Sunday, April 3, 2011

Can You Picture Count Ignatieff as "Mary Poppins?"

Just think, the Liberal leader as Mary Poppins the ultimate nanny.  Yuck!!! He wants to impose a national daycare program that is so 1993 when it was first introduced in the Liberal Red Book.   He claims it would only cost $500 million but others say it really cost more like $10 billion a year.
While the Liberals have often complained that the Conservative program of giving parents a $100 monthly payment for each child under six is not enough, the truth is that program costs five times what Ignatieff is now offering. The Universal Child Care Benefit cost taxpayers $2.6 billion last year. Ignatieff is promising to do more with just $500 million.
Advocates of a national program claim it will cost about $10 billion per year, 20 times what Ignatieff is offering. Given that Quebec alone spends more than $1 billion a year on their government-run daycare program, a national system of the type Liberals and daycare activists have called for would likely cost much more.
  This program would just end up being a big government bureaucratic nightmare of a boondoggle. Can you say gun registry program anyone?The money would simply go to unionized bureaucrats and daycare workers and not actually going to care for the children at all.   

The count says that's what parents want. Nonsense.
A poll of 2,000 Canadians, taken by Fleishman-Hillard in 2006, showed that by far families would prefer to have one parent stay at home. The poll was taken at the height of the debate over replacing the Liberal plan for a national system with the Conservative plan for the $100-per-month cheques.
When asked what was best for children, 77.9% of Canadians said having a parent stay home with a child vs. 20.5% who said it was best if the child was looked after by a competent caregiver. When asked what was best for children if both parents had to work, 52.7% said having a relative look after the child followed by using a family-run daycare at 20.4%.
Conservatives have the best plan that allows choice for parents.  That's the way it should be. Children need at least one parent at home during the formative years.

If you want parents to have choice then you have no alternative. Vote for a Conservative majority, they are the only ones who will make sure parents have choice.  The other alternative is Count Ignatieff  Liberal/NDP/Bloc coalition and a bloated big government nanny state.No thanks!!!!

When it comes to Red Books,check out Gerry Nichols. He has a very good take on it.


  1. I'd like a fiscally responsible government and Harper is not that. We can't afford $10B on new prisons we don't need and he should have gone out for bids on fighter jets. He ran through the large surplus he inherited in 2006 within a couple years by increasing government spending and then promised during the 2008 he would never run a deficit, but almost immediately upon winning, did in fact run a deficit. Harper spends too much on things that don't help Canadians and his promises are not kept.

  2. actually, it's 15 billion for the jails.

  3. I am no expert but listening to Iggy on CPAC it sounds like the oil sands and Alberta will pay for a lot of the Liberals promises.
    Same old, same old!

  4. I am no expert but listening to Iggy on CPAC it sounds like the oil sands and Alberta will pay for a lot of the Liberals promises.
    Same old, same old!

    Oh yeah,that'll sure win a lot of votes in the west here. NOT!!!

  5. William in Ajax said...

    @ annony...

    #1 There aren't ANY NEW prisons being built.!
    #2 A tax revenue surplus means taxpayers are being gouged.!

    Want to see what Canada would look like under Iggy?
    Look to Ontario after 7 years of McGuinty..!

    Thousands of Liberal appointees hired, into do-nothing jobs at dozens of boards and agencies.!!
    Thats what Liberals do'd think the voting public would have caught on by now.!

    Everything the Iggster has proposed involves HIRING more Liberals, from Daycare to
    Healthcare, Liberals promise more appointed Liberals, to rape whatever program they're appointed to, through outrageous salaries, perks and pensions.

    See ...Ontarios LHIN's, OPG the list is endless...
    or see Jane Stewart hired to oversee the Caledonia fiasco @ $700,000 for 6 months work...

    Nice gig if you can get it ...ONLY Liberals need apply.!

    There is only one possible reason to HIRE the incompetent Jane Stewart(see HRDC) into such a high paying job...
    ...brown-paper bags of cash to your local Liberal riding association...!

    Make Iggy PM, and watch the robbery continue.!

    Wake up people.!

  6. Wake up people.!

    Wake up indeed!!! I do not want more tax and spend big government nanny state! I'm sure most Canadians feel the same way. Look at Europe and now the the US!

  7. If I may answer your headline on a very superficial level; NO I can't see Igantieff as Mary Poppins!

    The Mary I knew was played delightfully by the beautiful Julie Andrews,who also has the voice of an angel. Everyone fell in love with Julie/Mary. Tens of millions of moviegoers paid to see Mary.

    Ignatieff would make a better Hunchback of Notre Dame, even more scary than Charles Laughton in the role, though I wouldn't pay a plug nickel to see him.

    But he'd be a hell of a lot MORE scary in the role of Canadian Prime Minister!


  8. Time for some fun with photoshop...

  9. Time for some fun with photoshop...

    Yes,by all means,do it Iceman.


This is my home. I hope you respect it. I will not tolerate profanity or anything that is not suitable for family consumption.