Toronto Sun | Sunshine list swells under Liberals Toronto Sun The number of Ontario public servants making $100,000 a year or more has grown by 727% since the Liberals gained government in 2003. It is now routine to see teachers, police officers, firefighters, nurses, paramedics, school caretaking team leaders ... |
Read more from the original source:
Sunshine list swells under Liberals - Toronto Sun
In opposition as in government, Justin Trudeau has never quite managed to command the attention of the House in the way that he often does in an unscripted format. It may be that he never bothered to try, writes Chantal Hbert. ( Sean Kilpatrick / THE CANADIAN PRESS file photo )
Justin Trudeau does not much like the House of Commons and the feeling is mutual.
This is not a statement on the people who sit alongside or across from the prime minister, or the latters feelings toward them.
A majority of MPs owe their seats to Trudeaus campaign skills and they are grateful to him for that. Most opposition members do not wake up at night to hate the current prime minister. On both sides of the Commons, some save their most negative feelings for colleagues of their own party.
No, this is really about the venue itself a stage for which Trudeaus affection seems inversely proportional to his love of rallies, parades of all kinds and even the most contrarian of town halls.
In opposition as in government, Trudeau has never quite managed to command the attention of the House in the way that he often does in an unscripted format. It may be that he never bothered to try.
Even in his early days as opposition leader, he did not have a lot of time for the mini-dramas that tend to grip the attention of Parliament Hill insiders.
While Thomas Mulcair systematically dominated question period, and earned kudos for his performance, Trudeau was content to achieve the required minimum to stay on the radar.
Today it is Mulcair who on the way out and Trudeau who is half way into a majority mandate. His House performance in his new role as prime minister has been consistent with his daily performances as opposition leader.
What agitates the Commons is often unrelated to what drives the mood of the country. Thats a disconnect that political leaders (and those who are paid to report on them) lose sight of at their own peril. But Trudeau is at risk of going to the other extreme.
Possibly because he earned poor marks for his spotty attendance in the House over his first year in office the prime minister has been more assiduous in question period since the new year. He is often there in body only.
Trudeau rarely engages with the opposition in a meaningful way. For the most part he speaks past his critics arguments. The attentive hearing he affords those who challenge him in town halls does not extend to opposition parliamentarians. When not on his feet, Trudeau can be the picture of adolescent boredom.
Trudeau leads by example. His attitude has filtered down the Liberal benches. They are filled with rookies who won seats for the first time in 2015. One of them Bardish Chagger serves as the governments house leader. She has perfected the art of delivering unhelpful answers with a smile.
Another is Finance Minister Bill Morneau. If cardboard cut-outs could speak he might have one take his place in question period. On budget day he told me he feels that what happens in the Commons is for the most part destined to never make it out of the bubble. Like his leader he does not see the point of putting a lot of energy on his parliamentary game.
All of which brings one to the wide-ranging House reforms the Liberals have recently brought forward under the guise of what they call a discussion paper.
For the four opposition parties the proposals add up to a heavy-handed bid to erode their already limited capacity to hold a majority government to account.
There is a bit of verbal inflation at play here. Some of the government proposals used to be championed by Conservative MP Michael Chong as part of a bid to breathe more life in Canadas parliamentary democracy.
But overall the spirit that seems to have presided over the drafting of the Liberal wish list is a desire to make the House function in a more convenient manner for the government. In opposition, Trudeau would have fought many of the proposals tooth and nail.
The Liberals already enjoy the powers of a majority on the basis of a minority of the votes cast in the last election. It does not help that they apparently feel no obligation to seek if not unanimity at least a multi-party consensus before changing the way the House operates.
Only a governing party that is tone-deaf to the mood of the House would have initiated such a sensitive discussion in this way so soon after having led the opposition down the garden path on electoral reform. In this instance the tone-deafness is deliberate.
Chantal Hbert is a national affairs writer. Her column appears Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday
The Toronto Star and thestar.com, each property of Toronto Star Newspapers Limited, One Yonge Street, 4th Floor, Toronto, ON, M5E1E6. You can unsubscribe at any time. Please contact us or see our privacy policy for more information.
More here:
Trudeau, Liberals tone-deaf to House of Commons: Hbert - Toronto Star
Toronto Sun | Liberals would lose official party status if election held today: Poll Toronto Sun The Kathleen Wynne Liberals would face the humiliating prospect of losing official party status if an election were held now, a new Forum poll projects. The Liberals are sitting at 19% support, polling third behind the PCs and NDP in the 416 area, and ... Wynne Liberals could lose official party status if election held today: poll Liberals could win as few as seven seats in 2018 election: poll Liberals spent taxes on partisan ads: BC NDP |
View original post here:
Liberals would lose official party status if election held today: Poll - Toronto Sun
Late Tuesday,The Washington Post's Ashley Parker published a story about Vice President Mike Pence's relationship with his wife. By Thursday morning, thousands of liberals had attacked Pence as a sexist bigot for simple steps he reportedly takes to honor his wife and avoid any appearance of infidelity in their marriage.
"This is a medieval vision of every man as an incorrigible adulterer or rapist, lest he be restrained by his wife's presence by his side," tweeted Arnand Giridharidas, an author who used to write forThe New York Times.
What is Mike Pence's alleged "medieval vision"? As Parker reported, "In 2002, Mike Pence told The Hill that he never eats alone with a woman other than his wife and that he won't attend events featuring alcohol without her by his side, either."
Perhaps, following the major scandal of President Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky, Pence decided to avoid any appearance of impropriety or infidelity, no matter how seemingly insignificant. Mike Pence had served in Congress for years, and had major political ambitions. He did end up becoming governor of Indiana and vice president to boot.
Pence and his wife (not to mention his campaign manager or chief of staff) may have set ground rules to make certain no enterprising photographer could snap a picture intended as blackmail later on or a juicy story on a left-wing website. Stranger things have happened.
But Social Justice Warriors on Twitter had a different interpretation Pence's personal self-limitations are ... the right-wing version of Sharia law!
"Sincere question," tweeted left-wing journalist and cancer survivor Xeni Jardin. "How is this different from extreme repressive interpretations of Islam ('Sharia Law!') mocked by people like Mike Pence."
Answering Miss Jardin is rather easy Pence's self-limitations are not intended to be normative for anyone besides Mike Pence. They are not imposed by a particular religion or denomination, but are politically understandable (if perhaps rather stringent) voluntaryground rules.
But nevermind according to Jardin, Pence's very eyes reveal he's a rapist.
Greg Carlstrom, a Middle East correspondent for theTimes andThe Economist, took up Miss Jardin's Sharia comparison: "Mike Pence sounds a lot like the Muslim Brotherhood officials I've interviewed."
Read the original post:
Liberals Attack Mike Pence for Being Faithful to His Wife - PJ Media
Till 1991, decades of central planning, licence raj and big government had crushed the confidence of Indian youth in their ability to compete globally. Liberalisation changed all that. India integrated into the global economy, started modernising, and its national income shot up. No longer was it necessary to wait for ones relatives settled abroad to bring in tiny blocks of imported cheese. No longer was it necessary to apply for permissions in triplicate to get foreign exchange.
But something was amiss. For whatever reason, no one was stepping forward to claim credit for this Big Bang reform. No leader told us why liberalisation is good. And the many failures of basic governance continued, unabated. Two things stood out in particular: low levels of freedom and high levels of corruption.
Even today, nearly 70 years after independence, India ranks close to the bottom of the world in all global indicators of freedom and justice. And we have a Censor Board, we have laws about matters that should be within the purview of religion, and our governments directly manage or fund religious bodies and events.
As far as corruption is concerned, my stint in the IAS since 1982 showed me that Indias politicians were hopelessly corrupt and that corruption always started from the top. I was getting sick of serving under these despicable leaders.
In 1998 i decided to look for a political solution. Joining mainstream parties was not an option because of their involvement in corruption. What i was looking for was a liberal party that would fight for a small but strong government, for free markets and for equality of opportunity (not equal outcomes). It would form a government that undertakes a limited role of defence, security and justice. Such a government would have very little discretion in regulating peoples social preferences or economic affairs except to the extent they physically harm others. Such a government would never be allowed to use taxpayers money to operate businesses such as Air India or Ashok hotel.
Since the reforms needed for this to happen would require controlling the central government, this party would have to be national (as opposed to regional).
After an initial failed discussion with a few liberals about forming such a party, i resigned from the IAS in 2001 and moved to Australia to learn about modern governance and to continue my search for a liberal party. The key was to find leaders to take this forward. In a book that i wrote in 2008 to outline policies that such a party would implement, i invited liberals to form a team. This team grew bigger and we launched the Swarna Bharat Party in 2013. A huge task lay ahead.
SBP offers the vision of a golden India, an India that would lead the world in freedom and wealth, an India capable of competing with the best in every field. An SBP government would perform core functions (which current governments do not much care for) and leave the people alone to live their lives in a manner consistent with their beliefs (or lack thereof). It goes without saying that an SBP government would treat everyone equally under the law, not divide them on the basis of religion, caste, language or class.
Liberalism is the belief that we are born free and that freedom is the highest value. Liberalism is the idea that the common man is sovereign and the government is our servant. It is the belief that through their own free endeavours the people can achieve material (and for those so inclined, spiritual) prosperity: even greatness. And it is the belief that if anyone is left behind after putting his best foot forward then the government should top up such a persons income and lift him above dire poverty.
SBP is growing steadily. There is a small but growing group of young Indians, widely travelled, who understand that working together to increase liberty is pivotal to Indias success. But what about the other new parties that have found favour with the youth? Unfortunately, despite their good intentions, they are offering old wine (socialism and freebies) in a new bottle. One would hope they examine the proven benefits of liberty and reconsider their by now outdated approach.
Unlike in the UK or in the USA, the idea of liberty is skin deep in India. We have no counterpart of the 1215 Magna Carta or the 1689 Bill of Rights. We fought for independence from foreign rule, not so much to advance our personal economic, political and social liberties. Till today, our countrys conservative and socialist leadership operates on the premise that for Indians liberty does not matter.
The first stage will be to awaken the people. We will need to show them the enormous benefits of liberty and the real solutions to their problems, not the hype of Jan Lokpal or the magic of demonetisation. And it will be good enough initially if those who understand liberty step forward to contest elections. Winning will happen when its time comes.
I invite those interested in good governance to assess SBPs manifesto. Gokhale, Ambedkar and Rajaji were among Indias early liberals. Now it is time for a new generation of liberals to lead.
If this task is undertaken with persistence, the day will come when India votes for a liberal party. And then Indias reform journey and journey to freedom can finally begin.
DISCLAIMER : Views expressed above are the author's own.
Read the original post:
For a liberal India: The country now has its first liberal party, the Swarna Bharat Party - Times of India (blog)