[大选感想]:HARPER重提取消对政党的经费补贴

  • 主题发起人 主题发起人 cfz
  • 开始时间 开始时间

cfz

新手上路
注册
2010-09-12
消息
188
荣誉分数
0
声望点数
0
昨天HARPER重提取消对政党的经费补贴。2008年大选后不久,HARPER就是错误估计形势,提出取消对政党的经费补贴引发反对党倒阁。结果HARPER以Proroguing (shutting down) Parliament收场。大家心知肚明,保守党经费充足,因为他代表富人,大公司,大财团利益,筹集的捐款多。2006年大选就是保守党钱多的用不完(选举法有规定最多使用多少经费),搞出了一个in-and-out 丑闻. 几位保守党的SENATORS have been charged with election fraud。正是2006年那次大选,HARPER首次赢得MINORITY。HARPER当然不会说因为保守党经费充足,所以他提出取消对政党的经费补贴。HARPER说正是对政党的经费补贴,造成了7年内4次联邦大选。大家知道实际情况并非如此。2006年是HARPER联合BLOC和NDP推翻Paul Martin的自由党大选,结果HARPER如愿组成保守党MINORITY政府. 2008年也 是HARPER要大选,因为HARPER想要一个Majority政府, 但未能如愿, 仍是一个MINORITY。

我认为不应取消对政党的经费补贴. 因为需要给各政党一个相对公平的机会。就象不应该你没钱就不能上学。SOCIAL JUSTICE 是需要的。HARPER想借取消对政党的经费补贴使保守党一党独大,这在好象比较困难。
 
你漏了一个关键的FACT
为啥PC钱多呢?
另外那个CHARGE已经判了,ELECTION CANADA还要再告,知道ELECTION CANADA 一共浪费了多少钱?
 
昨天HARPER重提取消对政党的经费补贴。2008年大选后不久,HARPER就是错误估计形势,提出取消对政党的经费补贴引发反对党倒阁。结果HARPER以Proroguing (shutting down) Parliament收场。大家心知肚明,保守党经费充足,因为他代表富人,大公司,大财团利益,筹集的捐款多。2006年大选就是保守党钱多的用不完(选举法有规定最多使用多少经费),搞出了一个in-and-out 丑闻. 几位保守党的SENATORS have been charged with election fraud。正是2006年那次大选,HARPER首次赢得MINORITY。HARPER当然不会说因为保守党经费充足,所以他提出取消对政党的经费补贴。HARPER说正是对政党的经费补贴,造成了7年内4次联邦大选。大家知道实际情况并非如此。2006年是HARPER联合BLOC和NDP推翻Paul Martin的自由党大选,结果HARPER如愿组成保守党MINORITY政府. 2008年也 是HARPER要大选,因为HARPER想要一个Majority政府, 但未能如愿, 仍是一个MINORITY。

我认为不应取消对政党的经费补贴. 因为需要给各政党一个相对公平的机会。就象不应该你没钱就不能上学。SOCIAL JUSTICE 是需要的。HARPER想借取消对政党的经费补贴使保守党一党独大,这在好象比较困难。


听起来HARPER的目标就是一党专制, 这在中国100年前就实现了啊 :D
 
支持取消,save our taxpayer money.
 
应该取消...支持取消 :cool:
 
初步的感觉,是不应该取消对政党的经费补贴。

一个社会里面有各个不同的利益集团。如果政府放任不管,那么有钱人的集团一定在各种竞争中居优势地位,穷人在各方面都处弱势。所以,政府介入各个利益集团之间的一个目标,就是保护竞争中居弱势的集团,努力(不可能完全)使弱势集团有能力和富豪集团竞争。政党经费补贴的宗旨,就是让代表各个利益集团的政党都有基本的运作经费,是这种保护弱势集团的一个必要政府干预。

中国共产党经常拿西方的竞选都是有钱人支持、为有钱人说话,来否定竞选的意义。如果加拿大政府真的完全取消了政党经费补贴,正是向有钱人政府的方向靠近了一大步,落实了中国共产党的指责,更是促使社会不公平的扩大。
 
能给个判决结果或有关的连接吗?谢谢!

另外已经说了"因为PC代表富人,大公司,大财团利益,筹集的捐款多."

你漏了一个关键的FACT
为啥PC钱多呢?
另外那个CHARGE已经判了,ELECTION CANADA还要再告,知道ELECTION CANADA 一共浪费了多少钱?
 
能给个判决结果或有关的连接吗?谢谢!
EC已经输了,它还要搞啥呢?

http://www.barrheadleader.com/artic...nior-conservative-officials&template=barcpart
Elections Canada charges four senior Conservative officials

Feb 24, 2011 06:00 am | The Canadian Press
An unidentified man opens the door for a plainclothes RCMP officer at the Conservative Party Headquarters of Canada in Ottawa on April 15, 2008 during an RCMP raid. Elections Canada has charged the Conservative party and four senior party officials with violating election laws during the 2006 vote. THE CANADIAN PRESS/ Tom Hanson

TORONTO - Elections Canada has upped the ante in a long running feud with the Conservative party over election spending, charging several Tories including a Harper insider with violating election laws during the 2006 vote.
Those charged include Senator Doug Finley, a confidant of Prime Minister Stephen Harper and an architect of his recent election campaigns.
Charges were also filed on Wednesday against the party and officials Irving Gerstein, also a senator, Michael Donnison and Susan Kehoe, a Conservative source told The Canadian Press late Thursday.
"We will vigorously defend," the source said.
Elections Canada was not immediately available to confirm or comment on the charges. It was unclear when the case was to go to court.
The agency has alleged in the past that $1.3 million in national advertising was improperly reported as a shared expense by 67 Conservative candidates.
The agency contended the scheme allowed the party to exceed its spending limit and the candidates to claim rebates on expenses they hadn't actually incurred.
The Elections Act charges are the latest salvo in a long running battle between the elections watchdog and the Conservatives over the spending arrangement, which has become known as the in-and-out case.
Two of the candidates involved in the case launched a civil lawsuit against Elections Canada and won. Both the agency and the Tory party, for different reasons, have appealed that ruling.
The Tories are trying to strike down a little-noticed section of the judgment that would mean up to 10 candidates _ including Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon, Natural Resources Minister Christian Paradis, Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Josee Verner and former minister Maxime Bernier _ exceeded their campaign spending limits in 2006.
If the ruling is allowed to stand, the four sitting Tories and up to six former candidates could face Elections Act charges. If convicted, they could be barred from running again or even be barred from sitting in the House of Commons, much less cabinet.
A Conservative source expressed dismay that the agency filed the charges against the officials before the appeal was heard.
"We're disappointed that Elections Canada filed these administrative charges after losing in Federal Court and not waiting for the Appeal Court decision that matter," the source said.
The charges came after the commissioner of elections, William Corbett, conducted a lengthy separate investigation into the in-and-out transactions. In June, 2009, Corbett recommended to the federal director of public prosecutions that charges be laid in the matter.
Elections Canada is also alleging the Conservatives failed to properly report the cost of running two regional campaign offices in Quebec.
The agency said the $107,000 tab was divvied up and claimed as a shared expense by 15 candidates in Montreal and Quebec City. They claimed the expense even though Elections Canada found many candidates never used the regional offices, which were staffed by central party workers involved in what appear to have been national campaign activities.
The party complied ``under protest'' with a demand that it file a revised campaign financial return, but has challenged the watchdog's order in court.
 
初步的感觉,是不应该取消对政党的经费补贴。

一个社会里面有各个不同的利益集团。如果政府放任不管,那么有钱人的集团一定在各种竞争中居优势地位,穷人在各方面都处弱势。所以,政府介入各个利益集团之间的一个目标,就是保护竞争中居弱势的集团,努力(不可能完全)使弱势集团有能力和富豪集团竞争。政党经费补贴的宗旨,就是让代表各个利益集团的政党都有基本的运作经费,是这种保护弱势集团的一个必要政府干预。

中国共产党经常拿西方的竞选都是有钱人支持、为有钱人说话,来否定竞选的意义。如果加拿大政府真的完全取消了政党经费补贴,正是向有钱人政府的方向靠近了一大步,落实了中国共产党的指责,更是促使社会不公平的扩大。

:cool::cool::cool:
 
这里说的是俩个PC的候选人(CANDIDATES)赢了他们告ELECTION CANADA的CASE,不是Senator Doug Finley and Irving Gerstein等赢了ELECTION CANADA告他们的CASE.

EC已经输了,它还要搞啥呢?
 
保守党弄这个招,好使吗? 太高, 老百姓看不懂.:(
 
这里说的是俩个PC的候选人(CANDIDATES)赢了他们告ELECTION CANADA的CASE,不是Senator Doug Finley and Irving Gerstein等赢了ELECTION CANADA告他们的CASE.
是啊,同样的事情,EC还告啥呢?:blink:
 
我认为不应取消对政党的经费补贴. 因为需要给各政党一个相对公平的机会。就象不应该你没钱就不能上学。SOCIAL JUSTICE 是需要的。HARPER想借取消对政党的经费补贴使保守党一党独大,这在好象比较困难。

这事可是哈弗叶教授的错!08年大选后,HARPER想借取消对政党的经费补贴。引发国会休会,叶教授急于在自由党内夺权,让HARPER逃过一劫!

我看这事只好随遇而安了!

老话一句:相信人民,相信党!保守党搞得好,自然连任!搞不好,人民会要他下台。再多党费也救不了的!
 
后退
顶部