Kate over at the Conservative echo chamber Small Dead Animals posted that pictures were coming for her story about the outgoing NDP government trashing offices in the legislature.
Well it's been a week, Kate, and as predicted, not a single picture has shown up. What a surprise. I would never, ever expect you to post a bunch of crap on your shitty little site and try to pass it off as news. Could it be -- and I'm just going out on a limb, here -- that your story is a total fabrication? That there in fact was no damage to the offices, and the Sask Party is using this tired excuse to do some renovations? Or that, I don't know, painting offices and cleaning carpets are standard procedure when there's a change in government?
The truth is there was no vandalism in the legislature by either party. There was no mention of this in the media. And Kate will have no pictures forthcoming. You owe us an apology, babe. Not that we'll get one, but you do.
Here's the story that goes along with the picture you posted, too. You'll note there's nothing mentioning the sinister coyote -- not wolf -- left in Wall's office. He seems pretty pleased with the thing anyway. Must have been a slow day at the spin machine. (Leader-Post, Nov. 23)
Of course, having no brain of her own, Kate can hardly be blamed for spreading this gross falsehood: she's only allowed to say what the Sask Party tells her to. I wouldn't be surprised to find out she's nothing more than a paper mache mask with a walkie-talkie inside.
November 29, 2007
Labour is on the Agenda
Session starts again on Dec. 10, and Wall has already said Labour is on the agenda. His need to get this out of the way so soon means something is in the works. So much for Larry Hubich's request for compromise:
No Larry, they're clearly not interested in that approach. Barely a month after the election and they're already going into session? Who could they have possibly consulted?
What's more concerning than their clear agenda to change the labour laws is the hidden agenda Rob Norris lets out of the bag:
Saskatchewan Federation of Labour president Larry Hubich said he'll be looking to the government to consult broadly before any changes are made, adding the labour movement is prepared to be respectful and "engage in compromises."
"If that's the approach that the new government wants to take then I think they'll see a favourable response from the labour movement," Hubich said, who has written the premier to request a meeting between labour leaders and cabinet.
"If they're not interested in that approach, then they shouldn't be surprised at the kind of response that might ensue."
(Leader-Post, Nov. 23)
"If that's the approach that the new government wants to take then I think they'll see a favourable response from the labour movement," Hubich said, who has written the premier to request a meeting between labour leaders and cabinet.
"If they're not interested in that approach, then they shouldn't be surprised at the kind of response that might ensue."
(Leader-Post, Nov. 23)
No Larry, they're clearly not interested in that approach. Barely a month after the election and they're already going into session? Who could they have possibly consulted?
What's more concerning than their clear agenda to change the labour laws is the hidden agenda Rob Norris lets out of the bag:
When asked about the planned changes to labour legislation, Norris said there is a need to "rebalance relationships."
But the minister said he couldn't detail which relationships or the changes that need to occur until he was more fully briefed about his new portfolio.
(Leader-Post, Nov. 23)
Rob is clear that there's a need to rebalance the relationship between labour and management, but he apparently doesn't know where or what that imbalance is. If he's saying this just to toe the party line on labour, then he's an idiot. If he shed some more light on the Sask Party's hidden agenda, which is more likely, then he's an idiot and a liar.
But the minister said he couldn't detail which relationships or the changes that need to occur until he was more fully briefed about his new portfolio.
(Leader-Post, Nov. 23)
Rob is clear that there's a need to rebalance the relationship between labour and management, but he apparently doesn't know where or what that imbalance is. If he's saying this just to toe the party line on labour, then he's an idiot. If he shed some more light on the Sask Party's hidden agenda, which is more likely, then he's an idiot and a liar.
November 28, 2007
Brad Can't Add
Mandrake came out hitting pretty hard with his piece Friday about how the province's finances are probably better than Brad Wall would care to admit (Leader-Post, Nov. 23).
He starts by saying $2 billion in the bank would cover the Sask Party's election promises, then asks if Lorne Calvert is lying about the money in the bank. We know from the bumblings of Dan D'Autremont that the Sask Party says one thing when they mean another, so it's not surprising to have Wall forced into a corner so quickly.
Mandrake is uneven in his column when he should be hard-hitting. Although he does point out that this is an old political tactic to lower voter expectations, and is also likely a way for Wall to criticize the spending of the outgoing government, he stops just short of Wall's promise to curb the growth of the civil service and his promise of no deficit budgeting. And in spite of Wall's insistence in the following quote, I think we'll be seeing both of those promises go out the window very shortly:
Another thing we can expect is the privatization of SPM. There are certainly some budgetary efficiencies to make up there.
He starts by saying $2 billion in the bank would cover the Sask Party's election promises, then asks if Lorne Calvert is lying about the money in the bank. We know from the bumblings of Dan D'Autremont that the Sask Party says one thing when they mean another, so it's not surprising to have Wall forced into a corner so quickly.
Mandrake is uneven in his column when he should be hard-hitting. Although he does point out that this is an old political tactic to lower voter expectations, and is also likely a way for Wall to criticize the spending of the outgoing government, he stops just short of Wall's promise to curb the growth of the civil service and his promise of no deficit budgeting. And in spite of Wall's insistence in the following quote, I think we'll be seeing both of those promises go out the window very shortly:
"We're going through a transition program right now. I can tell you this, there's no directive today in that (cabinet) room ... to say 'Here, we're going to find a bunch of savings through fewer public service jobs.' We have said we think government ought not to grow faster than the population it serves. We will be looking for efficiencies and savings in government and I think that's reasonable given what we will report," he said.
(Leader-Post, Nov. 23)
(Leader-Post, Nov. 23)
Another thing we can expect is the privatization of SPM. There are certainly some budgetary efficiencies to make up there.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)