If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CTV)   Canadian PM to ban corporate and union political donations   (ctv.ca) divider line 71
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

1337 clicks; posted to Main » on 28 Jan 2003 at 1:24 AM (11 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



71 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2003-01-28 01:08:33 AM
Yay! The US should do the same. Lobbying should be illegal. Why is it that you can go to jail for paying a DJ to play your record, but it's perfectly acceptable to pay a senator to pass a bill? The money might be exchanged covertly, like say giving someone a high paying job as a "consultant", but it IS exchanged. When you hear of a lobbyist spending $3mil. a year, it's not being spent on lunch.
 
2003-01-28 01:27:45 AM
sounds like an excellent idea.

is anybody going to disagree here?
 
2003-01-28 01:29:27 AM
DirkValentine, I'm sure someone will come out and cry foul that unions not being allowed to donate, then someone else will claim that our free speech is being taken away.
 
2003-01-28 01:30:28 AM
Does he have the proof he needs?
 
2003-01-28 01:31:19 AM
whoever DOES speak out will be first against the wall when i rule.
 
2003-01-28 01:31:40 AM
I'd give it a "Hero" tag, except for the US flag in the background...
 
2003-01-28 01:32:30 AM
Damn straight! It's about time politicians started doing things for the people that elected them, instead of doing things for whoever donates the most money to their re-election campaign.
 
2003-01-28 01:33:24 AM
This is a great idea and is helping to further cement a unique distinction between Canadian and American politics. Chretien may have his critics, many, many, many critics, but also periodically comes up with something useful.

It's sad when as a Canadian I know more about American politics than I do Canadian after having all this shiat crammed down my throat by the media and intarweb.
 
2003-01-28 01:36:53 AM
Chretien can do whatever he wants now, he has no political support left... his own party has deserted him.

About 10 freakin' years too late, if you ask me.
 
2003-01-28 01:38:07 AM
If that halfwit wants to do something constructive, let him legalize it. Otherwise fark that lame duck.
 
2003-01-28 01:40:19 AM
It'll never pass. He's not doing it because it's the right thing to do, he's doing it to fark over his rival. He's just having a few laughs on the way out.
 
2003-01-28 01:42:12 AM
Hes not doing it to fark his rival (although if you wanted to sound intelligent, youd have pointed out that his rivalry with Martin might cause a tin-foiler to suspect as such) .. hes doing it to create a legacy.

But since we're on the topic of people doing the right thing for the right reasons .. why get down on it?
 
2003-01-28 01:42:54 AM
What a moron. He wants to go down as one of the greatest PM's Canada has seen, but I for one will simply remember him as the biggest walking gong show to reside on Sussex Drive.

And talk about hipocracy... good ol' Jean and his goonies would NEVER take questionable contributions, would they?? GROUPEACTION....
 
2003-01-28 01:44:06 AM
It will pass, the NDP and the Bloc Quebecois have both stated that they will support the draft legislation in it's current form, that gives them more than enough votes to make up for the hypocritical asshats in the Liberal Caucus (Joe Volpe, Nick Discepola, etc) who will vote against the legislation, while claiming they're in favour of more democracy.

Hooray for Chretien having the political wherewithal to make a courageous decision because it's the right thing to do.
 
2003-01-28 01:47:06 AM
Jean Chretien hinted Monday he's prepared to defy critics in his own party

How is this news? He's been running the party as a tin-plated dictator for years now.

At least he's doing something that might benefit me in some way, shape or form. Corporate interests seldom intersect with my own.
 
2003-01-28 01:47:47 AM
The beginning of a brand new day.

Smell that fresh air.
 
2003-01-28 01:48:50 AM
We need a hero tag with the Canadian flag for this one.

"Yay!" for effort.
 
2003-01-28 01:49:18 AM
I like this idea, and I don't care what his motivation behind it is. What I'm wondering is if Paul Martin, once he becomes PM (which he obviously is), will try to repeal it...?
 
2003-01-28 01:51:27 AM
Paul Martin won't be able to repeal it, without admitting to Canadians that he's largely in favour of corporations buying influence within his government.

The only downside to this legislation is that it won't be retroactive, so we will probably never get to see which companies have paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to buy influence in the Paul Martin government during this prolonged leadership campaign.
 
2003-01-28 01:56:52 AM
Of course, this doesn't stop wealthy people from making large personal contributions if they want to, but it's probably still a good idea.

The Liberals are still a bunch of hippocrites though, and Jean is one of the worst. I mean, realistically, they have done exactly what they needed to do politically- gain office on a platform directly attacking the Tories, and then once they had power, immediately assimilate the majority of the Tory platform into their own, and plant their feet firmly in the mushy middle on virtually every issue (until now, when Jean just doesn't give a shiat about anything except his legacy).

It wouldn't bother me so much if so many of my dumbfark Canuck bretheren didn't eat it up like ice cream. Apparently, a farsical government that has been proven time and time again to be incompetent (and at times, borderline corrupt) is a-ok as long as they don't say anything too radical/reactionary.
 
2003-01-28 02:06:11 AM
I like Jean Chretien. I think he's the best Prime Minister we've had since...well since, I've been old enough to vote.
E
 
2003-01-28 02:11:01 AM
Great idea Chretien, except he's been PM for nearly a decade, and only now that he's retiring does he come up with this idea - now that it won't affect HIM!
 
2003-01-28 02:11:24 AM
Politically, he is very smart, but that doesn't mean that he is the man I want leading my country. I'm sick of the Liberals in general, but mostly him and some of his cabinet (Manley and Martin are okay, Copps and Rock are idiots IMO).
 
2003-01-28 02:51:19 AM
at least it's been done somewhere. Too bad it won't happen in the US where the corporations rule our elections as is. 1 man 1 vote is the sentiment our forefathers acknowledged... using money for political speech runs against that ideal.
 
2003-01-28 02:56:00 AM
He's only doing this for one reason -- Paul Martin. Paul Martin is (was) Canada's Finance Minister, and is probably Canada's most popular politician. He's gradually forcing Jean "A proof is a proof once's its proven" Chretien from office. This is incredibly hippocritical for him to be doing this, since he could have done it any time over the past decade. But now that he's leaving, and his chief rival -- from within his own party -- has a huge lead, there's now going to be limits on corporate fundraising, or an outright ban. It makes life harder for Martin...Martin is a weird combination of politician who appeals to most average Canadians while having the respect of Bay Street (that's Canada's Wall Street).
 
2003-01-28 03:15:04 AM
The US might have had a president try this out too, but they're all too afraid to stand up to their own parties who would be screwed by lack of funds from special interest groups. As is John McCain is the only American politician to ever remotely try something like this that I know of.
 
2003-01-28 03:17:51 AM
Lets give credit where credit is due.
Credit is due.

Go on to the next post now.
 
2003-01-28 03:38:28 AM
hmmm. I do recall hearing something about Mr. Martin's campaign being funded by a lot of political donations, and it's no secret that Citizen Chretien has no love for his ex-cabinet minister who is running for the PM spot...

I'm sorry, but he's (Chretien) been too much of a dictator to suddenly grow a conscience now. While many of you feel he deserve credit for this, I withhold it. We've seen this game before.
 
2003-01-28 03:40:31 AM
Ehhh well, what do you expect they've banned everything else...NRA Forever... and TommyymmoT - Lobbying isn't always a bad thing, there are a lot of good organizations out there trying to gain favor...and in some cases that's not such a bad thing.
 
2003-01-28 03:41:12 AM
(Preface: fine people, those Canadians.)

Leaving aside whether this law/policy would benefit Canadians, the fact the PM can simply do it on his own demonstrates a big problem with their government. The U.S. "campaign finance reform" could be and should be overturned on free speech grounds. Canada has the "Not Withstanding Clause" (clause 33) in their charter, which leaves the people with basically no enforceable rights. I knew that Clause 33, along with the parliamentary system, leaves a majority in the parliament able to do just about whatever they want. But the PM could make a change like this election funding ban ON HIS OWN? At least U.S. misadventures in government control of the populous have to be approved and/or reviewed by all 3 branhes of government.

(again: Canadians,nice folks. Just nobody copy their govt, please. Even worse then the U.S. govt, and the vast majority are proud of every point on which they are worse.)
 
2003-01-28 03:46:46 AM
Geez, you Canadians are all calling freakin Jean Chretien a dictator and an autocrat. No wonder you see our president as a fascist. I suppose Bill Clinton was merely a harsh and uncompassionate thug in your guys' standards. Yeesh.
 
2003-01-28 03:48:08 AM
Please forgive any and all ignorance of my previous statement, as I am very ignorant of Canadian politics.
 
2003-01-28 04:13:55 AM
Sounds awesome, but I'd limit campaign contributions to like $50 per person as well.
 
2003-01-28 04:49:41 AM
I guess the folks who want to buy a government will just have to go back to the time honored tradition of a suitcase full of bills in the car park or maybe a numbered Swiss bank account.

/Politician=Corrupt bastard
 
2003-01-28 04:59:29 AM
Would be funny to see someone propose this in the US. He would be in the unemployment line within the hour.

In most European countries it's already illegal for a companies to make "political donations" (ie, bribes).

Also, most places it's illegal for a judge to be a member of a political party.
 
2003-01-28 06:57:19 AM
Well, so much for the NDP...
 
2003-01-28 07:53:21 AM
That sideways talking French bastard finally has a good idea.

My favourite part of the article:
Liberal Party President Stephen LeDrew has called the proposed change "dumber than a bag of hammers."

The phrase itself is funny enough, without the inherent irony.
 
2003-01-28 08:02:44 AM
 
2003-01-28 08:49:30 AM
I love watching unions get as pissed off as I do when I see workers picketing their workplace like whining babies.
 
2003-01-28 09:36:53 AM
That is so unAmerican.
 
2003-01-28 09:48:47 AM
Ahh...Crudnadia...one of the places more messed up than the U.S.
 
2003-01-28 10:03:46 AM
Crikey! if they did that here the liberal socialist democratic party would be out of business....
 
Bf+
2003-01-28 10:09:08 AM
Canada rocks.
I'm moving.
 
2003-01-28 10:20:48 AM
Anybody flaming this for any reason should be shot. I don't give a fark if you don't like the Liberals, or Chretien, or anything about government. This is a courageous and excellent move that will benefit all Canadians.

Stupid flaming POSs.
 
2003-01-28 10:43:54 AM
Ah Jean!

I haven't had this much respect for the man since he put a chokehold on a screaming protestor that charged him, then passed his pansy hippie ass over to an RCMP.

Photo of Jean choking the protestor in 5... 4.... 3...
 
2003-01-28 10:53:24 AM
"It wouldn't bother me so much if so many of my dumbfark Canuck bretheren didn't eat it up like ice cream. Apparently, a farsical government that has been proven time and time again to be incompetent... blah, blah, blah"

Dude... do you actually live in Canada? We are basically the envy of economists throughout the G7, and many of our large cities are rated as the best in the world. What exactly do you want? The NDP? The Alliance? heh... The Tories?

You've been reading the National Review a little too often. I think you are actually begining to believe the cack they write about how lousy Canada's medical system, and business regulations are south o' 49.
 
2003-01-28 11:37:54 AM
NO farking chance they won't accept them. They are jsut now under the table bribes!
 
2003-01-28 11:39:12 AM
The article said there probably would be some donations allowed from corporations & unions, but that there would be an upper limit. If I remember right, companies in the US get around McCain-Feingold by "encouraging" their employees to make donations, which will be reimbursed.
Also, what prevents the guy that owns the corporation, who is probably rich, from making the contribution? There may or may not be someone in the union rich enough to pay out of his pocket.
I agree with the goal of trying to prevent conflict of interest in the government, but I think it's naive to think that this will fix it.
 
2003-01-28 12:36:58 PM
I agree with the poster who didnt care about his motivations. I think Chretien has done a borderline satisfactory, pedestrian-centrist job over the past 10 or whatever years, but this legislation has been overdue for a long time. I dont care who he's trying to fark, I like the idea and I hope it passes.
 
2003-01-28 12:37:16 PM
Anyone who trusts Cretien is an idiot.

/victim of National Energy Policy
 
Displayed 50 of 71 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report