr. Brad Butt: But it's not in that bill.

    Hon. Thomas Mulcair: What is interesting is that in 2008, the Conservative Prime Minister went to the mother of all parliaments and told the parliamentarians there that it was his plan to have a cap and trade system. He even put a price on carbon. He put a $65-a-tonne price on carbon, in front of the parliament.

    Far be it from us to think for a second that in the mother of all parliaments he was telling the mother of all fibs, so let us take him at his word.

    In 2008, it was actually a bit less. However, if we take the figure for 2008 at $65 a tonne, do members know what that equates to in Canada? About $45 billion.
  + -(1635)  

    If we were in the same business as the brilliant and talented member who just spoke from the netherworld of the backbenches of the Conservatives, we would be able to argue that it was a carbon tax of $45 billion. However, that would not be quite true, because it was a cap and trade system and the only way of dealing with greenhouse gases.

    The member for Saint Boniface quoted a newspaper writer who talked about so-called greenhouse gas emissions. That is quite something, because it betrays a fundamental belief of the troglodytes that somehow greenhouse gases are something that one believes in. They do not really exist. There is no such thing really, as far as the Conservatives are concerned, as global warming. It is just something that is being made up to scare people, or in the unforgettable words of the Conservative Prime Minister when he was describing the Kyoto protocol, he said it was something invented “to suck money out of wealth-producing nations”. There was no such thing as global warming, so no action was needed.

    Some hon. members: Hear, hear!

    Mr. Thomas Mulcair: We can hear them, Mr. Speaker. They are saying “Hear, hear”. There we go. They are excited. I would like to know how much greenhouse gas emissions come from suntan salons, for example. Maybe we could reduce those as well.

    The Conservatives' tactics include 450 pages, 64 separate acts, with 20 that were never in the budget, no study, no accountability, no consultation with the Canadians affected and no respect for Canadians, who deserve better.

    The basic job of every person elected to the House is to make sure that public money is being well spent, to make sure legislation is rational and well thought out. That is our job. We have given ourselves institutions to help ourselves do that.
Amazing, isn't it? I've never been a fan of Thomas Mulcair. But that speech does provide a good evisceration of this monstrosity of a bill and that excerpt shows the harperscum as the un-parliamentary imbeciles that they are.


Gloria said...

Harper's worst betrayal of all is? Giving Canada to Communist China, served up on a silver platter. He also gave Red China our resources and resource jobs. China even has the right to sue any Canadians, blocking China's takeover of Canada. Harper needs his asinine omnibus bill shoved up, where the sun doesn't shine.

Harper is a Traitor. Selling our country out to Communist China, is Treason. Meanwhile, Harper is claiming to be a devout Christian. Harper says, he "prey's" every day. "Prey's" on Canadians and Canada, that is. Harper is a Christian right from, the ninth ring of Dante's Inferno.

Troy Thomas said...

It's good. I still ain't voting for the federal NDP, though. I oppose too much of Mulcair's policies.

thwap said...


Yep. harper's a traitor.

Troy Thomas,

I think Mulcair's speech was effective due to how staggeringly awful the proposed legislation is. And the utter buffoonery of the harperscum back-benchers was the shitting icing on the cake.