Elizabeth May should not be included in the debate. Her participation will detract rather than add to the event. Her only MP is a crossover. Harper, et al, have been forced into including her by a braying media and a politically correct chattering class. This opens the door for any number of other fringe parties to clamour for inclusion.

Although it’s unlikely to happen I would like to see some discussion on the inordinate amounts of money being spent on bilingualism and multiculturalism.
The office of the Commisioner of Official Languages is in fact only concerned with the French language and should be called the Office of the French Language.

SCRAP NAFTA.

Same old, same old. Pretend conservatives pandering to the left, Liberals trying to social-engineer the country leftward, NDP hucksters still peddling a backward ideology, Bloc desperate to appear relevant, and now the Greens telling us if we don’t ditch all the accountrments of the good life we’ll destroy the planet. I don’t know whether to laugh or cry.

I would like to hear a little about the income splitting we had and the large increase in personal exemptions as well as the $5000 fund coming that allows you to put away $5000 tax free on the interest or cap gains free on the gain …..not always the politicians crying about the income tax fiasco

I wish the Conservatives would outline their proposal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions as the press constantly is reporting that they have no plan at all which I do not believe to be true. To counter the Liberal idiotic policy of a carbon tax it would be in the Conservative’s best interest to inform us what their plan is instead of saying nothing. It appears now that the only plan on the table is the Liberal carbon tax.

In response to bloggers like David, the conservatives do have a plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. See the Clean Air Act circa 2007. They are the only fiscally responsible party tackling environmental challanges. They are using economic growth to spur innovation in green technology and using incentive based programs (see: Lesser polluting vehicles rebate) to help limit the gross output of pollutants. Dion and liberal (tax and regulate) method of addressing the environment is a disincentive and puts that much more power in the hands of the same body which has been responsible for ‘watching over’ those who have polluted our streams, deforested our forests and depleated our fish stocks (see: Stats Can)… the last thing we need is another regualatory body to be an ineffective watchdog over things important to Canadians.

I think Stephen should talk about soft hearts and hard heads. It’s great to be caring for everyone but nothing is free. We need tohave hard heads( calculate the costs) and soft hearts ( help those who truly cannot help themselves) but realism must be attached. Tax revenues come from businesses who increase employment by taking reasonable risks. Let’s increase the small business rate to $750.000 vs the 400k we have now and create some reinvestment dollars that create real jobs.

Gordon

Who among any of the parties and candidates are making any promises to deal with the government sanctioned attacks on free speech being perpretated by the various human rights commissions? Even Alan Borovoy, vastly instrumental in having them instituted, sees them as a huge threat. They must be severely curbed, or better still abolished.

I do not want to hear the party leaders discuss policy.
I am tired of voting for a party and a party leader while pretending to be voting for an MP.
I want to vote for a candidate that share my views.
I think that the party leaders and the PM have too much power.
The PM should be elected by the MPs after the election.
The MPs should have the right to dismiss and replace the PM.
A choice of political parties is not a choice.
I do not go to vote to change my political philosophy.
However, I may want to go to vote to change the MP that share my views.
I want a choice of candidates that share my views so that I may choose the best of them.
Only the preferential ballot would give me that choice.
The MP, in each riding, should be the candidate preferred by the majority of the voters in the riding.
A House composed of such MPs would be calmer because it would not be divided into factions representing different political parties but would truly represent the majority of the voters.
Only the preferential ballot would serve to elect such a House.
Which is why I am in favour of electoral reform.
But I am not in favour of proportional representation which would only make matters worse than they are by giving even more power to political parties.

Stephen Harper needs a mojority so he can implement the promises he gave at his election.
Carbon tax. Why would anyone vote for a person who declares a tax of any kind.

Global warming, the political kind. Wake up. Think outside your short and mostly insignificant life span. Think in geological years and you may see the big picture on global warming. There may be such a thing (global warming)but its beyond mankinds miniscule efforts.

To me it boils down to this:
Would I rather decide how to spend my hard earned dollars myself or would I rather have it confiscated so an ever-increasing array of largely overpaid pompous bureaucrats and politicians can waste it? Humm.. Trouble is I hear more about “programs” and less about “tax cuts” even from the Conservatives. Come on guys!

Why do Conservatives insist on negative ads?why not promote their programs and accomplishments?
It would appear the polls are good but they insist on making things difficult -Gee,even the press has been good to them despite the way they treat the press.I am generally pleased with the track record and will probably vote for them again. But if there are many more failures to keep promises[income trusts,fixed election dates,,etc] I think I’ll go Green.Hutch

I think we shoud come straight out to say who is the best leader for CANADA and that certainly is STEPHEN HARPER. TEN TIMES OVER DION We need a top notch leaader in the next few years to keep our economy good and HARPER is the one to do it

Will anyone one of those political leaders have the guts and courage to talk about forced Official Bilingualism?
Anyone can see the English speakers are losing their jobs at all levels -in Govt. moslty in the higher levels to the Francopohones who at times can not speak perfect English but that is allowed but not if an Anglo isn’t perfect in French.
It is really sickening to see our coutnry being dividied through our Englaish language. The Enlgish language of the world should be fisst to nothing else but here in Canada it takes second place ( Winnipeg Air Port Sign and Quebec stold Air Canada from them)-and notealby in the province of Quebec ,that totally discirminates against the English language. Everyone is afraid of being called names or better still threatened . Old itmers from Europe say they see signs of Hitler at work here. What do you think.?
People are afarid to speak up as I just did. I am speaking the truth and have no fear. Dot Davies-Fuhrman in Kelowna.

I want to hear the Prime Minister talk about health care. This is one issue that the NDP is making ground. I do not want the NDP to form a government because they are going to ruin the country. Another issue is the economy. Its hard to believe that the Prime Minister is helpless when it comes to the gas price gauging. Even a grade schooler would know that there is such a case because the increase is just overnight. I am a die hard Conservative and I want the Prime Minister to form a majority government and it is pointing that way so he should be careful now with his advisers because some of them are stupid enough to give him bad advice.

To bloggers like Lucien… Perhaps you do not value the Canadian constitution and the rights it has bestowed on you and your family. Put together by great men with grand visions, it is one of the greatest documents published of all time. The electoral system, while not perfect, was not intended to be. Democracy is not perfect…. If you simply want to vote for a candidate who shares your similar views you can. Our Charter of Rights and Freedoms allow any Canadian to live and work raise his/her family in any region or place in this great land. If you can’t find someone to represent your views to your liking, the constitution also grants you the right to run for political office yourself. You can be Prime Minister and not even have to be born here… opportunity? Change? Choise? I think you have it all.. no ?

Why can’t someone, who is knowledgeable in these matters, select a company; and then do a detailed financial analysis to show what, and where, the costs will be.

Real companies will have to do the arithmetic and so all the costs should be shown as well as the required prices. This could be compared with their existing costs and prices.

We should know how much the “Green Shaft” is going to cost – no ball park prices, or pie-in-the sky!

Why is it that the only “score” we ever hear with regard to our activities in Afghanistan is that another Canadian has been killed, or umpteen Taliban have been killed.

Are we not in Afghanistan to improve the lot of the Afghan people? Are we not there to train Afghans to police and protect themselves? Are we not there to help provide new schools, to make it possible for girls to go to school, to improve water supply systems, to improve the lot of Afghan women, to improve general infrastructure?

Are we not accomplishing any of these objectives? And if we are, why do we never hear about it. Why is the “score” only reported in numbers of people killed?

I fully support our troops and their objectives in Afghanistan, but I really would like to be informed of some of the positive things we are achieving while we are there–if indeed we are accomplishing anything positive.

Can everyone who blogs and uses the conservatives do everyone a favor and use a small red “c” until they learn how to act, tax and spend like a real conservative party would. Thank you

I am not sure a lot of Canadians really want to examine substantive issues as opposed to emotional or short term self interest ones. However, as a former police constable it bothers me that laws are being constructed that can put innocent people in jail. A police officer takes an oath to protect the lives, bodies, property, peace, and security of citizens. To do this he has to prove criminal intent and criminal action of individuals but laws constructed like bill C-52 make it possible to be charged and convicted when no criminal intent is displayed by an individual to do harm to any of the above five things. That is bad and ineffective targeting which has many counter productive results. Also a free democratic country should have property rights but “Liberals” have resisted them. That is bizzare! Freedom of speech should not be stiffled by power seeking groups either. The first duty of government is the protection of it’s populace and not social engineering initiatives in order to gain activist support. In a free country police officers us laws as tools to protect the population from individual persons who are a genuine threat but if police officers become an arm of government to effect values control or mold rather than reflect the population that is a different kind of country and administration. History shows us what that ugly result can be and I think we should be careful not to walk that erroneous path on a number of different issues besides those mentioned.