- Harper: Onward Con'ism Soldiers - Ongoing Fight Against Truth, Fairness and The Best Interests of All Canadians

Posted: 12:04 & 12:07 PM, December 24, 2010 The Globe and Mail
Budget watchdog lacks credibility, not cash: Jim Flaherty, Bill Curry, Globe and Mail, December 23, 2010
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/budget-watchdog-lacks-credibility-not-cash-jim-flaherty/article1848072/

I think it is outrageous, simply indecent, for Jim Flaherty to attack Kevin Page's credibility this way.

Of course, it is totally predictable.

How many other dedicated public servant, with what's best for Canada and carrying out their mandates have been viciously attacked, allegedly lacking credibility, on a personal level by Harper, Flaherty and the other Con's, usually.

I'll save you the trouble of counting - it's every single one of them, men and women, who have dared to stand up, do their jobs in an honest, objective, transparent fashion and tell Canadians anything that is out of line with Harper hype.

Kevin Page questioned Flaherty' assertion that Canada would grow itself out of deficit by '15-'16 (as long as Harper was in charge, of course). It doesn't take a huge budget to come to that conclusion and his credibility would have been in question if he supported these 'projections'. Now, Flaherty himself is having to back track on this 'prediction':

"Ottawa must continue with hefty spending 'in order to continue to foster some economic growth,' Flaherty explained.

In 2011, the government expects the economy to expand by only 2.5 per cent, considerably lower than the 3.2 per cent Flaherty forecast in the budget last March." (23/12/10 - Star)

It also doesn't take a rocket scientist to determine that the implementation of Harper's self-declared 'tough on crime' policies will cost Canadians 10 of billions of dollars - it's just that simple.

And Page's approach to whether the Harper Infrastructure program created jobs is quite ingenious - as far as Harper and the Con's are concerned, anyway - simply ask those directly involved. Although Flaherty has attacked this vehemently, I have yet to see any rational argument, well founded in reality, that would back him on his allegations.

"[Flaherty:]‘Well, they won’t be able to meet the goals that they’ve set out.’ It’s actually up to us to make those decisions."

What kind of non-sense is this.

When Harper, Flaherty expound some kind of pie-in-the-sky, grandiose claims, designed only for partisan purposes with the impact on Canada and Canadians playing no factor whatsoever

and someone, qualified and objective, in the cold, hard light of reality says that there is an 85% chance it won't happen,

Harper and Flaherty have no right, as our representatives, to attack their credibility, but must act in the best interests of all Canadians and say, "thank you".

In whom should we trust, Kevin Page or Stephen Harper, Jim Flaherty and the Conservative Party?

Weighing both sides objectively, I put my trust in Kevin Page.

Lloyd MacILquham cicblog.com/comments.html