With election campaigns officially and unofficially in full swing, voters are bearing witness to a multitude of promises from politicians. We’re also seeing a rising number of disingenuous statements, some bordering on the laughable.
In an era of never before seen wealth, they mismanaged our coffers and squandered our nest egg of oil revenues. Now the PC Government is deferring needed social infrastructure because, they say, we have no money.
Given the federal and provincial elections upon us, politicians’ appearances at community events like the St. John’s Pride Parade are inevitable. But is it sincere, and not just for good public relations and votes?
Our elected politicians’ behaviour online demands scrutiny.
With mere months to go until the federal and provincial elections, the New Democratic Party is enjoying a resurgence at both levels. Can they maintain, and even strengthen, their momentum in the weeks and months until voters go to the polls?
A preoccupation with political point-scoring seems to rule our politicians’ better judgment when it comes to governing and to offering an effective opposition in this province, and it has impacted both our social needs and our very democracy.
In claiming it is educating the public and reporting the “good news” provincial media are not, the Davis Government is looking mighty Harperesque in promoting its budget with public tax dollars in the lead-up to a provincial election.
Many Canadians, including Liberal Party supporters, are disgruntled over the Liberal Party of Canada’s support for the Harper Government’s controversial anti-terrorism legislation, which has them questioning whether the once presumptive future government is really any different from the Conservatives.
After reaping upward of $20 billion in offshore oil revenues in a decade, we have little to show for government’s reckless spending. After years of great promises wrapped in fierce pride, the PCs have placed us in worse fiscal straits than before they took office.
Rationally approaching delicate matters in the public interest, especially those as sensitive as the Don Dunphy shooting, is the most effective way to gain the answers and the information we seek.
Is a commitment to openness and transparency with access to information this government’s real motivation for accepting an effective quashing of its infamous Bill 29?
