Budget 2005 -- Various Angles -- Defense -- Security -- Politics -- Foreign Policy -- Stelco -- UNSCAM Rot -- Financial Markets -- Tung Chee-hwa -- &

Less than meets the eye -- budget -- a closer look at backloading National Post, March 3, 2005

[. . . . ] Of the $13-billion in new defence spending promised by Mr. Goodale, only one-fifth will be invested over the next three fiscal years; the Forces will have to wait until 2009 and beyond for the other $10-billion. Until then, there will be no money for new helicopters, transport ships and planes, nor even a portion of the 8,000 new troops and reservists the Liberals promised during the federal election last year. Canadian Forces officials have even had to delay a planned pay raise for uniformed personnel, so unsure are they of how much new money their department will receive this year, and when. [. . . . ]

What Canadians voted for--some say out of fearmongering over the economy--and now have in a government is appalling; check for yourself.



There is an excellent article by William Watson in today's National Post on what the Conservatives predicted on the budget before the June 2004 election, what the Liberals said at the time, and the actuality today.

'Delivering on commitments'? Yeah, right

[. . . . ] Table 1.3 of last week's Budget Plan 2005, which you'll find on p. 27

[. . . . ] But check last week's budget (Table 7.6, p. 258, to be precise).

[. . . . ] But the overall impression the budget creates is the bad taste of having been had.

Search: fiscal black hole



Victor Salus: Liberal Defence Spending: More Smoke and Mirrors -- search And as it turns out, this initial spending will end up being less. A lot less.



CBC's budget bias Arthur Weinreb, Associate Editor, Canada Free Press, March 1, 2005

Search: "The CBC, of course has a conflict"

That one reference will leas to all you need to know about the CBC's reporting -- if you need more proof.



"The first duty of a government is to protect its citizens."

Defense Policy -- letter

Foreign policy, courtesy of Quebec -- "Re: Bush Won't Call PM, March 2."

Search: marginal, defence

What is a "national party", anyway? According to the mainstream media, conservatives have not had one. Well, I beg to differ.

I hesitated about drawing attention to this letter because I have been chastised a bit for how I write about Quebec and China -- probably rightly for the tone of what I write; I am rather blunt. However, I am more than the sum of my words. I am also my own behaviour and actions toward other ethnic or cultural groups and I don't believe that should be a problem for anyone. Some people have even agreed--or at least tolerated--my views because the subjects deserve debate.

If 250,000 immigrants and refugees enter the country per year, 99% become good citizens but that 1/2 -1% of 250000 = 1200 bad -- and they can cause a lot of damage to all Canadians. It is preferable to separate the good from the rest and go after the bad apples but the government lumps them in with the good and does basically nothing except to make sure the security forces / RCMP mind their manners.

I do want to draw attention to these few dangerous ones and to what I see as the control of all aspects of Canadians' lives, seemingly without concern for what the majority think or prefer. I am concerned about the current direction of our government in foreign policy and its push for business 'partnerships' -- where Canadians should read the fine print and check what has happened in the past. This needs more media scrutiny. I worry about Canada's security which is allied to immigration/refugee policies -- and, if you read past posts, you will know to what that refers. To anyone else who is offended, read the material to which I refer. They makes the arguments.

All this is why I decided against self-censorship and I have included the usual posts on whatever I find. We have had enough of self-censorship in the mainstream media.




Politics

Paul Martin's best friend Don Martin, National Post, Mar. 3, 05

This may be good advice to Stephen Harper.

For example, there's his curious preoccupation with Quebec, where he won't win seats in the next election, at the expense of Ontario, where he risks letting Conservative seats slip back to the Liberals [. . . . ]

Exposing the rot behind Oil-for-Food Claudia Rosett, National Post from The New Republic, Mar. 3, 05 -- finally -- but it tells only part of the story. For even more, look at the following.

Search Google: "oil for food, Canada Free Press"

Search Canada Free Press website: "oil for food" -- and, while there are other articles, do not miss one entitled Canada's global connections

Judi McLeod has done the research; you will learn much more.





Stock jumps after Stelco rejects bids -- Shares up 28% as steelmaker seeks new capital Peter Brieger, Mar. 3, 05, Financial Post

Stelco Inc. shares rocketed 28% yesterday after the steelmaker rejected all bids for the company and said it now plans to tap the market to raise fresh capital -- a decision that dissolves Russian steelmaker OAO Severstal's effort to buy the whole company. [. . . . ]

There is more, of interest to investors.




China, Europe gaining larger share of world's financial assets Jonathan Ratner, Mar. 3, 05, Financial Post

Global financial stocks were comparable to the world's GDP in 1980, at roughly $12-trillion. Since then, the expansion of stock markets, banks and other financial institutions has contributed to enormous growth in the capital available for lending and borrowing. World assets jumped to $53-trillion by 1993 and could reach $200-trillion by 2010, according to a study by McKinsey Global Institute. Europe is gaining ground, as is China, where financial markets are expanding quickly, making them more relevant in the world system. Meanwhile, Japan is losing global share.[. . . . ]

A hopeful sign for Hong Kong or a Beijing crackdown? -- "Born in Shanghai in 1937, Mr. Tung was the son of a shipping magnate who fled to Hong Kong rather than live under Mao Zedong's communists."

Tung's term marred by fumbling of economy, uncaring attitude -- Beijing's man in Hong Kong had been criticized Kelly McParland, National Post

When China selected Tung Chee-hwa to run Hong Kong in 1997, it saw him as everything it could hope for: successful, steely, a wealthy businessman who could be counted on to stick to the line laid down by Beijing.

Unfortunately, Mr. Tung wasn't what Hong Kong had in mind, and after eight years of gaffes, missteps and plain bad luck he finally appears to have been eased out, according to reports in Hong Kong.

Mr. Tung was a successful shipping tycoon, just the sort of self-made man Hong Kong would normally take to, but his term as "chief executive" of the former colony went wrong right from the start.

[. . . . ]

Search: Tiananmen Square, crises, anti-subversion bill, Hu Jintao