Canadawide

Conservatvie MP Ted White is Bashed by own Staffer

"Dear Anna Marie [Senior Editor North Shore News]

As discussed, I'm forwarding to you a copy of an email message which I received from Mr.Ted White yesterday afternoon. The email contains an attachment which outlines threatened legal action against the NS News based on what I consider to be a convoluted interpretation of the Elections Act and a bullying demand for additional coverage.

Firstly, I wish to acknowledge that I've been a member of the Conservative Party for many years. My family ancestors who arrived inCanada over 180 years ago, were also Conservatives. And for a brief time in the late 70's I actually worked in the House of Commons for a Conservative Member of Parliament and later a Minister.

The attached letter only served to remind me of my growing disaffection for our incumbent Member of Parliament. For some time now, it's been my strong belief that Mr. White's election was never so much a measure of his distinction, or his yet unproven ability to represent this riding, as it was a reflection on us, as a constituency which elected him. How did this happen? For example, when did we advocate for a 'Star Chamber' process where all Federal initiatives within our riding would be scrutinized by unelected and personally appointed representatives of Mr. White? Who are these people that would deny this riding's federally mandated share of community investments including Film Industry Tax Credits, youth job training and other life skills investment, for example?

When is the last time Mr. White ever visited a local Community Centre? I've been involved in many aspects of our community over the last several years, and have constantly had to deal with the 'White Manifesto' of denying any support for public investment in our community....of having to live with the "Scarlet Letter" branding of representing a dreaded 'Special Interest Group'. That our community has achieved so much in the last 10 years is a testament to the will and ingenuity of the hundreds of other community volunteers who continue to prevail despite the lack of any meaningful support from Mr. White.

As a neo Conservative Mr. White denies the historical Canadian legacy of community engagement, irregardless of the constitutional responsibility In the preparation of your usual election 'Profile Grid' you were absolutely correct in your notation that the incumbent did not respond to the question about achievements. His claim that he directed your attention to an existing or upcoming pamphlet was wrong and a lame attempt to either (a) overcome a dumb decision caused by laziness, or (b) an irrational and arrogant response from an incumbent MP with the most pedestrian, lackluster and insignificant achievements to show for a 10 year member of Parliament representing this constituency.

Just as he now defiantly declares that you have presented him with the 'straw that broke the camel's back', I too have come to a turning point. As a long time Conservative I no longer respect his constant denial of involvement in our local affairs, because of jurisdictional 'boundaries'. Using Mr. White's logic, the Provinces would be the sole players in the delivery of health care in Canada. I no longer respect Mr. White's obsession with his own variant of 'direct democracy', supported by tele-votes and unaccountable and unscrutinized polls, where majority rules dominate and Charter minority rights and freedoms become indefensible. Is this really how we want our fellow citizens across the country to know us? How can anyone forget his use of the 'Liberal biased North Shore News' when it came to his paranoia of losing his own nomination to members of the Iranian community, who he claimed had 'hijacked' the nomination process.

No, Mr. White has lost more than my respect. He's lost my vote. He claims that elections are simple sales campaigns......a competition of marketing ideas selling political 'products'. If this is the case consider me 'unsold', and I consider his banal analogies of our electoral process insulting. Being a Member of Parliament should be about leadership and humility. it should be about what you stand FOR.....not what you're constantly against. Trying to bully the North Shore News to do his bidding in the late stages of a campaign is nonsense. And on election day, this Tory will be voting for Mr. Don Bell.

Regards
Wayne Hunter"

Vote With Your Head and Not with Your Heart

There is no chance of Liberal majority. The Conservatives and Liberals are tied. 32% each. The NDP have no hope in hell of forming a majority. They are at 17%. The best case scenario now, is a Liberal NDP minority government. For this reason, I ask supporters of both parties to vote strategically; the Liberals and NDP are essentially one party now. If you are in a riding where the only parties capable of winning are Liberal and conservative, vote Liberal. If, on the other hand, you are in a riding where the only parties capable of winning are NDP and conservative, vote NDP. Finally, if you are in a riding where the only parties capable of winning are Liberal and NDP, vote with your heart.

NDP concerns about Paul Martin are ill-placed. The Liberals will not be able to pass anything nasty, otherwise the NDP will vote against it and the government will collapse. Furthermore, the argument that ever vote for the NDP will bring them more Federal money is equally ill placed. If the conservatives get in they said they would scrap such a system. It would be a shame if a small number of voters from either party cast a vote that gives a Conservative member a win in a two horse race. Do not cast a Nader vote.

Cheryl Gallant

From the Liberal Party website "Controversial Alliance Conservative MP has once again made national news for her irresponsible comments regarding Bill C-250 hate propaganda legislation:

“The danger in having sexual orientation just listed, that encompasses for example pedophiles. I believe that the caucus as a whole would like to see it repealed.” (Cheryl Gallant, CTV News, June 5, 2004)

In a tax-payer funded brochure Gallant sent to her constituents shortly before the election campaign she also attacked Bill C-250 incredibly claiming under the law the Bible would “be outlawed by the Liberal government.”

This is just the latest in a long list of bizarre policy positions Gallant has taken in her short political career:

· Gallant went way over the top in describing the firearms registry:

"Are we going to go like lambs to the gas chamber as the Chretien Liberals strip away our rights?" (Cheryl Gallant, National Post, November 21, 2000)

· The horse-racing industry was furious after Gallant accused the industry of links with organized crime during a speech in the House of Commons:

“Unfortunately, the horse racing industry is often penetrated by organized crime.'' (Cheryl Gallant, Canadian Press, August 29, 2003)

She opposed Liberal government plans to extend parental leave to one year”

“At first glance to women of pregnancy prone age, this proposal may seem to be one of the best things about Canada. However, even with the current six-month leave, a functioning uterus can be an impediment to getting a job in the first place. Were it not for the idiocy of the Liberals contemplating the extrapolation spousal benefits to roommates, it could be argued that parental leave discriminates against infertile couples -- but that may lead to the risks of extending parental leave payments to those who merely go through the motions!” (Cheryl Gallant, Fredericton Daily Gleaner, October 28, 1999)

· On Stockwell Day:

"We are on a mission to save Canada. …Stockwell Day has proven himself a man who will not recant his beliefs even under the most extreme pressure." (Cheryl Gallant, Toronto Star, February 16, 2002)"

Ted White North Vancouver

I posted the following comment on elections board. Ted White: "At least 40% of all the Iranians living there are refugee claimants. Most of them are bogus." Someone else described White's comment as "racist" and said the Iranian community would not be voting for Ted White.

This appeared on the board today. "Mr. Ted White has threatened legal action against Election Prediction Project for publishing submissions that asserted certain opinion on Mr. White’s comment on the Iranian Community. While we disagree with Mr. White’s (and his lawyer’s) point that those comment constitute defamation, as a volunteer-run project, we are in no position to fight a legal case. Thus, upon consideration, we hava decided to comply to Mr. White demand, and hereby APOLOGIZE, and remove all those submissions. We would state without reservation that Election Prediction Project does not have or care to have a position regarding whether Mr. White is a racist.

We would like to publish the following excerpt from Hansard of the House of Commons. March 31, 2003 - Mr. Ted White (North Vancouver, Canadian Alliance): "My riding has the largest Iranian population in the country. At least 40% of all the Iranians living there are refugee claimants. Most of them are bogus." "They see all these, and I am sorry to use the word, scumbags who come in using our refugee laws and claiming refugee status just so they can be criminals here."

I found an old North Shore News article about the 1997 race. Ted White did not want his past discussed back then either. "Kinsella ... challenged White to a debate: "If he's (White) such a believer in free speech and free debate, why don't we have a debate about his involvement in a party that refers to people from the Third World as 'degenerates'.

Reached at his campaign headquarters and told of Kinsella's debate challenge, White said that his involvement in the WCC was known to North Vancouver voters prior to the last federal election.

'The people of North Vancouver have already heard the debate and they've made it quite clear which side they're on,' White said.

'I'd see a debate as a complete waste of time.'"

Stephen Harper's Abortion Red Herring.

Harper threw out a Red herring the other day and a lazy and docile press took the bait. Specifically, he said the conservatives "will not be bringing in abortion legislation. We will not be sponsoring an abortion referendum." Of course, he would never hold a referendum on abortion; they will loose hands down. As for his suggestion that he would not be tabling legislation, this is just a smoke screen too. Harper said he would allow a free vote of MPs on a private member's bill; such a bill is all but guaranteed. This is the first thing should have caught the media's eye. The second one I already mentioned. He suggested that he would leave it up to the provinces to decide. I hope this caught the eye of female voters in Alberta.

Getting the Youth to Vote

I think the solution is not making political platforms more attractive to young people per say. Anyway, this is very hard to do and still run an effective election campaign. There are some very large generational gaps opening up (e.g., gay marriage) and in so long as the under 45 crowd shows up in far fewer numbers than the over 45 crowd, the political parties have no choice but to pander to that older demographic. What I think needs to be changed is the answers people give to the
question “why vote”? Indeed, I do not think that we as a society have come up with compelling response to great numbers of young people who say that they find none of the parties appealing and so they are not voting. I think the only answer we can give is this: it is not so much who you vote for but rather that you vote. If young people start voting in greater numbers, the parties will start building the platforms around them.

Some people how they are tired of all the candidates being 55 year old plus white males. Although I must second this, my response is, well, get off your ass. While the problem is, of course, wrapped in low voting turnouts among the younger generation, this problem is far less intractable. Young people should take a page from the book of many minority groups, join parties on mass and nominate the candidate of their choosing.

Grandparent Government

According to stats Canada there are 2.62 million Canadians aged 18 to 24. There are 9.09 million Canadians aged 25 to 44. There are 7.29 million Canadians between 45 and 64. Finally there are 3.88 million seniors. 25.4 per cent of 18 to 24 years old vote. 54.2 percent of 25 to 44 year olds vote. 70.9 percent of 45 to 64 years vote. Lastly, 82 percent of seniors vote. If these groups vote in the same ratio this time around, the numbers break down like this: 8.35 million voters will be 45 and older and 5.60 million will be 44 and younger. What this means is that once again the parties will be offering up a Grandparent government. After all, that is where the votes are.

Harper let the provinces decide if they want abortion?

It is time people and the press start reading between the lines. A reporter yesterday asked specifically Harper how he would respond if one of his MPs brought forward a private members' bill to cut funding for abortion. He responded by saying "I would oppose that. I think health-care money should go to the provinces for them to decide how to run a health care system.” The reporter did not think to ask the obvious follow up question. Namely, would he oppose a province (e.g. Alberta) that wanted to ban abortions?

Now, taken alone perhaps Merrifield’s comment does not mean all that much (Merrifield said that women must undergo counciling before undering an abortion), but given Merrifield’s past it should be setting off all kinds of alarm bells. After all, as health critic, he seems well positioned to become health minister if the conservatives, god forbid, were to win.

Indeed, it should not surprise anyone that Merrifield is staunchly “pro life”. He had this to say about stem cell research. “We asked to be shown why stem cells were needed. We asked why as a nation we should go to the place where human life would be destroyed for the sake of others. The science is not there. Scientists said they were needed because stem cells from embryos are more elastic and therefore they might be capable of being triggered to grow into any organ of the body. I challenged them by asking them to show us in animal embryos where that was a possibility. If it is a possibility then maybe we should go there even though it would be difficult for many Canadians to destroy human life for the sake of others.

Perhaps there would be some scientific validity to it if we want to change the ethic from where we protect human life from beginning to end, which has been a fundamental principle for Canadians for as long as Canada has been a nation. The legislation would change that ethic to “for the greater good of society”, which would change the ethic from protecting human life regardless of the cost. We should do the math and see whether we should proceed or not, and if it is for the greater good rather than the negative, then perhaps the math will be the guiding principle. If this becomes just about math, then we are on a very slippery slope in this nation. Not only will we be destroying human embryos, but as health dollars become precious in the upcoming years, we will be going to the place where we will perhaps be making decisions as to whether or not grandma should have hip surgery or heart surgery, or whether we look after comatose patients or the physically and mentally challenged individuals in our society.”

Rob Merrifield and a Lazy and Biased Press

I am tired of hearing how this or that conservative member undermined Harper and how Harper had to bring them back into line. It was Harper that appointed Larry Spencer Family Issues Critic. (A conservative former Baptist minister, Spencer said homosexuality should be illegal.) It was Harper that appointed Scott Reid, who authored a book on how bilingualism should be scaled back, language critic. (Reid resigned after he said blingualism should be scaled back.) It was also Harper who named Robert Merrifield health critic. Just two weeks ago Merrifield said this about Ottawa's decision to make the morning after pill available without a prescription: "This drug is 50 times as potent as a birth control pill, and we're treating it like an aspirin.”

An FDA panel looked into the how safe the drug was. All 28 members concluded that it posed no threat whatsoever to a women’s health. Subsequently, the panel voted 23-4 to make the drug available over the counter. The Bush administration overturned the panel’s decision. A day later, two panel members were invited to speak on the News Hour with Jim Lehrer. One of the guests opposed making the drug available other supported the decision. The proponent said that the drug was literally saver than Aspirin; her opponent conceded this.

Merrifield ludicrous attempt paint the drug as dangerous was particularly funny for in that same interview he said that "They [The liberals] laid it out there knowing it's a volatile issue, and they wanted someone to fall into a trap and to say something controversial” Guess what Merrifield the trap worked and it was you that they got.