100 Reasons Not to Vote Conservative

http://www.100reasons.ca/

Here are a few examples:

#4. Conservative Government Cancels Court Challenges Program

The Court Challenges Program was created in 1994. It was designed to provide legal and financial assistance to Canadians whose voice would not otherwise be heard by the courts. It was believed that in order to assure the equality rights of all Canadians, it was vital that Canadians, regardless of situation or financial means, have the ability to challenge government laws and directives on constitutional grounds. Without this protection, many Canadians would be voiceless when confronted by an unconstitutional action by their government - for them, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms rendered an ineffectual piece of paper.

This seemed to be of little concern to the Conservative party when they cancelled all funding for the program.

In the House of Commons, Stephen Harper responded indignantly to questions about the program's cancellation, saying that his government "intends to behave in a constitutional manner," and that they "do not intend to adopt unconstitutional legislation." But can Mr. Harper make the same guarantee for the governments that follow his? Why cancel a long-term protection that was functioning perfectly well, at very little cost?

Does it make sense to remove all the fire extinguishers from a building, reasoning that "We have no intention of starting a fire"?

Harper's Conservatives have a history of not handling well the questioning of their authority or judgment, whether in the House of Commons or in the courts. When confronted, they would sooner silence the opposing voice than debate it. One might ask, "Is it wise to trust the intentions of a government that behaves in this manner?"

#7. David Emerson - Stalwart

During the 2006 election campaign, David Emerson, Liberal incumbent candidate for Vancouver Kingsway, had this to say about the nature of Harper's Conservative Party: "The strong survive, the weak die."

He added, "Just mark my words. If they get elected, they are going to begin a massive review of programs and a massive set of cuts to government programs. And people are going to say, 'We didn't ask for this. Mr. Harper didn't say this is what he was going to do.'"

And on election day, he proclaimed, "I'm going to be Stephen Harper's worst enemy. We're going to stir the pot and you better believe we are going to make a heck of a lot of noise."

A little under two weeks later, on February 6th, 2006 - the first day of the new parliament - Emerson joined the Conservative Party and was made a cabinet minister by incoming Prime Minister Stephen Harper...

And it's true - most voters in Vancouver Kingsway would agree - "We didn't ask for this."

#20. David Sweet, MP for Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Westdale

David Sweet, Con MP for Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Westdale, was elected to the House of Commons in 2006. Before this he was a CEO of Promise Keepers Canada. Some comments made by Sweet, and statements from Promise Keepers, are causes for concern.

In an interview with Christian Week, Sweet said, "Men are natural influencers, whether we like it or not. There's a particular reason why Jesus called men only. It's not that women aren't co-participators. It's because Jesus knew women would naturally follow."

A leader of the Promise Keepers organization went further, "I believe that feminists of the more aggressive persuasion are frustrated women unable to find the proper male leadership. If a woman were receiving the right kind of love and attention and leadership, she would not want to be liberated from that."

And from the 'Chosen Women' rally: "[A woman's] job is to submit to our teachers and our Professors...even if we know they are wrong. It is then in God's hands."

David Sweet is on the record on homosexuality, saying, "It's pretty clear in Genesis, in Leviticus and in the book of Romans that homosexuality is not an acceptable lifestyle, and that's the truth we decided to live by."

Some may find it alarming that a group like the Promise Keepers, which believes in the dominion of men over women, and the derision of gays and lesbians, would have such influence on a Member of Parliament.

#23. Conservatives vs Science on Insite

When science disagrees with the Harper Government's beliefs, science must back down.

That is the message given by Tony Clement's Health Ministry, in their decision to deny funding for Vancouver's Insite program. Despite public assurances that the government would look at all sides of the issue, their actions behind the scenes tell another picture. For instance, the government told researchers that it was willing to fund additional scientific studies of the Insite program, so long as the studies were not published until after June 30, after Insite's licence had expired.

Despite statistics that show Vancouver's supervised injection site reduces neighbourhood litter and needle sharing, and increases addiction treatment, and despite an RCMP commissioned report that determined the program was a net benefit, the Harper Government bitterly opposes Insite.

Though its federal exemption has expired, Insite is currently able to continue operations due to a decision by the B.C. Supreme Court (which the federal government intends to challenge).

#36. Stephen Harper's Judgement on Iraq

Not very long ago, in March 2003, Stephen Harper and Stockwell Day wrote an editorial for the Wall Street Journal. With the onset of the Iraq war, their letter addressed America with the words, "Canadians Stand With You."

"Today, the world is at war," they wrote. "A coalition of countries under the leadership of the U.K. and the U.S. is leading a military intervention to disarm Saddam Hussein. Yet Prime Minister Jean Chretien has left Canada outside this multilateral coalition of nations. This is a serious mistake."

What a serious mistake it would have been had Canada become embroiled in Afghanistan and Iraq. But, to his credit, it only took Stephen Harper 21 months to recant, this time to the Washington Times:

"On Iraq... I would not commit Canadian troops to that country. I must admit great disappointment at the failure to substantiate pre-war intelligence information regarding Iraq's possession of weapons of mass destruction."

Regardless of whether one agrees with the occupation of Afghanistan, it was to the Americans' great benefit that Canada had their back in Afghanistan. But, as we see today, it would have been utter folly for Canada to join America's invasion of Iraq.

Of course, some already knew it was folly, back in 2003. Stephen Harper, however, was not one of them.

#47. Harper Shows True Colours

Said Stephen Harper to [Conservative] Premier Danny Williams during an equalization meeting on November 30th, 2007: "I don't need Newfoundland and Labrador to win an election."

So, Stephen Harper doesn't need Newfoundland and Labrador.

Well, the feeling is probably mutual.

#63. Extremist MP Rob Anders

With Nelson Mandela due to arrive in Canada in the fall of 2001, a motion was put before parliament on June 6, 2001, that would make him an honorary Canadian citizen. Foreign Affairs Minister, John McCallum, with the support of the four opposition foreign affairs critics, read the motion. So, when the speaker asked if everyone agreed that "Nelson Mandela, icon of the human spirit, be hereby declared to be an honorary citizen of Canada", everyone agreed.

Except for a shout of "No" from MP Rob Anders.

Rob Anders later tried to defend himself by calling Mandela a "communist" and "a terrorist."

During the last sitting of parliament, Con MP Anders was the Chairman of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs.

#70. Military Integration with NORTHCOM

The intention of Northern Command, when it was first dreamt up in 2002 by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, was to grant territorial control of all of North America, including Canada, Mexico, the Caribbean, and the far arctic, as well as all territorial waters within 500km, to the United States during a civil emergency. All Canada had to do was sign up. Fortunately, Canada did not.

Fast forward to 2006. Canada Command is established.

Fast forward to 2008. It is revealed on February 22, 2008, that Canada Command has entered into a pact that would authorize the U.S. military to enter and operate under U.S. command within Canadian territory during civil emergencies.

Other details were vague, as the agreement was not made public by the Harper government or the Canadian Forces. Rather, information about the arrangement, which was signed in Texas on Feb 14, was released by U.S. Northern Command alone.

A distinction must be made between the American people and the American government. The American people are a valuable partner for trade, culture, and cooperation. The American government is the quasi-benevolent dictator who would gladly do the world a favour by taking all dominion over it.

Any fit person who values Canadian sovereignty (and resources) sees the madness of integrating Canada COM with NORTHCOM. To the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, nearly any situation can look like a "civil emergency" when wearing "Threat Condition Red" coloured glasses. Given the right excuse of "National Need" it will be time to send in the troops, because Stephen Harper already sold us out.

#77. Jim Flaherty on the Homeless

Harper's Finance Minister, Jim Flaherty, began his political life in the Ontario Legislature. There, in 2002, he ran for the leadership of the Ontario Progressive Conservatives. His was a "law and order" campaign. If made premier of Ontario, he promised, he would make homelessness illegal.

No, Flaherty's suggestion was not to give a home to each person without one; rather, if found living on the street, the police would come and take you away.

Out of sight. Out of mind. Homelessness eliminated.

Flaherty lost the leadership race.

#84. Conservatives Roll-back Immigration Policy

The Conservatives have settled on a new plan for dealing with the immigration backlog into Canada. Unfortunately for Canada, it is the wrong plan.

Immigration Minister Diane Finley has put forward a bill which would replace the current system, which judges each applicant on equal ground, with a system that places all of the power in the hands of the ministry. The change would drop thousands of applicants from the lists - people who have been waiting patiently and legally for years - to give an advantage to applicants of the Immigration Ministry's choosing.

Said Alex Stojicevic, chairman of the immigration section of the Canadian Bar Association, "The system should be transparent. It shouldn't operate by ministerial fiat. And that's what we're talking about here, a kind of decree system."

And, NDP MP Olivia Chow, "The principle of this bill is anti-democratic. ... It gives all the power to the minister to help people jump the queue. It's not accountable, it's not transparent."

The Conservatives had so much confidence in fairness of the immigration bill, they crammed it into a budget implementation bill, knowing that the Liberals would be unwilling to fight it there.

#87. Tom Lukiwski is an "A"

First elected in 2004 and again in 2006, Tom Lukiwski is the Conservative MP for Regina - Lumsden - Lake Centre. On April 3, 2008, a videotape surfaced featuring a younger Tom Lukiwski. On the video Lukiwski is seen saying, "There's As and there's Bs. The As are guys like me, the Bs are homosexual faggots with dirt under their fingernails that transmit diseases."

The tape also featured Brad Wall, later Sask. Party leader and Premier, and other provincial Progressive Conservative Party campaign workers making racist and sexist comments.

Lukiwski apologized in the House of Commons the next day. He called his comments, "stupid, thoughtless, and insensitive," adding, "I will spend the rest of my career and my life trying to make up for those shameless comments."

Of note, the previous MP for Regina - Lumsden - Lake Centre, Larry Spencer, was forced out of the Canadian Alliance party in late 2003 after informing a Vancouver reporter of a "well-orchestrated" gay conspiracy and insisting that homosexuality should be outlawed.

The question remains: "Will the next Conservative candidate be any better?"

#100. A Final Question

As we come to the end of a two and a half year Conservative minority government, one should ask:

What if Harper was given a four year majority?

Now it is true, some might argue that to ask that question is scaremongering. That just the mention of a hypothetical Harper government is playing the politics of fear. And to even suggest the possibility of a Harper majority is downright tawdry.

But this website is not about what Stephen Harper's Conservatives might do. No - this website has been about the 100 corrupt, fraudulent, dishonest, secretive, unethical, unlawful, ignorant, and incompetent things that Stephen Harper's Conservatives already did.

There are actually more than 100, but they wouldn't all fit.

So, to ask what Harper's new Conservative party would do with a four year majority is a simple logical progression. If the Cons already managed one hundred irresponsible actions in just a two and a half year span, how many can they fit into four?

And if they can manage one hundred irresponsible actions in a minority government, where their power is checked by the opposition parties, how many more could they slip by with a full majority?

Here's hoping that Canadians don't have to find out.