Taking Canadians for pylons, the Cons have thumbed their noses at those little superlatives known as "experience" and "expertise," filling patronage positions with who appear to be unqualified party nobs capable of little but towing the party line.
And on the CRTC, we now have a local TV reporter sitting alongside others who have "decades of experience as executives in broadcasting, publishing or public administration." Could come in handy when they try to get rid of the CBC.
The appointments highlight the Conservative's reckless and disrespectful approach to governance, turning our quasi-judicial bodies into cesspools of factless, ideological smut - much the same approach they have to climate change. After all, "science" is just another form of "expertise," isn't it? A leading international journal recently rebuked the Conservative government's "manifest disregard for science." What would a government want with science?
Our government's chronic ignorance was further evidenced by the discovery that a Conservative volunteer was working for an Alberta-based group of global warming skeptics that launched ads attacking the former government for climate change spending, which puts them in violation of Canada's electoral laws - not that they weren't already in violation. As I recently pointed out, they've been filibustering an inquiry into their electoral spending for ages.
And what has this model of virtue and accountability earned for such a smashing performance?
According to this week's poll numbers, a 12% jump in support. Either Canadians are capitulating amnesiacs, or the polls are a joke. Short of proving Conservatives right, it's my sincere hope that it's the latter.
Labels: cons, election finance, global warming, polls
2 Comments:
"In Winnipeg, we have a registered nurse sitting as a chairwoman of the Board of Referees for Employment Insurance, a job which requires "a knowledge of the economy and labour market conditions, experience leading group discussions and experience interpreting and applying rules and guidelines." Refugees? Economics? Sounds just like nursing."
Very presumptious to assume to know someones entire background by their profession, no? Are we sure she does not have other experiences or backgrounds? I think we need to dig deeper before passing judgment. Also, have you ever spoke with her, how do you know she does not possess the skills necessary?
Mark
These are not presumptions.
She's the wife of a Conservative, and has been widely panned as having zero qualifications for the job.
By all available accounts, one of which I posted there, we can be pretty certain she has no applicable qualifications.
There's no rational defense for this kind of patronage.
Post a Comment
<< Home