I'll say up front that it was appalling and cowardly that neither Conservative candidate could be bothered to drop by. Shame on them.
My take: both Lynne Quarmby and Claire Martin impressed me greatly with their intelligence, enthusiasm, and obvious knowledge. The crowd liked them too.
The Liberals in attendance, Jonathan Wilkinson and Terry Beech left me cold; more or less just reciting talking points and waffling at any time when they were put on the spot. Really, they felt like the kind of party hacks that I just never vote for.
The NDP was represented by Carleen Thomas and Carol Baird Ellan, both obviously very smart, with different but very interesting backgrounds, but again, not my cup of tea. Ellan seemed very negative, and Thomas felt inexperienced and not entirely well prepared.
22 comments:
I will not be voting Conservative. Isn't this the second ACM that Mike Little has decided not to attend?
John Weston skipped the Sunshine Coast meeting yesterday - seems to be a pattern or directive for the Cons
"appalling and cowardly"? Pretty strong words. Have you checked with the candidates to ask why they didn't attend or are you making assumptions and jumping to conclusions?
Hey Anon - if you're running for Federal office, and there's a serious all-candidates meeting, you have an obligation to attend, answer questions, state your platform and have it challenged.
If you're not up to doing that you have no place in government.
More specifically, if you have so little respect for the voters in your riding that you won't even take questions from them, then you are singularly undeserving of even one vote.
So yeah, it's cowardly that both Saxton and Little refused to allow the voters in their ridings to see them in a forum like this.
Harper does the same thing when he turns down an opportunity to debate the candidates.
Hopefully voters return their silence with no votes.
Well Barry I'm sorry but I don't agree with you. If a candidate attends no meetings then they might be deserving of the kind of language that you used. Any candidate may miss a meeting now and then and, regardless of their party, not receive a personal insult.
Anon. 8:45
In my personal opinion, if a candidate does not show up at the ACMs, they do not get my vote.
For whatever reason they are not attending, it does not bode well for them running Canada.
If the candidate I am voting for was not at an All Candidates Meeting,wouldn't"t change my mind,there re much
bigger issues than that in this election.
The "problem", if you can call it that, with ACMs is that relatively few people turn out,as a percentage of voters, and at least half the audience is aligned with one candidate or another, or have already made up their minds. So that leaves the other half, who may be there just to confirm what they intended to do, leaving just a quarter of them, or less, truly there to choose their candidate. The other thing with many of the ACMs is that they are hosted by a partisan group, e.g. BROKE, and when there is one issue that will dominate the questions, and the party's position is already clear, what's the point? It just become an opportunity to rant by anti- this or that people.
In the case of the ACM at Lonsdale United Church, it isn't even in the riding for the Burnaby North-Seymour candidates, so I am not sure why they were included. There will be an ACM at Highlands United Church on October 14th, presumably for the North Vancouver candidates, and one in Seymour on the 15th for the Burnaby North-Seymour candidates.
Going to an ACM is relatively easy. Knocking on doors is a lot more difficult, and according to experts, better use of a candidate's time. So maybe that's what Saxton and Little were doing.
Anon 12:48. If you decide the major issues of the country by whether or not a candidate may have had a prior engagement and missed 1 ACM then that is highly superficial. One hopes that the majority of voters display greater depth in decision making.
Saxton and Weston are both at the ACM at Silver Harbour. Very well attended by mainly the Iranian community.
Gee, I hope everyone else showed up - wouldn't want any appalling cowards!!
Imagine that, Saxton pandering to the seniors...
Anon, 7:02, you really need to get a grip - and a little knowledge. The Silver Harbour Centre is used as a central meeting venue for many groups, and I doubt very much that it was attended by "just" seniors.
Meanwhile, on Friday Jordian-born dual-citizen Zakaria Amara was advised that his Canadian citizenship was revoked under bill C-24, the Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act, passed last May.
Amara has received a life-sentence as the mastermind of the Toronto 18 terrorist plot.
He admitted to a leadership role in organizing a camp north of Toronto in which "recruits" were given basic combat training along with indoctrination in the extremist jihadi cause.
He was the leader of a group planning a 3 day bombing campaign against Toronto including the stock exchange, nuclear power plants, RCMP headquarters and Parliament in order to terrorize Canadians and cripple the economy.
He is eligible for parole in 2016.
Anon. 9:12
What is your point? The plan failed. Good. Perhaps it never had a chance of getting off the ground.
Our tax money should be going to look after our kids and families -- Canadian citizens.
Why is Harper not so concerned with people with "dangerous offender" status being released into our communities? Some of these are folks who have been convicted of heinous sexual offences against children! They can never be cured.
Anon 5:38. The point is that there is a bigger world than our little piece here and when electing a national government we need to think nationally.
The terrorist plan had every chance of getting off the ground but it failed when the plotters took delivery of the explosives which had been switched by the RCMP for an inert product. The terrorists were completely ready to go but were foiled thus the life sentences address their intent.
Just because it didn't happen in North Vancouver that doesn't mean that it can't. We need to elect a government willing to address threats to our population which would, by extentiion, look after our kids and families.
Anon 5:51. Agree that these creeps shouldn't be released. I think that happens through the courts which are separated from government by our Constitution. Tend to think that the more liberal the government the more liberal the judge appointments and the more likely the release of offenders.
Good grief Barry, surely you don't decide who to vote for by what occurs at an ACM hosted by some partisan group, do you? I am prety sure you made up your mind a long time ago who you are going to vote for, and I doubt the absence of Saxton and Little made any difference in that regard. By the way, there is no obligation for any of the candidates to show up. Of course, it is fun to watch the NDP, Greens and Liberals go after each other when there is no Conservative there to dump on.
Anon 5:51. Re Dangerous Offenders. In 2008 Prime Minister Harper's government passed the Tackling Violent Crime Bill strengthening the provisions against Dangerous Offenders.
Once designated as a Dangerous Offender, the court will impose a sentence that must ensure public safety, which can be either;
An indeterminate sentence of imprisonment, with no chance of parole for 7 years;
A regular sentence of imprisonment for the offence, plus a Long-term Supervision Order in the community of up to 10 years after the regular sentence has expired; or,
A regular sentence of imprisonment for the offence.
Dangerous Offenders are released by the courts - not by the government. I'm sure that a Conservative government would be happy to contemplate stronger legislation against Dangerous Offenders which would meet with considerable opposition from the Liberals and NDP.
Trudeau and Mulcair both told Peter Mansbridge that they will roll back the $10,000 to $5,500 annual contribution. Hope not as TFSA a big part of my retirement plan.
Post a Comment