Response To Paul Well's Letter Writer

Paul Wells was kind enough to link to my blog yesterday and then (in the spirit of bipartisanship or something) posted an e-mail that he got from a reader criticizing me and/or my blog.

---

Maybe I’m a bit slow, or maybe it’s the over gleeful partisan nature of you and that mouse thingy you linked to, but I’m not seeing where the Tories are in trouble. We’ve got a Radio Canada leak of possible solutions, and then the Brad Trost quote looks only to guarantee the “best deal” ever, which doesn’t even seem to be violated by the RC leak.

---

The e-mail writer then went on to say:

---

Post some information rather than a smirk, or link to someone who can write for an audience that doesn’t already agree with him 1000%. Partisan blogs more than have their role, but to explain to the public outside of Sask. Such partisan abstruseness doesn’t help.

---

Mr. Wells then went on to eviscerate this person's attack on Wells' blog. Very, very effective.

This is my pale imitation of Mr. Well's - only I will be standing up for my own blog.

1) The Reader (a Graeme H) says "the over gleeful partisan nature of you and that mouse thingy you linked to"

First of all, Paul Wells is anything but partisan as he himself so eloquently points out. I on the other hand, have made no secret that I support the NDP. I am a member of the NDP as any sort of half-assed examination of my site would tell you.

I mean, my god, if the trolls over on Small Dead Animals can figure it out, we are not talking rocket science here, and they attack me for being an NDP shill and a lefty crazy all the time.

Secondly, "mouse thingy"? - I'm hurt. :-)


2) link to someone who can write for an audience that doesn’t already agree with him 1000%. Partisan blogs more than have their role, but to explain to the public outside of Sask. Such partisan abstruseness doesn’t help.

The link that Mr Wells was kind enough to provide simply listed the quotes, from Hansard, of the 12 conservative MP's. If these words now seemed bias and partisan - it is because the CONSERVATIVES LIED. Nothing I say or do can change that fact and if the reader doesn't like it, perhaps he should take it up with the CONSERVATIVES who LIED and not me and my blog for pointing it out.

Sheesh!


3) I’m not seeing where the Tories are in trouble. We’ve got a Radio Canada leak of possible solutions, and then the Brad Trost quote looks only to guarantee the “best deal” ever,

Right here, right now, I am going to predict the future. The Conservatives will take out resource revenues from the equalization formula and claim, as a result, that they lived up to their election promise. Then they will apply a cap (the O'brian formula) and say that this is nothing new and that they have still lived up to their promise.

Here is the problem. Applying the cap would mean that Saskatchewan would get a few million a year from the Federal Government. Brad Trost will claim that this is still the "best deal that Saskatchewan has ever had" because yes, 99 kicks to the head from the Torys is better than the 100 kicks to the head from the Liberals.

Heres the problem. The conservatives will still be breaking their promise.

Here is what the (now) Prime Minister Harper had to say when he was in opposition:

---

The Prime Minister is also failing Saskatchewan on equalization. The government promised to reform the equalization program in 2004 for Saskatchewan. The government now says it will not get to that until at least 2006, costing Saskatchewan over $750 million in lost revenue. When will the Prime Minister overrule his finance minister and make the changes necessary, so Saskatchewan does not lose this money?

---

Here is what Saskatchewan Conservative MP Tom Lukiwski said

---

"By my understanding, if Saskatchewan were allowed to keep 100% of its non-renewable natural resources, it would mean an estimated $800 million yearly and perhaps even higher than that".

"In fact, if Saskatchewan had a proper, fair and just equalization formula right now, at today's oil prices Saskatchewan would be receiving, by my calculations, anywhere between $800 million and $1.5 billion in additional revenue each and every year. Of course we do not have that agreement"

---

And here is what Saskatchewan Conservative MP Brad Trost had to say:

---

Brad Trost said while caucus discussions are confidential, MPs from Saskatchewan are intent on keeping their promise to get a new equalization deal for the province. "Let me give you a 100 per cent guarantee, Prime Minister Harper will give Saskatchewan the best deal it's ever had from any prime minister ever, " he said. Asked if that would be the same deal the Conservatives campaigned on, Trost said: "If it isn't, it better be better."

---

For the record they did not campaign on putting a "cap" on payments after taking resource revenues out of the system.

So the numbers that the Conservatives talked about (inlcuding Mr. Harper) were in the $750 million to $1.5 billion range.

If Saskatchewan gets $100 million a year is that living up to what they said?

I think not.