Can Graham take New Brunswick from worst to first?

Can Graham take New Brunswick from worst to first?

We will take New Brunswick from WORST to FIRST in education and that means creating educational opportunity for all NB children,” said Graham.

I WON'T BELABOR the point here as I have written ad nauseum on this very topic before, in that, politicians should never make promises that they are incapable of living up to. Not only is Mr. Graham's educational policy unrealistic and flawed, it is extraordinarily difficult to pursue a strategy of "worst to first" in such an economic setting as New Brunswick without a major increase in spending or ultimately raising taxes. As well, it has already been found that throwing more money at public education will not improve test results in the province. From 1997 to 2004, New Brunswick increased its educational spending by 18 per cent only to see it matched by woeful student underachievement. According to an education expert at AIMS, "only 49 per cent of 16-year-old francophone students and 62 per cent of anglophone 16-year-olds met national expectations in science, a seven percentage point drop for English students and an 11-point decline for French students over the 1999 levels".

Moreover, I believe that rather than following the 95 recommendations made by the Mackay report on education to increase spending at all levels in hopes of unrealistically propelling the fledgling system straight up the ladder to first, New Brunswick must rework its educational system, in that, it can become more accountable for the investments that have already been made. Not to mention, we must support a system that would organize our school financing so as to empower parents and students with the ability to choose schools. A system that has been very successful in Alberta where, in turn, they have one of the most efficient and successful school systems in North America.

With the educational approach that NB Premier-designate Shawn Graham is about to embark on, I don't anticipate that Albertans have anything to worry about anytime soon, especially given the fact their student's test scores rank highest amongst most OECD countries in math, reading and science. However, NBers need clear and committed leadership on education. We do not need a leader who overpromises and plays politics with our children's futures, on the contrary, we need a leader who recognizes how difficult it will be to put this egg back together. Unfortunately, I don't believe Graham to be that man. Let's hope he can prove me wrong and make New Brunswick #1 in education in Canada.

In the meantime, check out this week's article from the Economist below on Alberta's flourishing education system, an educational system that we should definitely be modeling our system after here in NB:

[Via The Economist]

Many educators acknowledge that over the past 30 years Alberta has quietly built the finest public education system in Canada. The curriculum has been revised, stressing core subjects (English, science, mathematics), school facilities and the training of teachers have been improved, clear achievement goals have been set and a rigorous province-wide testing programme for grades three (aged 7-8), six (10-11), nine (13-14) and twelve (16-17) has been established to ensure they are met.

It is all paying off. Alberta's students regularly outshine those from other Canadian provinces: in 2004 national tests, Alberta's 13- and 16-year-olds ranked first in mathematics and science, and third in writing. And in international tests they rank alongside the best in the world: in the OECD's 2003 PISA study, the province's 15-year-olds scored among the top four of 40 countries in mathematics, reading and science (see table above).

Elsewhere in Canada, especially British Columbia and Ontario, dissatisfaction with public-school standards is increasingly driving parents to pack their children off to private schools. Over the past decade, the proportion of students in such schools has risen by 20% in Canada as a whole, and double that in Ontario. But the private system does not have the same appeal in Alberta, where some 80% of parents say they are happy with the public schools.

This is especially true in the province's capital of Edmonton, which is noted for its innovative system stressing choice, accountability and competition. Funding there is based on the number of students in a school. Each school controls its own budget, spending money on its own educational priorities (such as improving aboriginal-student results), while following the provincial curriculum. Students are free to (and 57% do) attend any school in the city, not just in their own neighbourhood. They can seek out schools specialising in the arts, sports, leadership skills, girls-only education, aboriginal culture, Mandarin, and many other alternative programmes—or simply choose the schools with the best academic results. Students in every grade are tested annually and their scores published.

The results are also used to improve teaching. There is currently a citywide push to ensure that all children in Edmonton can read competently by grade three (88% now can). Far from fearing private-school competition, the city's public system has embraced it: it has already absorbed three private religious schools (two Christian, one Hebrew). “In Edmonton,” says Angus McBeath, the city's recently retired schools chief, “the litmus test is that the rich send their kids to the public schools, not the private schools.”

Another litmus test is the extent to which Edmonton's ideas are being studied by educators from elsewhere (mostly the United States, but some also from Ontario and British Columbia) and are now being emulated. Pilot projects on the Edmonton model have already been launched by school boards in Colorado Springs, Oakland and New York City.

All this is not to say that they have all the answers in Alberta. Their rigorous measurement scheme has revealed that schools still need to do a lot better teaching aboriginal and immigrant children and ensuring that more students finish high school. At present, about 30% of students drop out early, compared with 25% for the country as a whole. That, Alberta's educators admit, is an embarrassing statistic. But in the province's red-hot economy, a 17-year-old with a driver's licence can drop out and easily make C$60,000 ($53,300) a year driving a lorry serving an oil-drilling camp. That's tough competition.

-Scott

Good News, Better News and Really Good News:

Finance Minister, Jim Flaherty, announced today that the new Conservative government has recorded a $13.2 billion surplus. This should put to rest the fearmongering by the Liberals in the last election that a Conservative goverment's spending would bring the country back into a deficit. "If you elect a Conservative government, they will take us back into deficit..." came the call throughout the last campaign. In reality, our economy continues to grow at record levels after giving our military a much needed boost, sending millions of dollars in aid to help rebuild Afghanistan, cutting the GST by 1%, safely evacuating Canadians from war-torn Lebanon, compensating victims of hepatitus C and launching an inquiry into the long neglected Air India bombing - PM Harper still managed to post a record surplus.

The news got even better when Minister Flaherty announced that all the money will go to paying down the debt. This Conservative government has done more, in a shorter time, than any government in recent history. When you subtract the summer months when Parliament was not sitting, this government has had less than 4 months in which to govern. During that time they have introduced the Accountability Act to clean up government. They have issued the first checks from the new Universal Child Benefit. They have cracked down on violent criminals and repeat offenders. Their agenda and its execution have been so focused that the opposition has been reduced to commenting on what the Conservatives haven't fixed yet (see opposition response to the Throne Speech and PM Harper's address to the UN). When they can't find fault with what you say, they trot out another paper tiger and blame the Conservatives for not slaying it yet!

The really good news was delivered by Treasury Board President, John Baird. His department has been able to trim over $1 billion dollars in fat from budget spending on programs that were inefficient and ineffective. One of the first items to feel the blade was Cabinet itself which was downsized under PM Harper to produce a savings of $47 million. Other savings were found under items that had money allocated, but which was never spent. Former PM Martin made (and re-made) so many spending announcements that they must have lost track of what they promised to whom! CBC news reports that "The single largest saving, at nearly $380 million, will be made by reclaiming unspent money." "We have uncovered numerous examples of waste and duplication," Finance Minister Jim Flaherty said.

Opposition criticism was typical, 'I can't believe you're cutting programs when you're sitting on a $13.2 billion dollar surplus!' Thankfully those holding the purse strings in the Conservative government have a better sense of public responsibility and believe that you don't keep throwing money at problems that don't exist. Good job guys, I'm anxious to see what the new fall agenda holds in store for our country. Keep making your promises come true and the voters might just reward you with greater responsibility next time.

-TruBlue

Is the media above the law?

I suppose we all smiled along with Liberal leadership candidate, Joe Volpe, as we watched news coverage of two protesters haunting him with signs.

CP/Jonathan Hayward

The MP showed class by taking it in stride when his campaign is being assailed for paying to sign up new members, and registering members who have been dead for years. Unfortunately, the press did not show the same decorum as the embattled Liberal candidate. After Mr. Volpe went in to his press conference, reporters present outside began to assault the protesters in an effort to reveal their identities.

How do you suppose those same reporters would have fared if they tried to unmask the protesters at a G-8 Summit or similar event? Perhaps overcome by curiosity, reporters pulled violently on the protesters' hoods and then chased one of them down a busy thoroughfare. (See video of assault here).

CP/Jonathan Hayward

The legal definition of assault is "intentional touching without consent." There is no doubt that these harmless and humorous protesters were assaulted in front of television cameras, but charges will likely never be laid because the protester would have to reveal his identity. I'm sure the ambitious reporters knew this, so they rolled the dice because it was just too tantalizing to imagine that their identity might prove embarrassing for someone else. The question arises, "Should the media, in the course of reporting, be above the law?" Watch the video again; perhaps the first attempt could be considered light-hearted fun - but then the repeated attempts to unmask the protester, and chasing him through traffic? I could think of a host of charges that could be laid, were the victim perhaps a racial minority...

My point is this: we have come to expect bad behavior from the Liberals. So when Mr. Volpe's campaign allegedly signs up Sebastiano Sperduti (a man who has been dead for 17 years) we just shrug our shoulders and say 'That's just the way politics works.' And when we witness members of the media battering a peaceful protester on national TV, we are willing to overlook their 'indiscretion,' because we too are intrigued by the possible identity of the victim. We live in a parliamentary democracy that is supposed to be governed by the rule of law - unless of course you carry a press badge. So a couple of individuals wanted to have a little fun at Mr. Volpe's expense; his campaign may take children's money for donations and sign up dead people - but at least they don't commit assault on the public!

- TruBlue

Liberal Contempt for Border Guards

<>Today in Question Period Stockwell Day, Minister of Public Safety, was answering a question about Border guards who walked off the job because they were not able to protect themselves. During Minister Day’s answer, Derek Lee (Liberal, Scarborough-Rouge River), was heard to call out “Wimps!” (referring to the Border guards). When admonished by government members to cease and desist, he proceeded to hurl the same epithet at our Border Services another 10-15 times.

At the end of Question Period, Mr. Day rose on a point of order and asked the Liberal MP to offer an apology to the brave members of the Border Services. Mr. Lee stood to respond and, rather than apologize, he continued to excoriate the Border guards. He stated clearly that his respect extended only to those who chose to stay on the job and refused to apologize to the guards who left their post because of an imminent threat against which they had no means to respond.

<>To his credit, NDP member Charlie Angus joined Minister Day in his plea for an apology; none was forthcoming however. This is yet another example of the Liberal contempt for the security of our borders, and the brave men and women who police them. Paul Martin’s idea of protecting our sovereignty was to “talk trash” against the Americans. Thankfully our new Conservative government has taken a different tack and offered our Border guards the arms and training they need to credibly protect our borders. Together with the investments in our military and the assertion of our claim on the north, PM Harper’s initiatives are proving to be practical and material, rather than the harsh rhetoric and bluster from the Liberals. Perhaps there should be a ‘hot air credit’ under the Kyoto Accord for all the smoke and pollution on the Liberal side of the aisle. <>

- TruBlue

2006 NB Election Thoughts

The 2006 NB election is now over and the electorate has chosen a "majority" Liberal government. While I accept the results of Monday night, I do want to share some thoughts from a Tory perspective.

Firstly, those who say that the PC party is finished have to look at the results closely. While riding redistribution played its part at cementing a small Liberal majority, the PC party still won the popular vote. Not yet in power, Shawn Graham has stated to the media that they stop asking him if he will honour Lord's commitment to hold a referendum on electoral reform in 2008. Of course, he will not! Because has nothing to gain by it.

I have also noticed much speculation about the future of Premier Lord. Provincial Tories try to convince the leader to remain in NB while pundits suggest he will jump ship into federal politics. Will Lord stay in NB to fight another day, move to pasture or will he "Move West" to Ottawa? Time will tell, but I would encourage the former Premier to consider the impact he can have as representative for Moncton-Riverview-Dieppe as our Conservative MP. Many say that his star quality is no longer there, however; there are many examples of political comebacks. Two that come to mind are Clinton and Churchill. I would strongly suggest to the Premier that he take some time to recharge the batteries and return to cement his legacy as a nation builder. To offer some wisdom from one of the greatest leaders of all time:

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
Sir Winston Churchill
British politician (1874 - 1965)

I would also like to offer a word of encouragement to my fellow PC members in the wake of a crushing defeat. Get ready! Get ready to validate our existence to the people of NB, so that they remember how a PC government balanced the budget for 7 years, reduced unemployment, reduced the deficit and laid the foundation to fix a troubled health care system.

People of NB, you will soon see just how much Shawn Graham’s Liberal platform will cost you and our children. I look forward to holding his team accountable to an increased deficit, increased tuition, increased unemployment, higher property and income taxes, toll highways, gambling, increased red tape and cronyism in the form of over paid supercrats.

I look forward to the next provincial election…

-Blue Blogger

MP Dominic LeBlanc: An Embarrassed Embarrassment

The venerable Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal trade critic, continues to embarrass himself and his party in opposition to the Softwood Lumber Agreement. In an exchange on Tuesday in Parliament, M. LeBlanc implied that a 15% export tax was engineered to be a "cash cow" for the federal government. Before pointing out that Atlantic Canada overwhelmingly supports the deal, government Trade Minister Emerson corrected M. LeBlanc: "Mr. Speaker, the hon. member should know, if in fact he has read the softwood lumber agreement, that any export tax revenue will be flowed back, …to the provinces."

<>Indeed M. LeBlanc went on to attack the Trade Minister personally, accusing him of “being a Republican lackey willing to do the United States' dirty work” because he had successfully brokered the deal after crossing the aisle to sit as a Conservative. One could almost feel Dominic’s face turning red when Minister Emerson retorted: “Mr. Speaker, that hon. member should come clean. That [Liberal] party was prepared to settle for far less than this government has achieved in negotiations with the United States. That member and those who vote against that agreement are supporting continued litigation, dumping duties that will climb, and dislocation in the softwood lumber industry in Canada, and in Atlantic Canada in particular. <>David Emerson was an acknowledged expert on softwood lumber when sitting as a Liberal, and certainly was in a position to know the state of negotiations by the Liberal government. The unmitigated gall of Liberal MP LeBlanc in characterizing the current Conservative deal as a “sell out” is astounding! <>

The embarrassment grew as MP Gerald Keddy pointed out that, while Dominic LeBlanc and his Liberal pals opposed the agreement, the Maritime Lumber Bureau supports it! Mr. Keddy went on to say: “The member for Beauséjour has praised the deal stating ‘as an Atlantic Canadian, I'm certainly pleased that this agreement protects the rights we have fought hard to ensure are protected’. However, now he is indicating that he will be voting against the deal.” According to Campbell Morrison (Times & Transcript, Sept. 20, A4), “Outside the Commons, Keddy said that LeBlanc should put partisan politics aside and support local industry. ‘There is a time to play politics and a time to do the right thing. This is a good deal for Canada and a good deal for Atlantic Canada,’ Keddy said.” M. LeBlanc defended his position by saying that the Liberal opposition would not be "bullied and blackmailed by Prime Minister Stephen Harper." While acknowledging that the Softwood Lumber Agreement has the support of Maritime industry, M. LeBlanc pointed out that it has some opponents in PQ, ON and BC. (As if any negotiated settlement would have unanimous consent!).<>

The Conservative softwood agreement “puts over $5 billion Canadian cash into the pockets of Canadian companies. It creates stability and it protects provincial forest management policies.” Furthermore it “has over 90% support from the industry in Canada and over 90% support from the industry in British Columbia. The agreement has the very strong support of the government of British Columbia and the governments of other lumber producing provinces.” The agreement is overwhelmingly supported by provincial governments and industry across Canada and in the Maritimes. It is absurd that Liberal MP’s like Brian Murphy and Dominic LeBlanc would stand shoulder to shoulder in opposition, simply because they want to prove that PM Harper can’t bully them! So much for representing the best interests of your constituents. <>

-TruBlue

Arar-Opposition Exploitation is Shameful!

The report from the O'Connor inquiry has placed the blame for Maher Arar's mistreatment on "misleading information" passed along to US authorities by the RCMP. It is regrettable that a Canadian citizen was subjected to torture, and even more so if he was innocent of allegations against him. Public Safety Minister, Stockwell Day, expressed his sympathy for Mr. Arar in the House of Commons by saying the following: "As a matter of fact, Justice O'Connor's own words, and heartfelt words I might add, related to Mr. Arar were that this whole situation was regrettable, and we have said it is regrettable. Those were his words. Those are our heartfelt words and we think those are appropriate."

Today in the House, Conservative members joined in a unanimous consent to a Bloc motion that "in the opinion of this House an apology should be presented to Maher Arar regarding the treatment he has been subjected to." When they did so however, they made the distinction that "As parliamentarians, we obviously have a function that's completely different from the executive branch of government. As parliamentarians we're completely sympathetic."

For two days the NDP and the Bloc have been trying to lure a government member into making an explicit apology on behalf of the Government of Canada. It is instructive to note that during this time the Liberals have been notoriously silent (that is because this all happened on their watch). What is shameful however is for parties like the NDP, who claim to be the champion of the oppressed, to exploit the unfortunate event of an innocent Canadian being tortured for crass political gain. Alexa McDonough, et al, know full well that if the government were to express an official apology, specifically if it came from the Prime Minister, it would be tantamount to accepting culpability for Mr. Arar's detention and torture. In Tuesday's debate, the Prime Minister already telegraphed the reason for his reticence to offer an official apology: to do so when Mr. Arar is currently suing the government for compensation would effectively present the latter with a blank check at the taxpayers expense!

The only reasonable thing for the government to do is to express their regret, to admit that Mr. Arar was clearly the victim of injustice, to give assurances that the recommendations of the O'Connor report will be followed, all of which has been done. Honorable Members know that one does not comment on matters that are under litigation, specifically if they will circumvent or prejudice the negotiations already underway. The fact that the NDP hoped to cause the Conservative party political embarrassment before the 'great unwashed' is a naked shame, particularly when Mr. Arar's dignity and suffering is the tool for such exploitation.

-TruBlue

Autism NB Debate

My apologies to Autism NB for posting this so late... I've been in overdrive at work and haven't been able to get around to posting your reply.

For readers who are unaware, recently Autism NB posted a comment that the Provincial Goverment was not doing enought for Autistic children in this province. Since I know very little on the subject myself, I asked Autism NB to send me a post that I could place on the blog to have a positive debate on the issue.

Since then the Liberals will form the next provincial goverment and it will be our responsibility to hold them accountable to their promise as highlighted in the reply from Autism NB. I have also added the link to Autism NB's blog, which is relatively informative.

Last note, please keep this debate civil and respectable.

Autism Reality NB said...
Thank you. I acccept your challenge/offer.

If your political friends wish to acquaint themselves further they can also consult my blog site Facing Autism in New Brunswick and the links I have posted there.

http://autisminnb.blogspot.com/ (A word of caution to your fellow conservatives: the most recent comment contains pictures of Liberal leader Shawn Graham signing a pledge to commit funding to autism services.)

My interest in autism originates with my profoundly autistic 10 year old son. I have been actively involved in advocating for improved pre-school, schooling and residential care for autistic persons in NB during the seven years since I discovered that there were virtually no services available specific to autistic persons. Generic, "it takes a community", approaches may be enough to deal with some disability challenges but not autism. Autism is a neurological disorder with a wide range of subsets hence the reference to Autism Spectrum Disorders.

ASD’s range from classic Autism Disorder, like my son’s, to Asperger's Syndrome or higher functioning autism. Autism is marked by intellectual disability in approximately 80% of cases, although higher functioning autistic persons can be of above average intelligence and a few can indeed possess special abilities. Autism can feature serious sensory issues such as hyper sensitivity to lights, sounds, movement, smells etc. all the factors often present in a regular classroom. Autistic persons can have severe difficulty with social interaction and communication even to the point of being totally non-verbal.

With some autistic persons dangerous self injurious behaviour such as head banging to the point of injury or self inflicted bites on arms, hands and legs are concerns.Many of these severe symptoms can be alleviated substantially in 47% of cases almost entirely eliminated if children receive intensive behavioural interventions between the ages of 2 and 5. Thereafter they can still improve and be educated but the progress is not as dramatic. Time, though is critical and can not afford to be squandered.

In New Brunswick activists amongst parents of autistic children protested and brought our complaints to the Premier, Bernard Lord in front of the Legislature, interviews on Rogers, Global and ATV and letters to the editor. We appeared in front of legislative committees and we filed Human Rights Complaints. Eventually we got responses from the Lord government. But it took precious time, time that autistic children will never recover. The pre-school funding for autistic children, after much delay, was implemented although not funded to recommended levels. Only recently the Lord government began training Teachers’ Assistants and Resource Teachers in the autism and autism learning techniques at the UNB-CEL Autism program that has won national recognition. But with approximately 1000 autistic children in NB schools the 80 TA’s and 9 resource teachers being trained only scratched the surface of the problem. And there is at present no commitment from Team Lord to train more as soon as possible. That means many more autistic children will go without a real education.

To this day the Lord government is not providing residential care for serious cases of autism. The group homes do not generally have properly trained staff and the most serious cases are dumped in Centracare or on the grounds of jail facilities until they can be sent to a decent facility like Spurwink in Maine.

Delay and indifference have marked the Lord government approach to autism. And the result has been to deprive autistic persons of the basics of decent life in society – good health, good eduation and good residential care.

These are the “autism issues”. I would be happy to discuss them with your conservative colleagues.

Readers Choice

What category do you think Spinks should be added to? PC? NDP? Lib? Green? Other?

http://spinkaboutit.blogspot.com/

Liberals using Taxpayer Dollars to Smear PC's

Shame on the Liberals for using taxpayer money to fund their smear campaign. This is a re-post from the CBC blog...

----- Original Message -----
From: Rowinski, Jan (LEG)
Sent: Thu Sep 14 15:35:36 2006
Subject: The clean province? Please forward this important info to your friends and families

* T > he Lord Government has failed to take any action to clean up the Saint John Harbour.

* New Brunswick is the worst province in the Maritimes for climate change emissions according to a 2006 Report Card on Climate Change Action by the Conservation Council of New Brunswick.

* New Brunswick has no climate action plan, despite public consultations completed in 2003.

* Commitments to environmental protection made in the 2001 provincial energy policy have not been implemented.

* According to the most recent 2005 National Pollutant Release Inventory from Environment Canada, the Coleson Cove Generating Station had S02 emission levels three times those at the Irving Oil Refinery in Saint John. According to this report, the Lord Government is the largest polluter in the Saint John area.

* The Lord Government has taken no action on the Petitcodiac River, ignoring the Environmental Impact Report.

* On June 1, 2006, the Lord Conservatives defeated a Liberal motion calling on government to introduce legislation setting out clear targets for reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by December 31, 2006.
Authorized by the official agent for The New Brunswick Liberal Party

Read what Jacque poitras had to say.. Click here

"See Austin Harvey's post below about an e-mail from a Liberal Opposition staffer. Given that this is a serious accusation, I called the Liberals for a comment. Liberal chief of staff Chris Baker says the employees still in the Official Opposition office (as opposed to on leave to work for the party) have been scrupulous about staying within the bounds and this was indeed a mistake. "It was a stupid thing to do," Baker said, "and it won't happen again." He added that he has reprimanded Jan Rowinski. "

Quote from Jacques Poitras

-The Blue Blogger

Jack Layton/NDP off the deep end on Afghanistan

As of last Sunday the NDP officially did a nose dive off the cliff of political sanity. It was reported in a National Post story last Wednesday that an NDP resolution calling Canadian troops terrorists was set to be voted on in last week’s convention. “Canada's troops in Afghanistan have been ‘acting like terrorists, destroying communities, killing and maiming innocent people’, according to a resolution” proposed by the Nanaimo-Cowichan riding association in British Columbia.

Initially Mr. Layton had called for the troops to be pulled out of Afghanistan by February 2007. Last week he moved up his timetable to “immediate withdrawal.” Mr. Layton offered no rationale for his brazen demands, other than insisting that this was “not the right mission for Canada.” Mr. Layton is attempting to politicize a deadly serious issue in order to galvanize the support of his radical leftist base.

NDP MP Peter Stoffer disagreed sharply with his BC comrades about our troops stating, “I absolutely fundamentally disagree with the statement. The people who did it are not only very naive but very antagonistic in their point of view.” Former NDP premier and Liberal leadership contender Bob Rae told CBC News, “I don't believe Jack Layton is right. I don't think you can just snap your fingers and quit. I heard his comments. I thought they were absolutely unrealistic in terms of where we are as a country, where we need to be as a country” Other Liberal leadership hopefuls, Michael Ignatieff and Scott Brison also disagreed with Mr. Layton.

Somehow PM Harper has come to bear the brunt of uninformed public backlash against the mission since we have begun to suffer casualties. I would like to extend kudos to former Transport Minister, David Collenette who affirmed to CTV news this week that it was the Chrétien government that initially sent troops into Afghanistan, and it was followed up by Paul Martin’s Liberal regime. He made it clear in the interview that PM Harper was simply maintaining the commitments made to the international community and the Afghan government.

Another myth is that “A combat role in Afghanistan is a no-win situation both for Canada and for the Afghani people. Its only dubious value is to curry favour with the militarist government of George W. Bush.” (BC NDP resolution, NP) With regard to this migrating role of Canada’s troops, Jim Fergusson, director of the Centre for Defence and Security Studies at the University of Manitoba says “When we agreed to send combat troops in, we didn't get ourselves trapped into it slowly by doing more and more. There was, by the former government, a conscious decision that we were now going into a combat role. They dressed it up at the time as providing security for provincial reconstruction teams, but to anyone listening, especially to Hillier who was blunt, it was clear."

“What our forces are doing is exactly what Hillier said they should be doing. What's going on [now] is partisan politics, pure and simple,” said David Bercuson director of the Centre for Military and Strategic Studies at the University of Calgary. Lee Windsor, deputy director of the Gregg Centre for the Study of War and Security at the University of New Brunswick, observed that “Canadians are getting an eye-opener after years of ignoring military operations abroad. Many Canadians remain attached to the blue beret ideal of peacekeeping, not realizing that traditional peacekeeping is long gone. ‘What we're seeing in Kandahar looks like a radical shift to the average Canadian, but if you're a Canadian soldier this is only a subtle shift, because we've been killing people on peacekeeping missions to protect our mandate for years,’” (Note: quotes from CP, by John Ward, 6 Sept. 2006). Traditional ‘peacekeeping’ was between warring states with some sort of cease fire or peace agreement. What we are dealing with now in the world is failed states where some radical faction obtains arms and funding and begins to kill innocent men, women and children in a wholesale bid to collapse legitimate governments.

Canadians must remember, we are in Afghanistan, not only at the invitation of the UN, but at the invitation of Afghanistan’s democratically elected government. Afghans turned out at about 82% to vote in the government of Hamid Karzai; that is about 25% better than our turnout in Canada (where we have no threat of violence)! Why are some people turning against our mission in Afghanistan? Because they are uninformed by a press that is willingly ignorant of the facts. A brief visit to Department of Foreign Affairs’ website provides a wealth of information about the scope and success of our mission. One of Mr. Layton’s greatest criticisms is that we have no clear mandate, no timetable and no exit strategy. He is obviously as uniformed as the national press because our goals are clearly spelled out in the Afghanistan Compact which states its primary goals as “Security, Rule of Law, Human Rights and Economic and Social Development” (See Dept. Foreign Affairs video1,video2)

Our troop contingent comprises less than 10% of the total foreign deployment in Afghanistan, yet we have a very high profile role because of our superior combat, command and construction personnel. Over half of our deployed troops are involved in some element of command and communications, with about one thousand of our 2300 troops actually deployed in security operations* .

The initial mission was to secure the area immediately around Kabul (the capital) and provide sufficient security to hold free and democratic elections. This was accomplished in 2004 and since then children are now attending newly rebuilt schools and women have been emancipated from the brutality of Taliban rule. Now that much of the country is building democracy, it is necessary to extend the rule of the central government to the southern provinces around Kandahar, a traditional Taliban stronghold. Pakistani President, Pervez Musharraf, claims to have stationed 75,000 troops along his border to prevent the Taliban from escaping into Pakistan. The reason the Taliban are now resisting so heavily is that they increasingly have nowhere to run.

The political and military leadership of Canada have been very clear about the danger involved in completing the job we began in Afghanistan; as John Ward wrote, “No one was listening. *” Should PM Harper fail to have the courage to stand up to the withering attacks of the leftist press and the NDP, we will not only disgrace our country in the eyes of the international community, but we will have betrayed the brave people of Afghanistan whose families have paved the way to liberty with their own blood. It is shameful that Mr. Layton has chosen to abandon brave Afghan men and women who risk their lives in a bid for freedom. If he sincerely believes what he is saying, he needs a ‘check up from the neck up.’

-TruBlue

Strong Leadership Builds the Future

Today Canadian astronaut Steve MacLean sat at the controls of the Canadarm 2 on the US space shuttle Atlantis. There could be no better symbol of the strength of cooperation with our neighbor to the south. Last weekend however, Jack Layton tore a page from Paul Martin's playbook and tried to villify Prime Minister Harper as a "cheerleader for President Bush."

No matter what you might think of the US president or his policies, we have no better partner in progress than the United States of America. It is bigoted and naive to link and entire nation to an adminstration whose policies are a source of irritation. Even the press darling, Bill Clinton, has never appeared on a Canadian ballot and is not likely to in the near future - so why do the Liberals and the NDP stir the passions of their minions by attacking Americans?

The United States consumes something in the order of 90% of our foreign exports. That means Canadians have jobs because they buy our stuff. The only reason that the Liberals could get away with 12 years of systematically humiliating our military is that we understand that the US would never permit an attack on their northern neighbour. With Sea Kings falling out of the sky, submarines catching fire just off Nova Scotia and 25 year old Iltis jeeps exposing our troops to death by the smallest IED (Improvised Explosive Device), how could our military possibly do it's job? For Pete's sake, when the Liberals first sent out troops into Afghanistan they didn't even have clothing that was suited for the environment!

The point is that if we are to be a truly sovereign nation, we need to stand on our own two feet. It is disingenuous and dishonorable to take so much from the US and then set them up like a straw man for target practice during an election. If they're so bad, let's quit selling to them. If they're so bad, let's have a military that actually has the equipment to credibly defend our country's interests and borders. If they're so bad, let's sever our diplomatic relations and recall the thousands of Canadian families who live in the US part time, or for years at a time.

If they're not that bad then we should quietly go about the business of governing our country, and let the US presidents campaign for popularity on the other side of the border. It is time for us to come out from under the shadow of the United States. We have one of the most robust economies in the world. We have a huge wealth of natural resources including forestry, agriculture, minerals, gems, livestock, fresh water, fishing and of course the second largest reserves of oil in the world. As long as would be leaders keep playing the "I hate America" card to arouse nationalism we will be degraded to the lesser of the two north american neighbours. The strong and independent do not feed the bigoted fears of the proletariat, they merely build successful partnerships that are mutually beneficial and strengthen our position on the world stage. Congratulations to PM Stephen Harper for resisting media pressure and making our country strong, independent and free.

TruBlue

Deepest sympathies to the Schom family

According to a Canadian Press report, the body of 62-year-old Chuck Schom was found this morning in the woods near St. Andrews, NB. Mr. Schom was the former riding president for NB Southwest and a candidate for National Council. He ran a small whale watching business in St. Andrews and worked in marine science at UNB. Chuck had been missing for almost a week when his body was found.

Those of us whose lives he touched were made better for it. He was a dedicated and sincere man with a gentle spirit and a keen mind. At this difficult time, our prayer is that his family will find consolation in knowing that their grief is shared by others. He will be dearly missed.

Phil Seely

President, Moncton-Riverview-Dieppe EDA

The Right is All Right

I would like to begin my first post by quoting the axiom “If you are under 30 and you are not a Liberal, you do not have a heart.” Conversely. ”If you are over 30 and are not Conservative, you do not have a brain”. If this adage holds true, I may be as heartless as the Tin-Man. All kidding aside, I do have a heart, it is quite blue and I wear it on my sleeve aside my Tory stripes.

Judging from some of dirt that is flying off of the campaign train I think I can easily disprove the belief that Liberals do “Have a heart.”

As accounted to Bacchus, a Liberal Moncton area candidate has been campaigning with the golden aged widow of a former Premier. While it is nice to get the endorsement of generations past, is it kind to repay the kindness of our seniors by asking them to climb steep embankments such as “Braemar Dr.” to knock on doors?

“Hey Liberals, Have a Heart.”

More details given to Bacchus, tell of a certain former MP who has been warning seniors at the Villa de Repos, that voting Conservative will “endanger their pensions”. Scarring our seniors, I hope this is not how the Grits hope to win.

“Hey Liberals, Have a Heart.”

Not to sound naïve here, but elections should be fought on the issues shouldn’t they? It always tends to become more complex in the second half of any election campaign, but are these tactics necessary? Ask any senior what their thoughts are on this?

Day after day, new components of a solid Conservative platform are released to the public and followed by similar policy responses from the Liberals. While imitation is indeed the most sincere form of flattery, this has resulted in trailing Liberal polling numbers. The Premier himself said “If our policies are so good, why do you [the Liberal Party] oppose us?”

I guess there is little left to do in the last week of a campaign when your polling numbers are down, other than to shock and scare the most loyal demographic of voters.

“Hey Liberals, Have a Heart.”

The Tory platform on seniors is nothing short of visionary, such as the idea of protecting their assets 100%. No government before has done more for our greatest generation. We should honor those who came before us, they’ve earned it and they deserve it.

What’s more, wisdom comes with age.

Please remember Mr. Graham, seniors are over 30 and they do have a brain.

-Bacchus

My Final Seat Predictions

My Final Seat Predictions

Date	PC	Lib	NDP	Other
09/18/2006
Seat Predictions	39	16	0	0
+/-	+11	-10	0	0
Safe Seats	21	8	0	0
Marginal Seats	17	8	1*	0

Methodology: This following projections are obtained by applying the latest poll results (including the latest Omnifacts poll) to UBC Professor Werner Antweiler's Election Forecaster.

As well, from what I have witnessed and heard at the ground level in 11 ridings, I am comfortable in saying that the Liberals have been extremely unsuccessful since week 1 in getting anything to stick to Bernard Lord and the Tories. Nonetheless, I did throw into the mix the fact that Shawn Graham and the Liberals, out of desparation, will go seriously neg this week which will ultimately backfire and, in turn, cost them another 2 seats (originally had the PCs @ 37 seats) Why you ask? Because this will not go over well with the remaining undecided vote that are still giving them a last look and will push 50% of the PC marginals over the top, or 8 seats, giving the Tories a clear margin of victory.

And finally, judging from the Liberal leader's retreat back to Boutouche to campaign in his own riding for a full two days , while trailing, says to me that he is no longer running for Premier, but ultimately for his own seat. The same pattern happened to Liberal leader Francis MacKenzie in Nova Scotia who lost his seat to PC blogger and current Bedford MLA Len Goucher back on June 13th. If I were a Liberal in New Brunswick, I would start campaigning for my political life.

* The NDP marginal seat has a star beside it as it does not represent a possible victory. However, if you are wondering, it does in fact represent the Fredericton-Lincoln riding where Allison Brewer will cost Liberal Greg Byrne his seat by splitting the vote on the left. Thus, increasing the PC seat count from 38 to 39.

Cheers,
Scott

TruBlue on Softwood

Today Liberal international trade critic, Dominic LeBlanc, stood shoulder to shoulder with the Liberal House leader and confirmed that the party would vote against the softwood lumber deal negotiated by the government. The Liberals are counting on Bloc support for the deal so that they can posture themselves as the defenders of the universe. Their opportunism is as caricatured as a cartoon.

LeBlanc went on to say that "it would be a failure if the lumber industry gets anything less than all of the tariffs it paid to the United States." As a lawyer, we know that M. LeBlanc understands the principles of a negotiated settlement. When you enter into arbitration, no one party gets everything they want. Compromise and concession are essential elements to negotiating in good faith. With the Conservative deal, the crippling tariffs are now gone!

The Liberals feel comfortable blowing smoke because the NDP/Liberal alliance won't have enough votes to defeat the settlement. The fact is that the softwood lumber agreement is a good deal. It ends years or expensive litigation that has cost the lumber industry millions, and more importantly it has cost forestry and mill workers their jobs. The Conservative negotiated deal nets the return of $4 billion of the $5 billion in tariffs collected by the US. It reopens our export market to the US which consumes the vast majority of our exports. It provides a stable framework for the expansion of our forestry industry for years to come.

The reason Dominic LeBlanc and the Liberals are "opposed" to the deal is because they failed to make it happen during their 12 years in office! While Carrolyn Parrish was stomping on dolls of President Bush and former PM, Paul Martin, was throwing cheap anti American barbs south of the border, the lumber industry in Canada was falling apart. MP's representing regions affected by the dispute were begging the former government for aid packages to keep the industry afloat. Now the deal is done. It has the support of the majority of lumber producers as well as the provinces of BC, ON and PQ. Virtually the only ones left in opposition to this deal are those who cannot bring themselves to admit that Stephen Harper's team made it happen. RED looks good on the Liberals - it must be from embarrassment!

TruBlue

**Edit: Apologies for the type O. Thanks to Anon for pointing it out. - The Blue Blogger**

Prosperity under attack by the left!

Once again prosperity is under attack by the left in NB. The Liberals are again beating the war drums, rallying their troops against the people who earn a living in the insurance industry. They claim that rates are too high and the government can offer insurance at a lower cost to the consumer, with a higher level of service.

This is a lie.

Government workers can rarely deliver the same level of customer service as their private sector counterparts. Since their customers have no other place to take their business, government run monopolies have no incentive to focus on best practices or cost reduction measures to retain their current, and attract new, clients. Anyone who has dealt with Service New Brunswick has seen this mentality in practice.

Recently the CBC did a story comparing auto insurance premiums and claims over the last few years. The story focused on how much claims have dropped as a percentage of revenues. While claims do represent just over 50% of all premiums, that does not mean that insurance companies are pocketing the rest as profit. Labour expenses and taxes are about 40% of total revenues for insurance companies, leaving less than 10% of sales for profit. If you were an investor in an insurance company, would you be willing to have your equity lose value? If you were employed in the insurance industry, would you be willing to work for free? Does anyone think the tax man is going to allow companies to stop paying taxes? To continue lowering rates, even a small amount, companies would have to greatly reduce the benefit to one of these groups, all of which are contributors to the province's greater economic well being.

My final argument against the socialization of another New Brunswick industry is the correlation between jobs and the out migration of our citizens. People are not moving to Toronto, Vancouver, and Calgary for better roads, schools, or hospitals. They are leaving for better jobs.
The increased government regulation and ownership of our economy is actually reducing the number of decent employment opportunities in our province. This will not be stopped if the left is allowed to essentially lay off hundreds of our fellow citizens, putting further pressure on an already high unemployment rate. Many of these people will eventually be forced to make a choice: become the latest economic refugees to go west, take lower paying jobs to pay living expenses, or beg the government for "social assistance" and housing subsidies. Is this what the left means when they talk about social justice?

Jason Inness

Welcome

Welcome to The Blue Bloggers! Your one stop blog to read up on the Moncton-Riverview-Dieppe Tory point of view. The goal of this blog is to debate local, provincial, national and international issues and their affect on the Metro Moncton area.

We invite you read the postings by many local tory contributors and comment on your view of the issues. We look forward to open and transparent debate.

Cheers,

The Blue Blogger