Phil McHypocrite

Somebody call the waaahmbulance – Phil's been complaining about the cost of an "unnecessary" democratic election again:

"They're upset about having an election that's costing $300 million especially when it's the fourth election in seven years."

Well, Phil, let's crunch some numbers…

• $1.5 million: Annual cost of the gun registry that Phil wants to scrap.

• $3.1 million: "A lot of money" in "small town Ontario" Brantford, Phil says.

• $27 million: Cost of all those Economic Action Plan signs.

• $300 million: Cost of an election.

• $1 billion: Cost of hosting G8/G20 summit, including tens of millions of unaccounted-for spending.

• $2.7 billion: Conservative estimate of cost of "tough on crime" agenda, though the actual amount will likely be billions more.

• $28.5 billion: Cost of F-35 stealth fighter jets that Phil wants taxpayers to buy.

• $55.6 billion: Canada's current annual deficit.

It's extremely doubtful that Phil will address these numbers during our "unnecessary" election:

Gretzky Centre Over Cost Because of Phil!

Phil was super-happy to brag all about the pork-barrel funding of the Gretzky Centre construction (in conjunction with Dave Levac). But the Harper government made an unreasonable deadline for using the money so that they could look good before an election. The deadline was eventually moved back, but the process had already been sped up. The shortened timeframe forced costs higher, and this was coupled with a bottleneck of contractors across Canada working on pork-barrel projects in Conservative-held ridings.

Pretty bad planning from a man who brags about being a contractor. Here's a replay of the Conservatives' moronic move:

Harper to Visit Hamilton Behind Closed Doors

Phil tweeted today:

Phil definitely has the ear of Prime Minister Stephen Harper. Harper gave Phil a whole 3 days' notice that he was visiting near Brant.

More disturbingly, Harper is not willing to meet with the public at large. What kind of elected official is scared to meet with the public that she or he represents? It doesn't seem too democratic. You have to pre-register to go to the event. It reminds one of the last time Harper visited Brantford, where members of the general public were turned away at the gates of Patriot Forge.

However those who do manage to get approved for the event still run the risk of being thrown out on the street, as the plight of this young student shows.

Would You Accept a Bribe for Your Vote?

Would you accept a bribe for your vote… if you knew you'd have to pay back the debt later?

If you would, Phil's your man He brought Gary Goodyear to the opening of his campaign office. Goodyear lauded Phil for bringing pork-barrel funds into Brant, while neglecting to mention the structural deficit that the Conservatives have racked up. Watch the video:



Phil is so close to his boss Prime Minister Stephen Harper that he has no idea whether Harper will visit Brant. Oh well, it's not a great loss since Harper is only holding pre-arranged meet-and-greets and accepting only 5 questions per day. Not to mention that last election when Harper visited Patriot Forge in Brant, the event was only open to card-carrying Conservative Party members. Those who couldn't show their Conservative membership were left outside the barbed-wire fence surrounding the factory. Compare that to e.g. Jack Layton who, when he came to town last week, spent time on the street with random Brantfordians.

Attention Laurier Brant Students: Don't Vote for Phil

Phil McColeman has gone on record saying that he opposes giving grants to post-secondary students because it "could make some students ineligible for other loans and grants".

Let me get this straight. Phil opposes giving students money because then they won't be poor enough to qualify for high-interest loans. Of course, with education grants those students won't need said loans. Phil's reasoning makes perfect sense: it's better to keep students in debt instead of giving them tuition money up-front. Right.

Phil Respects Taxpayers… APRIL FOOL'S!!

No doubt that during the election tons of great letters to the editor will be penned. Here's a gem from the Expositor:

Taxpayers on Hook for Conservative Ads

The Conservatives like to pretend that they didn't want an election but I'm not buying it. They had hoped to be defeated on a budget that was unacceptable to other parties because it was so misleading, but they were slapped in the face with a Contempt charge instead. If they didn't want or expect an election then why did I get campaign literature from McColeman in my mail box the very day the government fell, and why did I hear a barrage of radio ads all weekend trying to sell their 10 billion dollar tough on crime prison building scheme? The saddest thing of all in this though is that when Stephen Harper talks out of both sides of his mouth, we pay for it.

By Nic Coivert

The Conservatives have wasted TONS of taxpayer dollars on advertising. Those Economic Action Plan signs that sprouted up like dandelions cost $27 million (a whopping $800-$7,000 per sign!!). Since coming to office the Conservatives have spent $130 million on advertising. That money should have been spent on tax cuts or lowering the huge deficit. Even spending it on Kanye sunglasses would have been a better use. Phil has no respect for taxpayers!

McColeman Speaks for Harper, Not You

Ever since day one people were worried about Phil McColeman being muzzled. They were worried that his boss Stephen Harper would control everything he said. Well looking at McColeman's voting record, it seems that he is just a puppet controlled by Harper.

McColeman voted 204 times in the House of Parliament since 2008. He dissented from the Harper line twice. That's 2 out of 204 times that McColeman voted differently than the rest of his party.

Is McColeman muzzled? 2 out of 204 is less than 1%. You be the judge.






[Ironically this isn't the first time we've seen Philnoccio the Puppet]

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.

Understatement Of The Year

A couple weeks ago this blog posted about Phil and land claims. Last election, Phil had said that land claims was his "number one issue". More recently, Phil was quoted as saying,

"[Land claims] has been my priority, though some may dispute that."

And the award for understatement of the year goes to… Phil McColeman! Here's at least one reason to dispute Phil's claim: As of today, his campaign website servingbrant.ca makes not one single mention of land claims.

Number one priority? More like number one failure.

Phil McColeman: CBC Never Heard of Him

Phil McColeman: Making your voice heard on Parliament Hill. Although his voice has obviously not been heard by CBC National reporter Rosemary Barton. She tweeted earlier today:

[Barton later clarified the typo: she meant "Google" not "goggle"]

Interesting that one of the best political reporters in Canada has never even seen Phil McColeman in Ottawa. What has he been doing for the past 3 years?

Phil Finally Decides to Communicate with Constituents

Phil McColeman was elected to office in 2008 and only  three years later has decided to start a Twitter account. Most other politicians have used Twitter for ages as a quick and effective way to communicate with the public.

Phil should have started using Twitter long ago. All competent politicians did. It's only now that it's election time that Phil has decided to use this tool to communicate with Brantfordians.

Phil Pretends to Care About Seniors

Phil McColeman likes to brag about helping families and specifically helping seniors.

But does he actually help seniors? While it's true that the Conservatives are increasing seniors' benefits by a small amount, and the Conservative bragging doesn't index the increases to inflation. According to one seniors' advocate,

"The announcements don't amount to a great deal. It's not nothing, but it's close to nothing."

What's worse than not caring about seniors? Pretending to care about seniors just to win a few votes.

[Phil doesn't really care about this impoverished grandparent.]

New Look, New Address, New MP!

We've redesigned Dump Phil – hope you like it! Our readers may have also noticed that we've moved from our old web address to <www.DumpPhil.ca>. During the election we'll be updating the blog very frequently, so stop by often.

During the election please forward this blog to your friends and family. As this blog has documented, Phil has been an awful MP. He's probably a nice guy but he's no good at politics. It's time for him to go. Brant can do better.