Who's telling the truth?

The Brantford Expositor asked all the candidates what most voters seem to be worried about. Here's the responses:

• Lloyd St. Amand: Land Claims and Jobs
• Marc Laferriere: Jobs and Healthcare
• Nora Fueten: Healthcare, Partisanship, and Nuclear Power
• Phil McColeman: Cost of an election

Three out of four candidates have something in common with another candidate. Those three also mention REAL policy issues.

And Phil McColeman? This is just more proof that he's living on another planet… or maybe not telling the whole truth.

Partisan Posturing and Trickle-Down Economics

Hours before a senior Liberal (who for years has been a respected Member of Parliament) was to visit the riding, Phil McColeman sent a message to the Brantford Expositor attacking the Liberal plan to eliminate a corporate tax cut. Phil defended the Conservative plan to cut taxes for corporations while making families wait 5 years for a tax cut:

Calling the Liberal rollback a "tax hike," the statement said: "This increase will kill jobs, stall our recovery and set our families back."…

"Why does John McCallum and the Liberal Party want to kill jobs, stall our recovery and set our families back?" it says.

"Brant's economy and job creators need support, not reckless job-killing tax hikes to pay for billions of dollars in ill-considered spending."

Where to begin?

First of all, it is not a "tax increase", rather it is avoiding a Conservative corporate tax cut – a tax cut that is inherently inefficient.

Second of all, Phil seems to think that cutting taxes for corporations will somehow benefit families more than cutting taxes for families and providing social services. This is called "trickle-down economics". The theory is that if you cut taxes for the wealthiest individuals or corporations, the benefits will "trickle down" to the average Joes/Janes. It's been tried before. It doesn't work.

Third of all, it is in fact the Conservatives who have out-of-control spending. They took a budget surplus and turned it into the largest deficit in Canadian history (see also this blog post from last year). Parliamentary Budget Officer Kevin Page has said that the deficit is "structural", which means that it'll still be there when the recession ends. The Conservatives are wasting tax dollars on e.g. $1 billion for the G20 meeting in Toronto, $10 billion for unneeded new prisons, $30 billion for stealth fighter jets (with no competition for the contract), $130 million on advertising (triple the former amount), and spending $27 million on Economic Action Plan signs.

Finally, it is simply over the top to suggest that the Hon. Mr. McCallum wants to "kill jobs" and "set our families back". Ask yourself honestly: Does any politician really want that? Does anybody really want that? Of course not. It's partisan posturing pure and simple.

Who would make a better Conservative MP: Phil or the fire hydrant outside his office?

After reading frequent letters to the editor by Mr. Ben Ayles, one would think that anyone, including the yellow fire hydrant outside his Park Road North office, would make a better Member of Parliament than Phil McColeman.




McColeman in the Dark?
Brantford Expositor
Letter to the Editor by Benjamin Ayles
Posted 13 hours ago

Now Phil McColeman may be in the dark in Ottawa but what can you expect from a guy who once made his living pouring concrete. That's what we need in Ottawa, more plain talk and less thought, that will do just fine. Brant doesn't need St. Amand's smooth ways and fine talk, we need rough hands and someone who will let Mr. Harper make the decisions. So Mr. McColeman may be in the dark but Harper is bright enough for both of them.

Here are some other gems:

Defending Phil McColeman
Brantford Expositor
Letters to the Editor

In response to the letters sent responding to my earlier letter, "McColeman Not So Bad," I just have to say not to worry about Phil coming in a little under the mark MP wise because he has a leader who can answer questions for him.

Does anyone think Ignatieff would do that for Lloyd St. Amand? And of course I realize that we are Canadian, not American, but I'm with the Harperites who declare that unfettered capitalism combined with a Republican laissez-faire attitude is the right way to deal with Canada's economy. America has obeyed that most of the time and look at what a great country it is.

I support Harper's mirroring of ex-president Bush's policy, and I'm pleased Phil does, too.

Ben Ayles Oakland


And...

MP Phil McColeman is not so bad
The Paris Star

To the Editor:

I've been hearing a lot of complaining about MP Phil McColeman's inability to think and speak freely about local Brant issues, but I don't see that as a problem, really.

It doesn't take a whole lot to be a MP these days with all the technology we got, and with a leader like we have in Ottawa we're better off leaving decisions to the Prime Minister's office.

I like the direction Canada's going in, selling off Federal assets and corporations is the right thing to do, limiting access to abortions in the third world countries I also agree with, even the end of the long form census.

We should be modifying government by increasing its military and security presence, this is the strength of America, and I am pleased that our MP so wholeheartedly supports this direction as well. I don't mind that Harper speaks for McColeman since it is Harper that has come up with Conservative policy, not the MP's.

Thanks for knowing your limits Phil.


Ben Ayles,

Brantford, Ont.

Food for thought: what does Phil stand for? Besides pork...

"You are what you eat..."







Pork BBQ on Parliament Hill
May 06, 2009

Attached is a photo taken today of Brant MP Phil McColeman, Larry Miller Chair of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food, and Curtiss Littlejohn, of the Canadian Pork Producers

Letters to the Editor from the Brantford Expositor, from the past month:

Paper should focus on asking MP tough questions

Posted 5 days ago

Recent concern by the Expositor about the selection of Lloyd St. Amand as the Liberal candidate for the riding of Brant is unfounded and misguided.
It is strongly recommended that, rather than focus on the opposition, perhaps the writer of the piece should be focusing on current representation of our riding.
It is very clear that more attention needs to be paid to the record of our current MP. In case there is some confusion, I've formulated some questions that the writer who questioned St. Amand's credibility could ask:
1) Why, when the taxpayers in the City of Brantford are spending millions of dollars dealing with land claims issues in court, hasn't Phil McColeman asked a single question about land claims in the House of Commons?
2) Why does Phil McColeman think that foreign affairs with Cuba are more important than issues in our riding?
3) When major announcements about land claims come from Six Nations, why does Phil McColeman not know anything about them? Isn't he "friends" with elected Chief Bill Montour?
4) Why is Phil McColeman opposed to Employment Insurance reform that would have offered immediate relief to hundreds of residents in the riding of Brant before the summer began?
5) Why does Phil McColeman support blatant political advertising that suggests that his government has achieved so little?
6) Instead of why they think they're doing such a great job, why doesn't the Conservative party spend government advertising money on saving or creating taxpayers' jobs?
7) Why does Phil McColeman support a party that has continually shown that it does not know what it is doing with the country's economy and finances?
It is my earnest hope and desire that the author of The Expositor editorial questioning St. Amand's candidacy finds the time to ask the questions that really matter to the citizens in the riding of Brant, and not waste our time by attacking the opposition.
Michael Skrzypek, president Brant Federal Liberal Association Brantford

&

Tough to answer where our MP stands on issues

Posted 7 days ago


Mr. Kastronovic, in his July 2 letter, shows that he did not read carefully the story about the flag. Our former MP, Lloyd St. Amand, conveyed concerns he had heard about the flag sent by Phil McColeman to households in Brant. This was supported by the fact that many of your readers submitted letters voicing a similar concern -- namely, that they found the inclusion of Mr. McColeman's website on the flag offensive. I do not believe the Canadian flag should be used for political propaganda.

The "contest" that Mr. McColeman took part in (with 30 other Conservative MPs) was obviously to identify supporters. I have not heard or read Mr. McColeman's stance on the current economic situation and solutions specific to Brant, how the record deficit of $50-plus billion is going to be retired, how employment insurance can be improved or how his government will attempt resolution of land claims. It is impossible for me to answer the question: "Do you think Phil McColeman is on the right track on the major issues of the day?" when I have no idea where he stands.

K. Babineau Mt. Pleasant

Phil does the darnedest things...

Take MP's 'embarassing' story at face value














Posted By SUSAN GAMBLE, Brantford Expositor
June 19, 2009
It's easy to misstep when you're a rookie MP in Ottawa.
Just ask Phil McColeman, who is sporting the scars from an embarrassing run-in with a window ledge in Bytown.
The abrasions on his forehead and across his nose have left Phil looking as though he's had a run-in with a bear. Or bumped heads with a deer.
The truth is far more mundane, says the politician who was caught by the camera while presenting a giant cheque to Caralyn Smith, the winner of his public safety essay contest. Caralyn, of Ohsweken, wrote an "excellent submission" and won $500 for her efforts.
"I tripped in a restaurant," says Phil. "It was tight quarters and I stumbled over a chair, hit my nose on a ledge and because my glasses were on, they tore the skin. It looked way worse than it was."
Unfortunately, Phil was dining with Gary Lunn, minister of state for Sports.
"I just know now when the Olympic torch comes to Brantford they're not going to let me touch it."
Phil's face became the subject of ribbing in the house, too, when Transport Minister John Baird quipped, "That'll teach you to mess with me!"
"It's been totally embarrassing," says Phil mournfully.
"Just tell people I'm really fighting for my constituents in Ottawa!"

Sadly I see we have Mr . Magoo for an MP...
and no Phil is not fighting for his constituents. He has yet to mention land claims, Caledonia or any local issues involving Brant in Ottawa. How exactly does one stumble over a chair? I sincerely hope Mr. McColeman stumbled his way to a cab and did not drive that evening. Phil is definitely making Brantford proud (sarcasm). I agree with Phil, it would not be a wise idea to have the flame near him.

Phil decorates the Canadian flag...

Brant MP makes 'no apologies' for flag decals
When a two-year old decides to write on the walls with a marker or crayons, it is completely innocent and cute even. When a Member of Parliament decides to use taxpayers' money and the Canadian flag as advertising space, it is completely ridiculous and disrespectful: Lawyer Lloyd St. Amand called The Expositor on Monday to express concern over the recent mailout of 76,000 Canadian flag decals by Phil McColeman; the flags, paid for out of McColeman's member's advertising budget, carry in red letters on the bottom McColeman's web address - www.philmccolemanmp.ca. Phil responded "That's what the budget's intended for. I'm actually quite flabbergasted that people are criticizing this."
Phil you're not flabbergasted, you're an idiot! Heritage Canada has a page on their website on "flag etiquette" for morons like Phil. He should read it as soon as possible, after reimbursing taxpayers, apologizing to his constituents and a time-out like the two-year old who writes on the wall. After mailing out coupons to his constituents, I would have thought Phil would have learned by now...
On another note I was reading about incremental conservatism by Professor Tom Flanagan, a former Conservative campaign manager. I think I know what incremental conservatism is...

Phili Vanilli

Loads of letters have been written into the Expositor regarding the water treatment plant since Phil McColeman made this "new" announcement. Phil McColeman, Member of Parliament for Brant on behalf of the Honourable Chuck Strahl, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development made the announcement that the residents of Oshweken will receive $10 million for a "new" water treatment plant. When I first read this, I was puzzled: This announcement had already been made in 2005 and the funds have also been available since 2005! So will there now be TWO new water treatment plants for residents of Oshweken, or will one plant cost $20 million?!

A basic Google search revealed that former Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, the Hon. Andy Scott had committed $10 million to Oshweken for a new water treatment plant, under the First Nations Water Management Strategy (FNWMS), this announcement is on the Ministry's website under 2005 news releases. Now, why did the government reannounce this funding three years later? The reason is that Stephen Harper became Prime Minister, then cancelled the historic Kelowna Accord and chose not to pursue this project. He probably figured that if the Six Nations had waited this long, they should wait until Brant elected a Conservative MP before getting any money. This is the same Prime Minister who also opposed a UN Resolution on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

A Conservative Indian Affairs Minister has not visited Brant since Stephen Harper became Prime Minister, all because of two words: land claims. Jim Prentice a former Minister of Indian Affairs, only visited Brant during the election and when he was no longer minister in charge of land claims. Why didn't Chuck Strahl make the water treatment plant announcement? Why did the PMO allow another patsy (Phil) to go up and make a reannouncement of something that had already been announced?

The answer will be revealed in the next round of campaign pamphlets full of more false claims by our shameless Member of Parliament. In Mr. Lloyd St. Amand's post-election interview he stated that he had worked hard to secure $10 million for a new water treatment plant in Ohsweken three years ago. He said it's unfortunate that the Harper government hasn't honoured that commitment.

In a letter addressed to Mr. McColeman published a few weeks ago, a letter writer hilariously comments,

Like Milli Vanilli, MP should not take credit

Phil McColeman: I was certainly happy to see some action from the Harper government on the water treatment plant for Six Nations residents, but this is too much. There was a letter in the newspaper about your "new" announcement, pointing out this commitment was originally made by the previous Liberal government.

Is this not shameless? I feel you owe the Hon. Andy Scott and Mr. Lloyd St. Amand apologies and should send out a news release soon. Are you familiar with the band Milli Vanilli? They were also dishonest and took credit for other people's work.

: )

NBC had this old saying to promote reruns during the summer: "If you haven't seen it, it's new to you"



"Phili Vanilli & Chucky S"

This blog got served!!!

Going through the archives, we came across this rebuttal against all of the letters sent to the Brantford Expositor questioning Phil's competence and criticizing his unresponsiveness to e-mails. It goes was so stinging in its logis that it feels like we got served in this battle of words, in this letter:

Brant's new MP has been the subject of recent letters to the editor. The letters seem to have a common thread of wishing the incumbent MP had not been defeated by a substantial majority last year.

In a short period of time, Phil McColeman has set up a riding office and has a talented staff on board.

I was impressed by his first constituency report, which dealt with legislative issues currently facing the government. He also solicited opinions and questions from Brant residents.

This was a welcome relief from the previous pap of an MP posing for multiple photo ops. Contrary to one of the recent letters, McColeman's communication reflects great respect for the intelligence of the electorate.

McColeman is a strong communicator with excellent people skills. I have been impressed with his eagerness to hear out and understand differing points of view. Brant is fortunate to have a man of his calibre as our representative in Ottawa.

Gordon Brain

I fully agree with Mr. Brain, Mr. McColeman's communication does reflect great respect for the intelligence of the electorate, Phil thinks residents of Brant are BRAIN-less. In another letter, which I can recall from early January but can not find the link, a writer defended and commended Phil for opening an office and staffing it. This was during the week where there was at least one letter a day complaining about Phil ignoring his constituents' concerns, no one was disputing whether Phil's office existed though. Having a constituency office is a basic requirement of any MP or MPP, it is not an accomplishment.

Back to Mr. Brain's "brainy" letter, he accuses our previous MP of posing for photo ops, which is completely false and a mere attempt at distracting the reader from the actual issues. Mr McColeman is constantly attempting to get in pictures with Cabinet Ministers, Justin Timberlake and even the Prime Minister! The worst example of this was when Stephen Harper visited Brantford during the illegal election. If you look below, Stephen Harper can barely shake a citizen's hand because Phil is trying to squeeze into the picture, shameless! Where are the mounties? Phil is definitely violating the Prime Minister's personal [arctic] sovereignty, how can we trust Stephen Harper to protect us from the Russians if he can't even tell Phil and his mullet to get out of his "grill"???