Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Cool Blue





Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 3130
Reputation: 114.9
votes: 10
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 5:27 am    Post subject: Convention Policy & Constitution Proposals Reply with quote

Anybody want to discuss policy proposals that will be voted on this weekend?

I like the idea to allow income splitting for those with kids under 7. Harper claims that income splitting is too expensive so this would be a more affordable way to introduce it to those who would benefit most.

I wonder why the age of 7 was picked though. I would think that 6 would be a better age. The universal child benefit ends at age 6.

Whaat do you all think of the proposal to base the number of delegates to a leadership convention to the number of members a riding has?

This proposal was introduced at the last convention and is what ticked off MacKay and many eastern conservatives. It failed because it was seen as possibly splitting the party.

I'd support it. Makes sense to me.
paisley_cross





Joined: 09 Jul 2008
Posts: 806
Reputation: 124.9
votes: 3
Location: Canada

PostPosted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 6:47 am    Post subject: Re: Convention Policy & Constitution Proposals Reply with quote

Cool Blue wrote:
Whaat do you all think of the proposal to base the number of delegates to a leadership convention to the number of members a riding has?

This proposal was introduced at the last convention and is what ticked off MacKay and many eastern conservatives. It failed because it was seen as possibly splitting the party.

I'd support it. Makes sense to me.


Clearly a Western initiative. It would de-nut Quebec, probably the objective. :D

I'm sure the party bosses will ensure its failure.
Riley W





Joined: 08 Jul 2007
Posts: 857
Reputation: 35.5Reputation: 35.5Reputation: 35.5Reputation: 35.5
votes: 10
Location: Manitoba

PostPosted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 12:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Also proposals on letting unions be voluntary, the human rights commissions, and some other stuff I believe.
Cool Blue





Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 3130
Reputation: 114.9
votes: 10
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 5:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Clearly a Western initiative. It would de-nut Quebec, probably the objective. Very Happy


Last time the concern was mostly over ridings in the east coast where some had only a few dozen members who's leadership vote counted just as much as western ridings, some of which at the time had over 10 000 members.
SFrank85





Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 2269
Reputation: 59.8
votes: 4
Location: Toronto - Scarborough Southwest

PostPosted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 11:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It looks like the motion to make it a crime to kill a baby in the mother womb might become party policy. Also not allowing Human Rights commissions to prosecute you on your freedom of speech will also be brought to a vote tomorrow.

Looks like Scott Reid's delegate/leadership voting proposal was defeated! And actually, it was an Ontario motion, not a Western motion! :lol:
paisley_cross





Joined: 09 Jul 2008
Posts: 806
Reputation: 124.9
votes: 3
Location: Canada

PostPosted: Sat Nov 15, 2008 4:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

P-203 passed - "overwhelmingly on a voice vote".

So did P-207 - "unborn victims of crime" but by a narrower margin.

Now, do we really expect the Tories to bring in a bill rescinding Section 13?
Riley W





Joined: 08 Jul 2007
Posts: 857
Reputation: 35.5Reputation: 35.5Reputation: 35.5Reputation: 35.5
votes: 10
Location: Manitoba

PostPosted: Sat Nov 15, 2008 5:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

so in my boredom I watched CPAC's coverage of the Conservative Convention's policy plenary.

Happy with most of the results. Unborn victims of crime resolution passed, right to not be in a union passed, removing Sec. 13 of the Human Rights Code passed, simplifying the tax code passed.

Quite a debacle over the proposal on the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms, and the Notwithstanding clause. I don't know where I stand on that, very complex.

Disappointed by the defeat of proposal for the federal government to encourage provincial governments to offer new ways of delivering health services utilizing both the public and private sectors. I guess I understand what kind of ammo that would give the opposition parties though.
SFrank85





Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 2269
Reputation: 59.8
votes: 4
Location: Toronto - Scarborough Southwest

PostPosted: Sat Nov 15, 2008 6:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Riley W wrote:

Disappointed by the defeat of proposal for the federal government to encourage provincial governments to offer new ways of delivering health services utilizing both the public and private sectors. I guess I understand what kind of ammo that would give the opposition parties though.


Don't be so disappointed, because in Ontario and Quebec it is already happening.
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Sat Nov 15, 2008 8:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SFrank85 wrote:
Don't be so disappointed, because in Ontario and Quebec it is already happening.

Same in BC as well.

Private healthcare takes nothing away from the public system... and it's time the Dippers and Grits wrap their head around the concept that healthcare is provincial jurisdiction... and the feds have no business meddling in it.

-Mac
Cool Blue





Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 3130
Reputation: 114.9
votes: 10
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Sat Nov 15, 2008 11:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think the private health care proposal kind of contradicts the rest of the platform where we promise to respect provincial jurisdiction which covers health care.
FF_Canuck





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 3360
Reputation: 73.4
votes: 17
Location: Southern Alberta

PostPosted: Sun Nov 16, 2008 2:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I thought the text of the healthcare resolution was quite clear, in that it signalled encouragement rather than direct action - disappointed to see it passed.

P-203 (the S.13 / CHRA motion) was a great moment during the session, IMO. The speaker got a (the only, I think) standing ovation, and it was ruled as 'carried unanimously' by the chair. I say 'ruled', because from where I sat I saw perhaps one vote against in the entire room... nonetheless, between that and the intermediary review, I'm confident that it's all over but the waiting, at least at the federal level.
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1

  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Convention Policy & Constitution Proposals

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB