NDP #15

1097 posts / 0 new
Last post
kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

All three major parties support corporate rights agreements. They merely disagree over some of the text but the basic concept has a consensus. This used to be an area that the NDP was correct in opposing but they like the BC NDP believe in change, one tiny step at a time. Lets not talk about the real problems with our economy and its place in the global order that might educate voters and that is no way to fool them into voting for your party.

Geoff

This shift to the Conservatives should serve as a warning to those who think the way to defeat Harper is by running a "common candidate".  I fear that such a naive strategy will only push more right-leaning Liberals into the Conservative camp, and actually contribute to the re-election of a Harper majority.  Unfortunately, there are too many political action groups out there that promote the "common candidate" position.  We need to be more public in challenging this strategy.  

janfromthebruce wrote:

David Young wrote:

janfromthebruce wrote:

I remember a friend of mine who lived in a different area of Ontario actually shifting his vote on the last weekend to conservative. He wasn't conservative in any way but bought into the last weekend push that the NDP would or may possibly win and that it would create financial crisis and turmoil in our economy. In other words, the NDP are bad economic managers.

Now that worked more so in Ontario rather than in provinces where the NDP has been in power provincially and successfully. His vote in that particular riding would not have made a difference in the outcome but still it provided me with insight into how somewhat progressive but conservative liberal voters shifted their votes to prevent the soc dems to come to power. 

The same thing happened here in South Shore-St. Margaret's, jan.

Gordon Earle lost by less than 1000 votes in the 2008 election to Gerald Keddy, and during the 2011 campaign, the Cons really went after Liberal voters with the 'vote for us, or else the NDP will win!' spin,  and they picked up enough former Liberal voters that they won by 2900 votes.  Had the Conservative vote remained the same as 2008, the NDP's increase in support would have defeated Keddy.

Some people just won't accept the fact that there are a great many Liberal voters that will go Conservative before they ever go NDP.

 

Agree David. But perhaps having a provincial NDP govt will help in that matter.

janfromthebruce

Well I agree with you both. So another ploy is to suggest the Liberal candidate is the unifying candidate whereas, one would have to actually check out the "liberal" platform before ever making that decision. And why gooh, it's not progressive at all, and now you have 2 non-progressive candidates duking it out for power. Such as non starter.

knownothing knownothing's picture

New book by Dr. David McGrane to examine NDP history from 2003-2015

http://o.canada.com/2013/06/10/blog-new-book-to-examine-ndp-history-from...

janfromthebruce

Found the pundit's guide post which laid out the NDP OO win in 2011.

Explaining the 2011 Federal Election II: The Recipe for Orange Crush

At the annual Canadian Political Science Association conference in Edmonton the other week, lead investigator for the 2011 Canadian Election Study (CES), Patrick Fournier of the Université de Montréal, attempted to account for the fortunes of the various parties, and particularly to explain the orange wave in Québec.

He listed seven potential explanations for the rise that emerged in the days and weeks following the election, and then sought to either rule them in or out as feasible hypotheses for further study based on the CES data. The seven takes that Fournier and his co-authors considered were: "Fluke polls", Campaign Events, Rejection of Sovereignty, Increased Left-Right Polarization, Increase in Political Cynicism, "Layton mania", Issues and Policy.

The other political parties will have to carefully consider what unique values and issues space is open to them in Québec, and/or whether they want to compete with the NDP on what looks increasingly like its own ground on the left in that province.

But with the Bloc holding the 24% of hard sovereignists, and the NDP occupying the centre-left of the soft sovereignist-soft federalist ranks in Québec, the opportunities for the Liberals will probably have to come out of right-field for now. And I for one would love to have heard the advice former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney had for the current Prime Minister on a Québec strategy this past week.

mark_alfred

Interesting article on the Global site:  Mulcair casts NDP as ethical alternative to corrupt Tories, Liberals.

Good article that almost flatters the NDP.  Perhaps I'm being a bit too pessimistic here, but whenever a right-wing pro-Conservative source like Global starts giving an almost positive spin on the NDP, I worry that it's only because they wish to stall Liberal growth.  Regardless, I thought the video showing the continued challenge that Mulcair has been giving Harper over the Senate scandal is very impressive.

Sean in Ottawa

Well I wrote about this before they will do that. It's ok. It is a force meant to keep the NDP and Liberals close in strength to each other, For the NDP if it is close to the Liberals in support in the next election it can win.

The strategy is different if you are ahead or behind the Liberals in the polls. If ahead you don't have that advantage but you have others. So now the NDP is behind it can and should take advantage of whatever sunshine it can get regardless of the motivation.

mark_alfred

PoliSciStudent wrote:
Ignatieff also had an impressive background in academia, yet Layton's charisma allowed him to surge past Iggy in support and once again Harper won. Trudeau may not have experience but he's good looking and charismatic, and sadly in politics that means something. There's a good chance he'll say something dumb that will turn people off, but until that happens I think New Democrats and Conservatives should be a little worried.

That last argument is weak.  You're forgetting that Layton had a PhD in political science and had also been a professor.  Granted, Ignatieff's credentials in academia were greater, but Layton had some impressive credentials in academia, and Layton had far more political experience than Ignatieff.  So, trying to draw a parallel between Justin Trudeau and Jack Layton really doesn't fly, in my opinion.

janfromthebruce

Layton also wrote a book and much municipal experience and also drove many policies - think about the white ribbon campaign that started with Layton and the City of Toronto and is now internationally recognized. Layton had a political track record of progressive politics - Trudeau nothing.

mark_alfred

For those interested in modernizing citizen engagement in politics, New Democrat MP Kennedy Stewart is pitching that e-petitions be allowed.  See petition here (paper, as it must currently be).  Some news details on his efforts here.

socialdemocrati...

If Jack Layton was so charismatic, where was he in 2004? Why wasn't he crushing Stephen Harper and Paul Martin? Stephan Dion? Why wasn't it until Michael Ignatieff, the guy who supported the Iraq war and then told Canada to "rise up", the guy who supported corporate tax cuts and then promised a "family pack", that Layton suddenly surged in popularity?

The thing that made Jack Layton so appealing, and something the Liberals have yet to understand, is that he basically pursued the same principles for 20 years. That instills a lot of trust. Justin Trudeau can't go 20 sentences without contradicting himself. The most offensive is how he treats any criticism of the oil sands is anti-Canada, then badmouths Alberta when he's in Quebec.

If Justin loses the trust of Canadians, no amount of "charisma" will work.

Sean in Ottawa

Question:

The NDP voted down these Liberal motions:

  • That travel and hospitality expenses of MPs be posted on a quarterly basis similar to the way cabinet ministers and their staff now list costs of travel to events and any money spent on hospitality.
  • That MPs' expenditure reports be posted in a form accessible to the public.
  • That the auditor general do a performance audit of the House of Commons administration every three years.
  • That a parliamentary committee develop guidelines for the auditor general to perform more detailed audits of parliamentary spending.

The reason given was the Liberals were grandstanding. Well that's process. You don't vote based on that. This has the potential to undo some of the positive stuff the NDP had and let the Liberals, of all people, have the high road. How the heck did the NDP not see that coming?

Here is the NDP explanation:

"NDP house leader Nathan Cullen Nathan Cullen accused the Liberals of "making it up as they go along." He said Trudeau had not consulted the NDP about his motions, and is "making it up on the fly."

"Let's not do stunts, let's work together," Cullen told reporters later after the party's caucus meeting."

The complaint is real but it is not an explanation for the NDP vote and there is a huge difference there. The appearance is that the Liberals may have been petty in not consulting but the NDP looked even more petty voting based on that.c If there is a better explanation it should be advanced.

"The Liberals and Conservatives have already committed to posting their MPs' expenses online by the fall, so it's likely the NDP will have to follow suit."

How do you think that looks?

Why is the NDP completely on the wrong side on this one. Mistakes like this should not happen.

I can say it just looks liek the NDP is trying to hide something and if that is not true then it is a question of a political screw up. Especially since it seems the Conservatives might have nixed the motion anyway.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/06/12/pol-mp-expenses-motons-...

 

 

 

 

 

Sean in Ottawa

BTW people won't think that openness on these expenses as stunts and they will look at the issue not the process when it comes to voting. NDP had a bad day and needs to do better.

The NDP also needs to know it cannot make more public relations mistakes right now or it risks undoing what Layton did.

Sean in Ottawa

The NDP, if it wants to contain this, should present a more comprehensive motion asap on expenses disclosure otherwise this will hurt longer term.

The people want it and there is no excuse for them not to have it. Basic accountability.

Stockholm

FWIW in 2010 there were all these hosannas in the media about how Michelle Simson the Liberal MP for Scarborough Southwest was posting evry single one of her expenses online and setting such an example for transparency etc...she still lost her seats in may '11 and came close to coming in third!

janfromthebruce

I understand but right now can't find the article that there was more to this than what is in that article.

"Mr. Trudeau is trying to take credit" after the NDP has been working on these issues behind closed doors for a year, Cullen said.

It's my understanding that there is a legislative committee which has been working on this stuff for a year and thus Trudeau was grandstanding, knowing full well this was going on. He should have gone to the committee. 

So a legislative committee working on this for 1 year gets preemptied by Trudeau who would know full well this work is going on. Here's the committee name: "Board of Internal Economy works with the administration of the House of Commons in order to enhance transparency."

Here's that article: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/06/12/pol-mp-expenses-motons-ndp-liberals-caucus.html

"Mr. Trudeau is trying to take credit" after the NDP has been working on these issues behind closed doors for a year, Cullen said.

that's not it either. Okay from what I gather that there was some problems with Trudeau's motions, like just say identifying places where female MPs are or going - thus the potential at putting their safety at risk.

So the problem of grandstanding and doing things on the fly is the unintended consequences of motions that are not well thought out.

Sean in Ottawa

But the NDP must explain the problems and produce its own solution-- now it does not look good

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Female MP's don't like to tell people where they are going to for government business because of safety concerns? I've never heard of this before. Do you have any examples of this problem and quotes from the women MP's who are raising it?

gadar

This is what i meant when i wrote in the other thread that the opposition parties are more worried about scoring points over each other than actually trying to bring the cons down. NDP does it this time and Liberals have done it earlier and both of them will certainly do it again. And then they will waste their time defending it. While they could both be hammering the cons and their policies. Its all grandstanding. May my team win at any cost.

Brian Glennie

In 2010, when the AG wanted to audit MP expenses, the NDP were firmly opposed (just like now, apparently) but Nathan took a stand, said people had the right to know, and released the records detailing exactly how his office spent tax payer's money.

You can still read on his website what he said:  http://www.nathancullen.com/news/article/cullen_welcomes_audit_of_mp_expenses/

“Canadians have every right to be assured their tax dollars are being responsibly and respectfully spent, whether through government programs or MP expenses.” Cullen says he agrees with views expressed by many Canadians that the recent appearance of MPs standing in the way of an audit by Fraser is not a good one. He noted that while MPs are subject to rigorous scrutiny of their expenses by impartial House of Commons administrative staff and an external auditor, public perception of possible improprieties is disturbing and should be put to rest.

“MPs must prove that every expense is incurred in the process of carrying out their parliamentary duties, representing constituents, and holding government to account,” he said. “But clearly there is some distrust on the part of some taxpayers so the solution is to address any concerns so we can get back to all the other challenges on our collective plates.”

I was just so impressed by what he said and how he walked the walk.

Where is that guy?

 

 

NorthReport

Don't need Liberal 'stunts' on MP expenses, NDP says

 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/06/12/pol-mp-expenses-motons-...

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

I like Nathan but he seems to be speaking out of both sides of his mouth on this one.  How can you complain about Liberal stunts in one breath and then turn around and do the same thing with a motion that itself was clearly a stunt.  That is not taking the high road that is getting down in the gutter with your opponents. Dumb political moves after such a good performance over who paid for Duffy's Senate expenses.  Why did the party just not vote with the Liberals? Telling voters that the issues are already being discussed behind closed doors in a Commons committee is something only partisans will accept as a reasonable response.

Quote:

Once all four of Trudeau's motions were defeated, Cullen introduced another motion that seemed to be aimed at Trudeau. It asked for an investigation into the "potential" use of members' travel points to see if the points have been used improperly for travel to paid speaking engagements.

Speaking fees

Trudeau has been under fire in the past for accepting hefty speaking fees from charities and educational institutions while he was sitting as an MP. He has said that he pre-cleared his speaking jobs with the federal ethics commissioner.

Cullen's motion passed with unanimous consent, meaning that the Liberals voted for it alongside the Conservatives and the NDP.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/06/12/pol-mp-expenses-motons-...

 

Sean in Ottawa

I have to agree. If the NDP acts like all the others it will lose as well. It is wrong and it is bad politics.

Doug

Grandstanding or not, I think that's a good motion.

janfromthebruce

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Female MP's don't like to tell people where they are going to for government business because of safety concerns? I've never heard of this before. Do you have any examples of this problem and quotes from the women MP's who are raising it?

I was looking for where Cullen said this and what article - found it. MPs accuse each other of playing politics over expense disclosure

 

Cullen fired back in an interview that it was Trudeau who was trying to score points by coming to the issue late and putting forward motions without consulting other parties.

The Commons’ all-party Board of Internal Economy has been working on increasing MP expense reporting for the better part of a year, Cullen said, adding that determining the right approach isn’t as straightforward as people may think.

For example, he cited concerns about female MPs’ safety when it came to posting information about where they live or stay while working in Ottawa.

“When people start making up solutions with no discussion in the middle of the House of Commons, it’s rare that those solutions actually get what you want, and actually leave a lot of unintended consequences along the way,” he said.

As for credability - I trust Cullen - to suggest that it only has credability if a female MP says so is rich in this regard. For a year this committee has been working on it and thus getting it right.

“If (Liberals) want to be serious and want to do some work, we’ve been doing it and we welcome them to the effort. But making up policy as stunts and press conferences is not a good way to fix things.”

For his part, Treasury Board President Tony Clement said ironing out specifics was better done by the Board of Internal Economy, but that Conservatives had supported Trudeau’s proposals in the House of Commons.

“Of course, there is a process by which all parties discuss these things at the Board of Internal Economy,” he said, “but we’ve always been in favor of increasing transparency and accountability.”

Also find it interesting that a certain posters always seem to come to the defence of Trudeau - interesting that

Sean in Ottawa

Who is defending Liberals?

I think the NDP has missplayed or been outplayed on this.

They ahve to act quickly to fix it.

Cullen is the right person to do it-- he should explain in detail what changes the NDP supports, why, and why the Liberal motion was not the right one. And do this by addressing the substance. He has the credibility to make the case and it is a case that should be made. It is not defneding Liberals to point that out.

No matter how frustrated the NDP gets with what the Liberals do -- they have to knock the substance out of what the Liberals do not merely rely on the fact that the Liebrals are jerks-- not enough people understand just how much the Liberals are like this so it is a political mistake to not be clear on the merits of things.

I point out these things becuase I want the NDP to fix this.

socialdemocrati...

The optics of it are unclear at best. The NDP definitely should handle it differently.

Sean in Ottawa

Indeed, they will need to be more careful. At the very least not be left scrambling after something else is on the table. Communications must be in place for any eventuality so if there is something premature, the party can reply saying this is not the answer but we will produce something soon. This is what it is missing.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

For example, he cited concerns about female MPs’ safety when it came to posting information about where they live or stay while working in Ottawa.

Thanks for the quote. That is potentially a privacy issue however the way you phrased it; "Okay from what I gather that there was some problems with Trudeau's motions, like just say identifying places where female MPs are or going - thus the potential at putting their safety at risk."  did not convey the issue Cullen was talking about. Cullen should have emphasized that problem not gotten side tracked by calling an oppositions party's motions stunts.

The problem with a strategy based on only saying the NDP are trustworthy and the Liberals are not is that it will not work. Most people on this board including me would agree wholeheartedly with that assessment.  However if the majority of voters believed that then the NDP would have formed government a long time ago. 

Kara

Nice of Charlie Angus to refer to a female cop as a "meter maid", a comment he surely would not have made about a man.  An apology doesn't cut it.  He should be suspended because disgustingly sexist comments like that should not be tolerated, especially by the NDP.

socialdemocrati...

I frequently hear people call male parking attendants "meter maids". I think the comment is generally more insulting to working people than it is to women. But it's a pretty ubiquitous term. *shrug*

Sean in Ottawa

Not sure what the sanction should be but there ought to be one. Just because it is common does not mean it is okay or benign.

I think donating a week's pay to the cause of women's equality would be about right.

Brachina

 A heart felt apology will do.

janfromthebruce

And just because I have nowhere to put this:

  1. Ray Heard ‏@RayHeard 19h

    So let's get this straight. The offices of Prime Minister, Premier of Ontario and Mayor Toronto are all under criminal investigation!

    12:44 PM - 13 Jun 13 · Details

  2. J.J. McCulloughJ.J. McCullough ‏@JJ_McCullough 18h

    @RayHeard it's the holy trinity of the eastern establishment!

    Expand

  3. Ray HeardRay Heard ‏@RayHeard 18h

    @JJ_McCullough Laurentian compact

Kara

re: Charlie Angus.  I call BS on the idea that the term is used commonly for men too - never heard that even once in my more than 50 years on this earth - just more excuse making for the NDP.  A heartfelt apology is not sufficient in any way whatsoever for a blatantly sexist comment and the underlying sexist attitude of Angus.    The latter is the more disturbing.  When a potential controversy comes about for the party, Angus chooses to resort to a sexist petty attack on a woman.  Unacceptable.

socialdemocrati...

"Hey it's the meter maid" is pretty much a standard reaction to even just the sight of the parking enforcement vehicle. Used interchangably for males and females. Examples:

http://www.ewingsecurity.com/?attachment_id=30

http://briancalle.ocregister.com/2012/08/10/hermosa-beach-meter-maids-ma...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870358500457560488346568245...

http://www.fightthemetermaid.com/

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=12776134

Amazing you managed to live for 50 years and avoid even a single mention of "meter maid" to describe a non-female. You'd have to spend a lot of time indoors and avoid contact with anyone who thinks even slightly differently from you. The fact that you're calling BS says far more about your reaction than it does of mine. Good luck organizing any significant outrage against this complete non-event.

Like I said, I think it (at worst) shows a generally dismissive tone towards working class people. But if that were the standard for "unacceptable", I'm not sure how many politicians we'd have left.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

socialdemocraticmiddle wrote:

"Hey it's the meter maid" is pretty much a standard reaction to even just the sight of the parking enforcement vehicle. Used interchangably for males and females. Examples:

What has the female officer in this story got to do with a parking enforcement vehicle.  The point is she was not a parking enforcement officer and and if it had been a male who was not a parking enforcement officer he would not have been dismissed in any such manner. Women aren't real police officers is unfortunately the subtext of Charlie's words. I am disturbed because he is a strong voice on many issues and this is a side of the man that is not very pretty.

Of course if her name was Rita ... Undecided

socialdemocrati...

If the context is as you described, then there's sexist overtones. But I didn't see any "story", and I can't comment on things that people don't post. My only point is that the "meter maid" can refer to women, men, and inanimate objects.

Brachina

janfromthebruce wrote:

And just because I have nowhere to put this:

  1. Ray Heard ‏@RayHeard 19h

    So let's get this straight. The offices of Prime Minister, Premier of Ontario and Mayor Toronto are all under criminal investigation!

    12:44 PM - 13 Jun 13 · Details

  2. J.J. McCulloughJ.J. McCullough ‏@JJ_McCullough 18h

    @RayHeard it's the holy trinity of the eastern establishment!

    Expand

  3. Ray HeardRay Heard ‏@RayHeard 18h

    @JJ_McCullough Laurentian compact

Doesn't it make you proud to be from Ontario :p

@Zealots As for the rest, Charlie has voted in ways very supportive of women and minority rights, so insulting him over such a minor thing is simply wrong and worse, fantical.

This is all I have to say on the matter, if your going to witch hunt a good man over a bad choice of words, you can do so without me.

Brachina
  1.  

  2.  

bekayne

The public are not buying the "Senators bad, MPs good" line:

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/mps-senators-likely-cheating-on-expenses-more-public-scrutiny-wanted-poll--211520141.html

A whopping 86 per cent of respondents — including overwhelming majorities in all regions and across all age groups and party affiliations — feel it's likely that MPs and senators are claiming improper expenses. Of those, 56 per cent feel it's very likely.

The telephone survey of 1,005 Canadians was conducted June 6-9 and is considered accurate within plus or minus 3.1 percentage points, 19 times in 20.

Fully 89 per cent believe all expenses claimed by MPs and senators should be available for the public to view online...

However, an attempt to win unanimous consent for his proposals failed earlier this week when New Democrat MPs voiced their objections. NDP Leader Tom Mulcair later referred to Trudeau's move as a "stunt" aimed at deflecting attention from the scandal involving Liberal and Conservative senators.

Mulcair has noted that an audit of the Commons last year gave the elected chamber a "clean bill of health."

 

Meanwhile

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/mps-quietly-increase-their-travel-budgets-67-per-cent/article12548293/

Members of Parliament from all parties have quietly approved a 6.7-per-cent increase to their travel-related expense budget in addition to a 1.6-per-cent salary hike.

The decisions were made behind closed doors on March 25 by the House of Commons board of internal economy. However, the increase to the travel status expenses account for all MPs was only made public Thursday, when the minutes of the meeting were tabled in the House of Commons.

 

Pondering

All those articles referencing meter maids used the term in a derogatory fashion. Within some of the articles they referred to "parking officers" not meter maids.

For those of you defending the comment, would you defend a Conservative or a Liberal equally if they used the term?

Pondering

So does the NDP consult with Liberals and Conservatives before presenting private member motions?

Cullen says the NDP has been working on this for a year and they still haven't got a proposal. This has been a high profile issue for months. Trudeau said weeks ago that Liberals MPs and Senators would be reporting expenses in a searchable database for weeks. How complicated can it be?

If the situation were reversed, would you be condemning the NDP's motion as grandstanding and defending the Liberals who had been working on this issue for a year?

Kara

Brachina wrote:

As for the rest, Charlie has voted in ways very supportive of women and minority rights, so insulting him over such a minor thing is simply wrong and worse, fantical. This is all I have to say on the matter, if your going to witch hunt a good man over a bad choice of words, you can do so without me.

Would you still consider it "a minor thing" or "a bad choice of words" if his comments had racial overtones?  Homophobic overtones?  Etc.?  I don't really care how he has voted on different issues because he has shown himself to be sexist, which is completely unacceptable.  Quite frankly, the idea that this is minor is extremely offensive and sexist.  Or, are us "girls" just supposed to put up with this same crap forever.

janfromthebruce

Actually Kara, outside of you making an accusations against one of the best NDP MPs, I didn't see any link to the actual comment so I can't judge your con't rant about Angus.

But let's talk about Liberals and Con senators having to pay back the treasury tons of false expense claims. Are you at all concerned about that or is your rant just towards the NDP? Libs and cons sure love their taxpayer pork - entitled comes to mind.

Unionist

Charlie Angus Accused Of Disrespecting Female RCMP Officer With 'Meter Maid' Quip

Quote:

NDP ethics critic Charlie Angus eventually grew frustrated.

"I am sure the Conservative caucus might want to sing Lovely Rita Meter Maid all day, but what will they do about coming clean with Canadians about a potentially illegal and indictable offence that happened under this prime minister's watch?" he asked. [...]

Some female Conservative MPs reacted negatively in the House and on Twitter. Later, Michelle Rempel appeared with him on Power & Politics:

Quote:

Rempel took Angus to task for not apologizing for the statement.

"I so very rarely get to talk about this issue," she said. "I do think that there is an issue with sexism in politics and even something that is perceived is something that’s wrong. I find it disappointing that Mr. Angus, who I actually respect for his level of debate, wouldn’t apologize."

When Solomon asked if she was willing to go so far as to declare the remark as sexist, Angus actually egged her on.

"Say it. Say it," he said. "A Beatles song. Say it."

"I certainly think that if you are trying to slander a female RCMP officer or make light of that it’s not right and I would offer him the opportunity to apologize just out of respect for the position if nothing else," Rempel replied.

"Evan, this is getting pretty silly. We’re dealing with a criminal investigation in the Prime Minister’s Office," Angus said. "I apologize for quoting the Beatles."

 

janfromthebruce

thank you Unionist - I appreciate the context. I had just googled Angus and meter maid and it came up to the Huffington Post article. I have to say that Angus being a musican and of a certain age (is that agism?) would be indeed referencing a Beatles tune.

But there's more:

Solomon played a clip of Angus’ quip and gave him a chance to clarify his remarks.

"We are certainly in the silly season here," Angus said. "I’ve seen MPs cry in the House. I’ve seen MPs feel hurt and wounded over all manner of things but I’ve never seen an MP feel hurt and abused because I quoted Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band."

Angus denied he called the RCMP officer a "meter maid" directly.

"I said the Conservative caucus can sing Lovely Rita Meter Maid all day," he said. "I think that’s on side two of Sgt. Pepper. So, if that’s me busted, well, hey, it’s obvious summer’s coming."

snip

What do you think? Did Angus cross a line with his statement or is this much ado about nothing? Tell us in the comments.

So I checked the comment section and except for one commenter, they all are seeing it for what it is - an attempt by Conservatives to change the channel to do with the serious issues of check writing and illegal expense accts of Senators. Commenters did not read into or buy this line that Angus was being sexist. geez

Pondering

While the Conservatives were certainly using the meter maid comment to deflect criticism that doesn't mean the comment wasn['t sexist. What exactly did the RCMP officer do to deserve being belittled?

Sean in Ottawa

Here is the song:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Se5JLYKQfDU

I have to say I think the context that this is a pop culture reference and he did not call her this directly is certainly important.

I still think, however, the context he used it was insulting and inappropriate. I think he should realize that the reference was not okay in the context of discussing a female RCMP officer. Given the news recently about abuse within the RCMP-- this is not okay and he should apologize. 

That said this is not the story some are making it out to be (by removing the context) -- it is not as serious in some respects and still an issue in others.

Pondering

Thank-you for the considered response Sean. You are one of the posters that has always stood out to me. I do feel it was sexist, but probably inadvertently sexist. The thing is, when people are inadvertently racist, or inadvertently homophobic, they get called out on it anyway.

I don't think it's the be all and end all of sins, but it warrants a sincere apology. What magnifies the issue is people defending the comment as perfectly fine.

Pages

Topic locked