I have an op-ed in today’s Globe and Mail taking Belinda Stronach to task on the election gag law issue.
Back in early 2004, when she was running for the Tory leadership, Stronach signed a pledge to scrap this horrible law which denies all Canadians the right to free election speech.
Did she really believe gag laws were wrong or did she sign it merely to help her win the leadership?
She has an obligation to her constituents to set the record straight, and I hope my article spurs her to do just that.
12 comments:
It will be interesting to see if & how she responds.
That one is almost as good (or as worthless) as the one Ontario's Fiberal leader signed a few years ago over tax and spend.
I support repealing the section that prohibits running campaigns on individual issues associated with a candidate so long as no direct or implicit reference is made to any party or candidate since an election is a time where all issues should be debated. However, I do believe there should be limits on running parallel campaigns with the sole intention of electing or defeating a particular party or candidate. The campaign spending limit is $18 million so if a party only wants to spend $15 million, then third parties provided they register as third party campaigners could spend up to $3million. I am not so concerned about third parties affecting the outcome as I think most voters are smart enough to see through third party advertising. Here in BC, the BCTF spent $5 million to elect the NDP in the last provincial election, which they failed to achieve. Where it is problematic is if a group spends a huge amount of money on third party advertising, the party elected will feel obliged to give into their special interests. Special interest groups have a huge influence in the United States and this is not the road I want to go down.
best site
nice site
best site
nice site
best site
BEST SITE
http://www.mentalhealth.net.in/
nice site
http://www.onlinecasino.org.in/
good site
good site
Post a Comment