Support NeoGAF

[BigJonsson]

I've seen more Senators on TV in the last week than in my entire life.....

 

[Azih]

Related: Quebec court rejects Conservative government Senate reform plan

That's from a few hours ago. Obviously, the Supreme Court could overrule that, and say that Harper can unilaterally reform the Senate, but I have a hard time imagining them saying one person (or branch of government) is allowed to unilaterally change the Constitution. And if that ends up being the case, he'd be forced to open up a Charter/Constitutional debate...like Maharg said, I can't imagine the political will would be there. Even if he doesn't care much for national unity, the risk of it exploding in his face seems like it'd be much greater than the reward of an elected Senate.

I'm guessing the same applies to abolishing the senate as well?

 

[maharg]

I'm guessing the same applies to abolishing the senate as well?

That's basically what the reference decision before the courts right now is supposed to find out. The most likely means to abolish the senate without any kind of constitutional wrangling is to basically leave it intact by the letter of the law but strip it of all ability to function. This would mean bills would take longer to pass, since they'd have to pass the senate by expiry basically.

 

[firehawk12]

There's really no reason to believe that making the senate elected and proportional would be easier than making the house truly proportional. Afaik the house can change its election system by simple statute, whereas changing the senate requires a much more complicated process.

If you doubt the political will for house reform you may as well doubt the political will for senate reform as well. Part of the reason senate reform will probably never happen is that proponents of it are completely split on how it should be reformed, so any given proposal is likely to fail.

Also if the senate were proportional and elected, why wouldn't the ndp run for it? How would that be shutting up? Their aim of eliminating unelected representatives would have been achieved.

No, I'm saying I am giving up on electoral reform in the House. Assuming that someone has the balls to actually sit down and do Senate reform and go through the process of having a national referendum, we could have a Senate that is proportionally elected and skip the angst of FPTP entirely. We could have a Senate that is elected in the same way as the Australian Senate, for example. It would potentially be a once in a life time opportunity for us to get it "right" the first time around before we get set in our ways and refuse to budge like we have on any kind of electoral reform on any other level.

As for the NDP, haven't they always been abolitionists when it came to the Senate? Would Mulcair be happy with an elected Senate and running NDP Senators in elections?

 

[maharg]

No, I'm saying I am giving up on electoral reform in the House. Assuming that someone has the balls to actually sit down and do Senate reform and go through the process of having a national referendum, we could have a Senate that is proportionally elected and skip the angst of FPTP entirely. We could have a Senate that is elected in the same way as the Australian Senate, for example. It would potentially be a once in a life time opportunity for us to get it "right" the first time around before we get set in our ways and refuse to budge like we have on any kind of electoral reform on any other level.

Except it wouldn't be right because on top of having an unrepresentative house (in the worst possible way, it's not regional balance it's just overbalancing results towards local winners) we also get the potential for utter gridlock because we have *two* houses that believe they're representing the will of the people, which is very empowering. Yay. We've been over this so many times but I still don't understand what you find so appealing about this. To me it is much much worse than what we have now. Like several orders of magnitude worse.

As for the NDP, haven't they always been abolitionists when it came to the Senate? Would Mulcair be happy with an elected Senate and running NDP Senators in elections?

They are abolitionists, but the reason they're abolitionists is because the senate is a legacy of feudal social structures and reinforces class structures. I don't think they'd be happy with an elected senate, but it wouldn't be so entirely offensive to their principles if it were proportional.

That said, they don't run candidates for the senate election in Alberta, but I assume that's because the current mechanism of senate election is pretty stupid and doesn't change the fundamental problem.

 

[gutter_trash]

reason 1 why I am against an elected Senate

there are fewer Senators right? right. So a Senator would cover a large geogrpahical representation, right? right

why would I want my Urban City vote to get drowned by hinterland country folks vote that would invalid my City Vote?

Fuck an elected Senate, it would empower the Hinterland rednecks more.

 

[maharg]

reason 1 why I am against an elected Senate

there are fewer Senators right? right. So a Senator would cover a large geogrpahical representation, right? right

why would I want my Urban City vote to get drowned by hinterland country folks vote that would invalid my City Vote?

Fuck an elected Senate, it would empower the Hinterland rednecks more.

Well, presumably the seat counts would change for the senate if it were made elected. The current seat counts are somewhere weirdly halfway between proportional and regional. For an american-style senate it would be N seats per province/territory. For a fully proportional senate it would have to be readjusted with the census like the house is, but it'd presumably be a simpler process.

But the whole point of a bicameral system is to counterbalance popular will with *something*.

Personally if the senate is kept and made elected I'd like to see it be some kind of demographic breakdown rather than a regional one. In particular, first nations are horribly underrepresented in our government and it'd be nice to see that change. A fully regional or fully popular senate would basically still entrench the existing power base.

 

[lacinius]

Huh. Did not know that. So it was basically the original Adscam (that is, scandalous-sounding at first, with the reality being significantly less bad), except Chretien knew that running around yelling "WORST SCANDAL EVER!" made for terrible politics.

Just to finish up this tangent about the HRDC and the "Billion Dollar Boondoggle"... lost in all the sound and fury by the opposition, including the ignorant fuck Preston Manning leading the way, was the Liberal Minister of the department at the time, Jane Stewart, showing what it means to be a Minister.

She is the one that initiated the internal audit, she is the one that accepted the results when deficiencies were found, she is the one that stood in Parliament and made the results public, rather than hiding and covering up, by saying this is what we have found and this is what we are going to do to fix these issues and then made sure it got done, which was specially noted in the 2000 AG report.

Now that's transparency, that's accountability, and that's what it means for a minister to take responsibility for a department... nobody was thrown under the bus on that day. This, as opposed to the what passes for the "Harper Government" of today.

 

[firehawk12]

Except it wouldn't be right because on top of having an unrepresentative house (in the worst possible way, it's not regional balance it's just overbalancing results towards local winners) we also get the potential for utter gridlock because we have *two* houses that believe they're representing the will of the people, which is very empowering. Yay. We've been over this so many times but I still don't understand what you find so appealing about this. To me it is much much worse than what we have now. Like several orders of magnitude worse.

I don't mind having the potential for gridlock though, if we get some form of representation that balances out the already broken electoral system in the House.

Some of the messes in Australian and, of course, American politics in a way actually make sense to me in terms of bicameral gridlock. I mean, we would have had an actual debate on whether or not Canada should be one of the few first world countries in the world to go without a mandatory census for example. Even if a government has a majority, at least there would be some attempt at accountability - rather than hoping that the opposition wins and reverses all the old government's decisions.

Although in the case of Australia, and presumably in Canada if we actually had an elected Senate, is that if we have a situation where there is complete disagreement between the two bodies, the Governor General would need to step in.

Now, I know THIS is impossible, but I would be more than happy to move to a Republican democracy and get rid of the vestiges of the Monarchy entirely. But that's even more of a pipe dream than electoral reform or senate reform.

 

[gutter_trash]

representation? only if it is proportional

I refuse an elected senate that empowers the hinterland over the cities

 

[Dr.Acula]

“That’s right, senators. Not one payment but two,” Duffy told a hushed upper chamber.

He said the Conservative party paid his legal bills to “make a political situation embarrassing to his base, go away.”

“He had my legal bills fully paid. Why did he do that,” Duffy said of the prime minister.

He said this “monstrous fraud was the PMO’s creation from start to finish.”

Duffy dropped bombshell revelations Monday in the Senate chamber as he continued to fight efforts by Conservatives in the Senate to suspend him and strip him of his pay for alleged spending infractions, along with fellow senators Pamela Wallin and Patrick Brazeau.

But Duffy again signalled he’s not prepared to go quietly as he served up a damning statement that openly accused Conservatives of covering his expense costs and then cooking up a scheme to deceive Canadians.

Duffy also alleged that the prime minister’s office gave him a script to lie about where the money came from, claiming that he had taken out a loan.
“The PMO told me to say my wife and I took out a loan at the Royal Bank,” Duffy said.

“That line was written by the PMO to deceive Canadians as to the real source of the $90,000.”

www.thestar.com/news/canada/2013/10/28/senate_scandal_mike_duffy_says_pmo_wrote_him_2_cheques.html

Wooooooaaaaah, Duffy throwing the Tories under the bus!!!

 

[firehawk12]

YEEEEEEEEES.

I hope this goes on forever. lol

 

[matthewwhatever]

As titillating as all this Senate/Duffy stuff is, I think Calgary Grit pointed out something that's being overlooked right now. The gist of it is: according to CBC, the Conservatives just scrapped their voter database -- which effectively means they wasted $7-9 million in contributions. If it's true (and there's no reason to believe it's not), then the Cons have basically squandered their huge fundraising advantage from the last year-plus. In all likelihood, they'll replenish their coffers over the next year and a half, but still...that's a massive setback for them, and will probably be far more damaging to them than anything Duffy says.

 

[firehawk12]

As titillating as all this Senate/Duffy stuff is, I think Calgary Grit pointed out something that's being overlooked right now. The gist of it is: according to CBC, the Conservatives just scrapped their voter database -- which effectively means they wasted $7-9 million in contributions. If it's true (and there's no reason to believe it's not), then the Cons have basically squandered their huge fundraising advantage from the last year-plus. In all likelihood, they'll replenish their coffers over the next year and a half, but still...that's a massive setback for them, and will probably be far more damaging to them than anything Duffy says.

I assume the software was totally shit or something, more than anything else. It's not the first time that incompetent IT created something that was junk. Or it may be a case of things being changed so much that people complained hard about it.

Hell, look at all the angst Facebook goes through every time they decide to make their site more and more like Twitter.

 

[matthewwhatever]

Junk software or not: at least $7 million, completely down the drain. Last year the Cons raised $17 million, compared to just under $9 million by the Liberals and a little over $7.6 million for the NDP. Spending so much money on garbage negated their huge lead, at least from last year -- and this year, things have been a lot closer, if I'm not mistaken.

 

[maharg]

It's probably not as bad as all that, tbh. At least in terms of whether the money is truly wasted, not so much in terms of PR impact. I imagine they still have the intention to replace CIMS, and they're not going to start from scratch. It sounds like it just had a terrible UI.

 

[gabbo]

It's probably not as bad as all that, tbh. At least in terms of whether the money is truly wasted, not so much in terms of PR impact. I imagine they still have the intention to replace CIMS, and they're not going to start from scratch. It sounds like it just had a terrible UI.

My thoughts exactly. It's bad for them internally, but from a citizen's point of view, it doesn't mean jack squat.

 

[maharg]

My thoughts exactly. It's bad for them internally, but from a citizen's point of view, it doesn't mean jack squat.

Hm. I was actually saying rather the opposite. Internally they'll just spend one more million to make it the system they always dreamed of by slapping a CIMS-like front-end on it. Externally it'll forever be known as a waste of 7 million bucks.

 

[Buba Big Guns]

Holy shit just saw some new polling data. Next election isn't for a couple years so it doesn't really matter, but right now it's looking like there is a good chance of seeing this government finally booted out.

 

[eBay Huckster]

Holy shit just saw some new polling data. Next election isn't for a couple years so it doesn't really matter, but right now it's looking like there is a good chance of seeing this government finally booted out.

You talkin' about the latest EKOS or Ipsos polls?

(Because either way, holy shit at those voter intention numbers :lol)

 

[firehawk12]

Bbbbbbbut free trade with the EU!

 

[Sibylus]

Canadian embassies eavesdrop, leak says (Colin Freeze, Globe)

A new leak suggests that Canada is using some of its embassies abroad for electronic-eavesdropping operations that work in concert with similar U.S. programs.

A U.S. National Security Agency document about a signals intelligence (SigInt) program codenamed “Stateroom” was published this week by Germany’s Der Spiegel magazine. The document, a guide to the program, was among material obtained by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden.

“STATEROOM sites are covert SIGINT collection sites located in diplomatic facilities abroad,” the leaked document says. “SIGINT agencies hosting such sites include … Communication Security Establishments [sic] or CSE (at Canadian diplomatic facilities).”

The leaked document does not give the locations of the alleged listening posts. It says that, in general, such surveillance equipment is often concealed “in false architectural features or roof maintenance sheds” atop embassies. “Their true mission is not known by the majority of diplomatic staff at the facility,” it adds.

Wondering if the other principal eyes are just going to sort of awkwardly manage to hide behind the US on this, or if the blame will (properly) be apportioned to the relationship as a whole.

 

[gabbo]

Hm. I was actually saying rather the opposite. Internally they'll just spend one more million to make it the system they always dreamed of by slapping a CIMS-like front-end on it. Externally it'll forever be known as a waste of 7 million bucks.

Political theater will keep peoples attention more than a party wasting its own money.

 

[matthewwhatever]

My thoughts exactly. It's bad for them internally, but from a citizen's point of view, it doesn't mean jack squat.

Absolutely. But just because people don't notice something doesn't mean it won't hurt them. Yes, they'll just go back to whatever system they were using before, but that's $8 million or so they won't be able to spend on pre-writ ads. Considering how they used those against Dion and Iggy, that's a pretty big deal.

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

Canadian embassies eavesdrop, leak says (Colin Freeze, Globe)



Wondering if the other principal eyes are just going to sort of awkwardly manage to hide behind the US on this, or if the blame will (properly) be apportioned to the relationship as a whole.

We are America's lapdogs what else is new.

 

[Boogie]

We are America's lapdogs what else is new.

You mean that our intelligence agency with a mandate to collect foreign Signals Intelligence actually intercepted foreign signals intelligence?!

I, for one, am shocked. SHOCKED, I say.

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

You mean that our intelligence agency with a mandate to collect foreign Signals Intelligence actually intercepted foreign signals intelligence?!

I, for one, am shocked. SHOCKED, I say.

Yeah, say that in front of Merkel or any other one of Canada's allies and see if that excuse flies.

Canada has no reason to be spying on our allies. They are not a threat to us and we have a moral obligation to respect their sovereignty. Tough call on that one though, we don't even respect our own sovereignty since we are basically in Europe to do America's dirty work.

 

[BigJonsson]

You think they aren't spying on us?

Everyone spies on everyone to some degree

 

[Boogie]

You think they aren't spying on us?

Everyone spies on everyone to some degree

Yup.

My take is more or less this:

http://www.cbc.ca/m/news/#!/content/1.2255092/pqid/7.879/

Which is to say, the only reason that France or Germany has to complain about the Five Eyes sigint network is just that we are better at it than they are.

There is really no "moral" objection to foreign sigint except for self-inulgent handwringing from those who will never be in a position to make decisions based upon the national interest.

There is no legal basis for putting limits on foreign sigint. Part VI of the Canadian Criminal Code limits the interception of private communications of persons in Canada. The idea of requiring judicial authorization for interception of extra-territorial private communications is absurd and no country on the planet adheres to such a standard.

If you object to such foreign activities *now* you simply reveal yourself to be completely ignorant to the history of intelligence as it has been practiced for more than a century as far as I am concerned. If you want really "morally" objectionable intelligence activities, you should read up on the history of the activities of the country that Snowde. Has chosen to take asylum in.

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

You think they aren't spying on us?

Everyone spies on everyone to some degree

Two wrongs don't make a right. Caanda can take a leading role in this category and we won't have to compromise national security. Germany and France are not a threat to us and "because they do it too!" is not a good reason to waste resources spying on them.

Canada sticking its nose into other nations' businesses (for the bidding of our southern masters) is also not my idea of a Canada with positive global influence, not that this government cares about anything like that. Do as I say not as I do.

 

[Boogie]

Your second paragraph there simply reveals that you have a fantasy where Canada does not have its own national interest stake in the practice of foreign sigint. That premise is absurd.

For example, we just signed a free trade agreement with the EU.

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

Yup.

My take is more or less this:

http://www.cbc.ca/m/news/#!/content/1.2255092/pqid/7.879/

Which is to say, the only reason that France or Germany has to complain about the Five Eyes sigint network is just that we are better at it than they are.

There is really no "moral" objection to foreign sigint except for self-inulgent handwringing from those who will never be in a position to make decisions based upon the national interest.

There is no legal basis for putting limits on foreign sigint. Part VI of the Canadian Criminal Code limits the interception of private communications of persons in Canada. The idea of requiring judicial authorization for interception of extra-territorial private communications is absurd and no country on the planet adheres to such a standard.

If you object to such foreign activities *now* you simply reveal yourself to be completely ignorant to the history of intelligence as it has been practiced for more than a century as far as I am concerned. If you want really "morally" objectionable intelligence activities, you should read up on the history of the activities of the country that Snowde. Has chosen to take asylum in.

We've been doing many things for centuries that aren't actually good for us, that is not a reason to continue to do something. I understand the importance of intelligence gathering; we need to know everyone's cards before they play them. Yet still, the ends don't justify the means particularly when it comes to spying on our allies. There is no reason to believe that France and Germany will act against our interests in any major way. Spying on them is simply a silly Cold War relic that we chose to keep because it makes us feel powerful. And at this point we are only getting our hands dirty with the nitty gritty because the Americans have used as decoy. It's sad we let our country take the hit when the real culprit is Uncle Sam, but we really only have ourselves to blame.

I disagree with CETA but that's neither here nor there. I'm not sure why we need to spy on the people we have free trade agreements with. Surely the spying activity would reduce once you entrust other nations with that kind of power, unless you are referring pre-CETA negotiations.

 

[Sibylus]

Link is still broken Boogie, but I think I know the piece you're referring to (Neil McDonald... yesterday?).

As for my personal feelings, I've a lot of mixed feelings about it. The world isn't nearly a good enough place to go without foreign intelligence altogether, and I am myself personally a fan of and fascinated by intelligence in general, but I can certainly conceive of a point in time where active intelligence gathering efforts against friendly nations may prove to be counterproductive.

And we're not sock puppets for the NSA, Viewtiful, we're equally "complicit" in the acts of gathering foreign intelligence, equally reaping the benefits of such intelligence, and I would highly suspect our intelligence community is just as loathe to give those advantages up. Ditto the UK, Australia, and New Zealand, they're not bloc members for giggles.

 

[matthewwhatever]

This is...interesting. The quarterly fundraising results are out from Elections Canada, and for the first time ever, the Liberals have more individual donors than the Conservatives -- 30,108 to 28,968. The Conservatives still outraised them ($3.4m to $2.1m), so I don't want to overstate it too much, but that's still pretty promising. (And for anyone wondering, the Dippers are well back of both -- 21,788 donors gave $1.5m -- while the Greens are basically non-existent, with $354k from 4,722 donors.)

 

[BigJonsson]

Pamela Wallin is in deep doodoo now

RCMP alleges fraud and breach of trust

 

[Boogie]

Pamela Wallin is in deep doodoo now

RCMP alleges fraud and breach of trust

I would repeat what I said before. A production order has among the lowest thresholds for being issued for any judicial authorization in the criminal code. Save your excitement for the day, if it comes, that charges are laid.

 

[firehawk12]

lol, the Conservative convention has been so stupid. Having zombies cheer on Harper as he pretends he has done nothing wrong makes them look like Tea Party crazies and not rational human beings.

Please start running attack ads now. Please don't let this story disappear in a year when people are worried about the Canucks being eliminated from the playoffs yet again.

 

[gutter_trash]

so, have the Conservative done some kind of vote of confidence on their leader Harper yet or what?

I'm not sure if replacing Harper with a Jason Kenney would remotely help them at all from coast to coast. Kenney is perceived to be more ''weasel'' like. Kenney's French is better than McKay's

 

[gabbo]

so, have the Conservative done some kind of vote of confidence on their leader Harper yet or what?

I'm not sure if replacing Harper with a Jason Kenney would remotely help them at all from coast to coast. Kenney is perceived to be more ''weasel'' like. Kenney's French is better than McKay's

Apparently the convention did nothing to stop any successors to the throne from solidifying themselves from what I've read. Harper was all talking points

 

[firehawk12]

Didn't you see the clip of Harper singing "The Hockey Song" to the crowd?

It's the Canadian Tea Party in there. lol

 

[gabbo]

Didn't you see the clip of Harper singing "The Hockey Song" to the crowd?

It's the Canadian Tea Party in there. lol

I read that in the same article that mentioned Kenney solidifying himself and Harper offering no substance

 

[firehawk12]

I read that in the same article that mentioned Kenney solidifying himself and Harper offering no substance

The frontrunners must be smelling some blood in the water anyway, and they can probably afford to take potshots (like defending Wright) without too much fear of retribution at the moment.

 

[matthewwhatever]

I read that in the same article that mentioned Kenney solidifying himself and Harper offering no substance

Link? As bad as things look for Harper right now, I still have a hard time imagining a scenario in which he actually gets forced out. He's just had such an iron grip on the party for so long, it's almost unbelievable that anyone could pull it out from under him.

 

[S-Wind]

Link? As bad as things look for Harper right now, I still have a hard time imagining a scenario in which he actually gets forced out. He's just had such an iron grip on the party for so long, it's almost unbelievable that anyone could pull it out from under him.

Which will make it all the more sweeter when it happens.

 

[gabbo]

Link? As bad as things look for Harper right now, I still have a hard time imagining a scenario in which he actually gets forced out. He's just had such an iron grip on the party for so long, it's almost unbelievable that anyone could pull it out from under him.

It was in todays paper, so I'l link it i i can find it online.
edit: It was from Friday apparently(online anyway), and the tea party comment must have been from elsewhere:
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/...ion_future_without_stephen_harper_hbert.html#

 

[gutter_trash]

Maxime Bernier calling for a national referendum on Senate reform is retarded since he fails to understand that:

-You need 7 provinces with 50% of Canada's votes to Reform the Senate

-You need unanimity of ALL provinces to abolish the Senate.

it's just populist pep talk to pump up the ignorant vote.

 

[firehawk12]

Earlier Saturday, party members passed motions pledging not to support euthanasia or assisted suicide, and to scale back public sector pension plans.

The policies don't necessarily become government policy, but tell the party's leadership, including the prime minister, what direction members would like to see.

The party also adopted policies to:
-pledge not to support any legislation to legalize euthanasia or assisted suicide.
-move public sector pensions to defined contribution plans rather than defined benefits, essentially scaling them back and bringing them into line with private sector pensions.
-reject the concept of legalizing the purchase of sex and develop a plan to target the buyers and third parties who profit off the sex trade.
-let faith-based organizations refuse the use of their facilities to people holding views contrary to their own.
-separate the CBC's TV and radio funding allocations.

One of the party's socially conservative MPs lauded the decision on sex-selective abortion, a practice in which female fetuses are aborted.

Conservative MP Rob Anders said the vote was a message from social conservatives in the party to the prime minister.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mike-duffy-s-90k-senate-expense-refused-by-tories-1.2335742

Jesus Christ, this fucking party.

You know what's going to happen? The Supreme Court is going to rule that criminalizing euthanasia is illegal, and it's going to becoming an idiotic legal gray area like abortion where no one is willing to regulate the issue and it will just become a free-for-all that the medical community has to decide on.

I also find it scummy that Conservatives have hijacked a feminist issue in an attempt to reframe the abortion debate, but then again, this is why I feel like social conservatives are evil - they have no scruples, if it gets the job done.

The one about basically letting churches turn away gay people (because what else could it be, really?) is just icing on the cake.

I really hope the left can get their shit together, because I'm tired of these knuckle-draggers defining Canada for the rest of us. I'm no fan of the Liberals, but if Trudeau riding his father's name is what it takes, then fuck it.

 

[NetMapel]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mike-duffy-s-90k-senate-expense-refused-by-tories-1.2335742

Jesus Christ, this fucking party.

You know what's going to happen? The Supreme Court is going to rule that criminalizing euthanasia is illegal, and it's going to becoming an idiotic legal gray area like abortion where no one is willing to regulate the issue and it will just become a free-for-all that the medical community has to decide on.

I also find it scummy that Conservatives have hijacked a feminist issue in an attempt to reframe the abortion debate, but then again, this is why I feel like social conservatives are evil - they have no scruples, if it gets the job done.

The one about basically letting churches turn away gay people (because what else could it be, really?) is just icing on the cake.

I really hope the left can get their shit together, because I'm tired of these knuckle-draggers defining Canada for the rest of us. I'm no fan of the Liberals, but if Trudeau riding his father's name is what it takes, then fuck it.

Why are they sounding more Republican every day ?

 

[maharg]

Why are they sounding more Republican every day ?

More? All this is tame compared to when they were called Reform.

 

[matthewwhatever]

Seriously. Anyone who thinks that the Conservatives are only becoming Republican now hasn't been paying attention. Most of their policies have been GOP-ish for years.

It was in todays paper, so I'l link it i i can find it online.
edit: It was from Friday apparently(online anyway), and the tea party comment must have been from elsewhere:
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/...ion_future_without_stephen_harper_hbert.html#

Thanks. I never thought Harper could seem like a good PM, but the words "Jason Kenney, Prime Minister" totally do it. Hopefully someone like Prentice can come back and take him out.