HST Sober Second Thoughts: Snatch Victory from Defeat

The recent referendum vote to abandon the HST tax and revert to the old GST+PST is viewed by many as a defeat for the liberal party in British Columbia.

My view is that it was a temper tantrum in response to a botched implementation, fanned by a former politician well past his "best before date". They succeeded in blurring the distinction between the mode of decision and implementation and the validity of the policy itself. The tantrum is over. The liberals can be contrite about the implementation and still take the opportunity to snatch victory from defeat. Here is a blunt blueprint that would require considerable massaging by political spinmasters.

Call an immediate fall provincial election.

Declare that the liberal party has paused and had sober second thoughts and that it is time for voters to also pause for sober second thoughts.
It is time to either move forward with the liberals or move backward with the NDP and that it is decision time.

Campaign on the issue of good government, fiscal responsibility, reliance on knowledgeable experts, and continuation with the HST. Perhaps make some minor adjustments but keep the framework and avoid the costly disruption of a revert to the PST.

Declare firmly that if the electorate is serious about following Adrian Dix and the NDP [as inspired by Bill Vander Zalm] as they march pig headedly back to the past then so be it, but that the liberals are not prepared to lead in that direction.

Yes there is some risk that the NDP would win, with predictable results. Perhaps that is what the electorate deserves.

The failed recall initiatives are probably a better indicator of genuine political sentiment than is the toxic HST referendum campaign.

The odds are with a party that is clear that it will not lead in a wrong direction on tax policies that are detrimental to provincial finances in the long run.

If the liberals cannot do a better job than they did in garnering support for their position on the HST referendum then indeed they do not have the leadership which this province deserves. In that case we are in a dismal position with no genuine leadership in sight. The NDP under Adrian Dix simply used the HST referendum as advance campaigning for the party.

Notice that Adrian Dix did not initially condemn the HST but waited until he saw the way the wind was blowing. He will be hard pressed to give a rational for the mix of irrational exemptions that were present in the old PST. He will be vulnerable in disregarding the views of economists.

I feel confident that there are enough supporters in the NDP party with enough financial competence to know that the HST is a better tax system. Their heart will not be in a campaign focused on returning to the PST.

In addition there are enough moderate voters who can recognize good professional level economic advice, and a degree of sober leadership.

If the liberals call the bluff of the NDP and call a snap election, it will indeed be interesting times in BC.

This is a no lose blueprint for the liberals.
If they "lose" a snap election they will avoid governing in period of financial difficulty that will be impossible for the NDP to carry off successfully.
If they "win" the election they will have succeeded in bringing a majority of the electors face to face with the realities of the financial situation which the province now faces.

June 2011 Speech from the Throne

June 5, 2011
Kamp.R@parl.gc.ca
Comments on throne speech

Hi Randy,

Again my congratulations on your re-election. My first was the day before the election!

I send you my reaction to the throne speech in the spirit of
"Each of us aspires to a Canada where everyone can succeed and contribute, where excellence and opportunity coexist."
http://www.sft-ddt.gc.ca/eng/media.asp?id=1390

Each observation is given a numeric score.
10= good move and important
1 = ok move but not important
0 = vague, meaningless
-1 = bad move but not important
-10= bad move and important issue.

Average score over the 60 issues I noted = 3.0

First I will note some areas that seem important to me but are either not dealt with or thinly mentioned.

- foreign policy. Harper's willingness to have an independent policy even when in conflict with the US is refreshing; e.g. Israel and 1967 borders.

- immigration is touched on, but in isolation from economic progress.
- free trade is mentioned frequently but in such contradictory ways as to have little meaning.

Now some detailed scores, "quotes", and comments.
0 ="It will continue to focus on jobs and growth."

8= "It will bring the federal budget back into balance." would get a 10 if more specific. More later

8="It will invest in our system of universal health care." would get a 10 if more specific.
8= "Our Government will defend the rights of law-abiding citizens." a basic justification for a government.

"..Government will reintroduce our Budget, in order to implement the next phase of Canada’s Economic Action Plan—our low tax plan for jobs and growth. See above for score 8 re budget.

10 ".. create the right conditions for growth and job creation: a stable, predictable, low-tax environment..". I have been generous in overcounting overlapping vague references.

1 "support for innovation and new technologies." Sounds good but government has miserable record in identifying winners.

10 ".. wider access to markets abroad". YES free trade is crucial. Does this include import of milk from the US?

-5 "introducing new tax credits for individuals and families". Just simplify tax rather than tinker and cater to special interests.

4 "complete work already underway with the Government of Quebec to reach an agreement on tax harmonization no later than September 15, 2011." Good luck on that. Hope you can accomplish without caving in to special interests

0 "Our Government’s plan will provide assistance for workers who want to learn new skills and seize opportunities". Too vague to be meaningful.

8 "Our Government will introduce and seek swift passage of copyright legislation that balances the needs of creators and users." Nice trick if you can do it.

-10 "our Government will continue to make targeted investments to promote and encourage research and development in Canada's private sector". Likely to be a waste. The private sector can take care of itself.

10 "and in our universities, colleges and polytechnics.". Yes this is the most likely area for government investment to pay off.

0 "It will also release and implement a Digital Economy Strategy that enhances digital infrastructure and encourages Canadian businesses to adopt digital technologies and provide digital-skills training for their employees and new hires." Bafflegab. Businesses are capable of identifying and implementing technologies when it is cost effective to do so.

8 "..will continue to cut red tape for small businesses so that they can focus their attention on growing their businesses and creating jobs". Good idea but "continue"?; I had not noticed any start.

10 "… free trade agreements covering eight countries, and negotiations covering some fifty more are underway.". Yes get on with it—and add free trade between provinces. Why no mention of Doah round of WTO? I am overly generous with the 10.

"Our Government will aim to complete negotiations on a free trade agreement with the European Union by 2012. It will also seek to complete negotiations on a free trade agreement with India in 2013." Good but this counts in the 10 above for free trade.

-10 "In all international forums and bilateral negotiations, our Government will continue to stand up for Canadian farmers and industries by defending supply management." You just lost it. Are you for free trade or not?. How about standing up for consumers of milk, eggs,. cheese etc. Note that farmers of most products e.g. beef, pork, berry crops, tree fruits can cope without your "supply management" interference in markets.

5 "We will strengthen our collaboration to streamline and secure our border and enhance regulatory cooperation, ensuring that people and goods can flow freely and safely between our two countries." Face facts, the elephant next door will invariably call the shots.

1 "Our Government will continue to welcome foreign investment that benefits Canada." Not much effort required here. Just stay out of the way and capital will flow to productive uses. Note also that foreign investment is just one aspect of free trade.

8 ".. move forward with willing partners to establish a new national securities regulator.." Good move. We do not need 10 bureaucracies

10 "We must eliminate the deficit and return to balanced budgets to ensure that our economy can continue to grow and create jobs and that the federal government will have sufficient fiscal flexibility for future choices." Somewhat vague but very important.

10 "we will undertake a Strategic and Operating Review of government spending led by a new Cabinet subcommittee established for this purpose. This review will be focused on reducing the cost of government". The liberals did this, don't re-invent the entire wheel. Make use of past studies. In particular follow through on
" and continue specific measures to restrain the growth of government expenditures." I am holding my breath and waiting for some announcements on this.

-10 "Our Government will also complete its stimulus package as promised". Give up on this political grandstanding favoritism.

0 "Our Government’s plan will put us on a strong footing to resume paying down the federal debt, further reduce taxes on families and continue investing in priorities." What a repetitive speech.

1 "..our Government’s low-tax plan will permanently enhance the Guaranteed Income Supplement for some 680,000 of Canada’s most vulnerable seniors." Yes, very important and already in place. Nothing new here.

8 "..will work with provincial and territorial partners to implement the Pooled Registered Pension Plan." Very good idea.

10 "The new Family Caregiver Tax Credit will support those who care for a dependent family member who is infirm. In addition, our Government will remove the cap on eligible expenses that caregivers can claim under the Medical Expense Tax Credit." Yes this is an increasing problem.

-5 "…establishing a Children’s Arts Tax Credit". Just another pointless tinkering with the already overly complex income tax act. Parents can choose which aspects of their child's development requires their attention and there is no end of available mechanisms already.

0 "Our Government is committed to respecting provincial jurisdiction and working with the provinces and territories to ensure that the health care system is sustainable and that there is accountability for results. It will maintain the six percent escalator for the Canada Health Transfer, while working collaboratively with provincial partners to renew the Health Accord and to continue reducing wait times. As has been done before, our Government will enter into a separate agreement with the Government of Quebec regarding the implementation of the renewed Health Accord.". Important but so vague as to be meaningless.

0 "our Government will also continue to pursue a stable, principled foreign policy that advances Canada’s interests." Good but vague, that is what we expect and nothing new here.

-10 "As part of our ongoing efforts to promote human rights, our Government will create a new Office of Religious Freedom to help protect religious minorities and to promote the pluralism that is essential to the development of free and democratic societies." Ample mechanisms are in place. The last thing we need is a different version of the existing Human rights Commissions.

-5 [for entire bafflegab about immigration] "Our Government is committed to protecting the integrity of our immigration system." This is an area that needs some specifics. The existing system is a mess and if you "protect it" that seems to mean leave it unchanged. .

"… It will introduce measures to address marriage fraud—an abuse of our system that can victimize unsuspecting Canadians and vulnerable immigrants." Good but can probably be handled within a reasonable re work of the entire system.

"Our Government will also reintroduce legislation to combat human smuggling" Good can be handled in rework of system.

8 exercise leadership in the stewardship of northern lands and waters. It is also committed to working with the Northwest Territories and the private sector to complete the Dempster Highway—by linking Inuvik to Tuktoyaktuk". Would have been a 10 if some mention of securing our just territorial boundaries and jurisdiction.

1 "..the development of a National Conservation Plan, to move our conservation objectives forward and better connect all Canadians with nature." The government suffers from forever planning and delaying getting on with things.

10 "It will support major new clean energy projects of national or regional significance, such as the planned Lower Churchill hydroelectricity project in Atlantic Canada. It will engage the provinces, territories and industry on ways to improve the regulatory and environmental assessment process for resource projects, while ensuring meaningful consultation with affected communities, including Aboriginal communities."

-2 "Our Government will move quickly to reintroduce comprehensive law-and-order legislation to combat crime and terrorism." Better to focus on prevention. Better to focus on the proven programs for reducing recidivism.

2 "These measures will protect children from sex offenders" Existing laws are sufficient.

2. "They will eliminate house arrest and pardons for serious crimes."

0 "They will give law enforcement officials, courts and victims the legal tools they need to fight criminals and terrorists. " Sounds good. Too vague.

5 "Our Government will continue to protect the most vulnerable in society and work to prevent crime."

-2 "It will propose tougher sentences for those who abuse seniors" Tougher sentences are unlikely to be a solution. I suspect present laws are sufficient.

0 "and will help at risk youth avoid gangs and criminal activity." Good idea vague and meaningless.

0 "It will address the problem of violence against women and girls. Good idea vague and meaningless.

2 "Our Government will reintroduce legislation to clarify and strengthen laws on self-defence, defence of property and citizen’s arrest."

0 "Our Government will also continue to implement its response to the Air India Report." Meaningless. How many years does it take to "implement" and what "response" is being "implemented"?

-5 "Our Government will act on its promise to introduce legislation to end the wasteful and ineffective long-gun registry." I remember the Harper speech saying he has heard the voice of hunters and farmers. I wish he had hear the voice of the chiefs of police. An implicit admission that the government views itself as incompetent to operate the registry on a break even basis. A significant instance of ignoring the recommendations of experts.

8 "..introduce legislation to ensure that western farmers have the freedom to sell wheat and barley on the open market." Now how about the freedom of farmers to produce and sell as much milk, eggs, as they wish to the open market.

0 "…by providing new investments in First Nations Land Management. It will promote access to clean water and the deployment of clean energy technology in Aboriginal and northern communities." Probably well intentioned but most such investment has, in the past, been wasted and ineffective.

10 " We will also expand adult basic education programming in the territories to help to increase education and employment levels."

10 "Our Government will also introduce legislation to ensure that people living on reserve have the same matrimonial real property rights and protections as other Canadians." Good as far as it goes. What about property rights in general quite apart from the matrimonial issue?

0 "..we will provide the principled, accountable leadership and good, clean government that Canadians deserve." I should hope so.

2 ".. and it will now move forward on its long-standing commitment to democratic reform." Important but vague. I look forward to less "whipping" and more free votes in parliament.

8 "Reform of the Senate remains a priority for our Government. Our Government will reintroduce legislation to limit term lengths and to encourage provinces and territories to hold elections for Senate nominees."

10 "Our Government will reintroduce legislation to restore fair representation in the House of Commons." Important and unlikely. The conservatives cannot even agree on what is fair representation within their own party when convention time rolls around.

5 "It will take steps to phase out direct taxpayer subsidies to federal political parties over the next three years." Good move. Individuals can make $2 donations directly to the party of their choice. Folks who don't pay any income tax will have to face up to paying their own money rather than rely on other peoples money.

4 "It will support transparency for First Nations communities by requiring their chiefs and councillors to publish their salaries and expenses." Good luck on this. It won't happen.

0 "Our Government will also support the efforts of the Public Service to modernize the way it works so that it can continue to provide the highest standard of service to Canadians." Vague. It assumes the "public service" is interested in the topic. Try sending an e-mail to most government departments e.g. the income tax department. so much for "modernization".

10 "In filling the two upcoming vacancies on the Supreme Court of Canada, our Government will engage parliamentarians through the transparent process first used in 2006." Yes Yes

8 "Our Government will also ensure that citizens, the private sector and other partners have improved access to the workings of government through open data, open information and open dialogue." I wish I could believe you on this one. The track record of the Conservatives has been miserable on this.

0 "Government will move swiftly to deliver the next important phase of the Economic Action Plan." More endless repetition.

"May Divine Providence guide you in your deliberations and make you equal to the trust bestowed upon you." Has not worked very well so far.

I would prefer greater trust in the reports of experts in the various fields. Please, more evidence based policies rather than ideologies.

Best regards,
Daniel McDonald
Make a Small Development Loan, Make a Big Difference. Easy. http://www.kiva.org/

REGISTER LONG GUNS

December 11, 2010

Keep the long gun registry.

Randy Kamp, M.P. Kamp.R@parl.gc.ca> cc gc PM
Pitt Meadows--Maple Ridge--Mission

Dear Randy,

Exec. Summary
1. The issue is still open for decision
2. Keeping the long gun registry is the right decision.
3. Keeping the long gun registry is the politically adroit move.

Details.
1. The Conservative polling firm phoned today soliciting views on this issue. This tells me the conservatives are wisely continuing to evaluate their options. So should you as my representative.

2. Keeping the registry is the right decision.

2a. Guns are dangerous and the fewer we have in our society the better. The more messages in that direction that the government sends- the better. Many folks with guns they really have no need for will get rid of them rather than register. Good. Fewer guns fewer problems.

2b. The gun registry. A good idea but initially executed with the usual Liberal inept management of costs. Now that it is up and running the past costs are sunk costs. The marginal costs of keeping it operating are worth the benefits in public safety. I think primarily of domestic violence, gun accidents, and suicides. Harper is an economist. He is familiar with the idea of marginal cost. Remind him of the fact. More important is to stop referring to the dead and gone past sunk costs as if they have any relevance now. Emphasize how conservatives can run it efficiently and effectively

Now that it is up and running, surely the conservatives are good enough managers to set the fee and manage the costs so that it is a cash break even operation. In various parts of our country we can register dogs, cats, bicycles, cars, people [voters lists], etc. etc. It is just not believable that we cannot register guns on a break even basis.

2c. The only people supporting reducing the control on guns are the gun nuts and the farmers and hunters who are too lazy or cheap to register.

2d. The Canadian Police Association and the Chiefs of Police support the continuing registration. I support our chiefs of police. Do you? Yes there are some officers with the opposite view. Some officers are gun nuts. The chiefs are the ones with the best overall view.

2e. Remember that Al Capone was brought down not for his criminal gang acts but for his income tax non acts. Presently many individuals accused of criminal acts get away on technicalities having to do with evidence. Unregistered firearms are a case of easy evidence and easy conviction.

3. Keeping the long gun registry is the politically adroit move.
The conservatives should simply lay low, do nothing, and allow the issue to die down, leaving the registry to quietly and efficiently operate. Yes there will be some disgruntled members of the party but they will not defect as there is nowhere for them to go. They will not join other parties and they will continue to vote Conservative.
Meanwhile the moderate conservatives, those who in my mind have a degree of common sense, will stick by the party rather than give up in despair. I dismiss the rumors that the NRA is active in lobbying the Conservative party.

Finally Randy, and on a somewhat personal note, close your eyes in meditative prayer and imagine Jesus owning a gun.

Sincerely,
Daniel McDonald

Conservatives, once a principled party

It was once a principled Conservative Party

To: Randy Kamp MP cc: Prime Minister Stephen Harper

With great sorrow I write of my disillusionment with respect to what I once believed to be a principled Conservative Party.

I think of recent issues
1. Long gun registry. I will use this as the classic example and present my detailed views later.
2. Long form census form.
3. Inhibiting open disclosure and discussion of research findings.

In themselves decisions on these matters are not significant in the grand scheme of things. They are extremely significant as examples of a mode of governing that chooses narrow ideology and/or weak unprincipled populism rather than principled leadership. Two characteristics are prominent; dismissing the advice of experts, and paucity of principled rationale.

Some details on the long gun registry.
Responsibility for public safety is acknowledged by those of all political persuasions except perhaps anarchists. I look to our police chiefs, the RCMP, the paramedics, the emergency room physicians for informed views on the long gun registry and find them unanimously in support. In contrast this is what I find in The National Post of September 18, 2010:
Mr. Harper predicted the “registry will someday be abolished” because it will continually be opposed by the people who understand it — who he identified as “rural Canadians, hunters, outdoors men and women [and] police officers.
“These people will never accept this registry because they know it is ineffective and wasteful. And the party I lead will not rest until the day it is abolished.”
So Mr. Harper believes that those most in the know do not understand it. Simply not plausible. I place my belief in the chiefs of police.

The bill to abolish the long gun registry is a private member’s bill. Traditionally MP’s are allowed a free vote on such bills and are not whipped, what an appropriate word, into submission by their political bosses. Neither Stephen Harper or Michael Ignatieff are allowing a free vote while Jack Layton distinguishes himself with a principled approach.

Politicians are repeatedly faced with the dilemma of leadership vs. popularism. How does Mr. Harper deal with this?

Mr. Harper said it will be “an important vote.”
“We encourage all members of Parliament to, obviously, vote on the right side of this issue, but particularly when members of Parliament have made commitments to their constituents.”
Reasonably clear if the member feels his constituents are against the registry and firmly believe the registry is a bad thing. But what if his constituents are for the registry and the member believes the chiefs of police. Both are irrelevant for Harper whips them into voting “his way or the highway”.

I like to believe that politicians have a degree of rationality. Consider the 3 main arguments against the registry.
1. High cost. The outrageous high cost of development, while factual are now irrelevant. Those are sunk costs as any graduate of economics 101 knows. The only relevant costs are the future net costs. Harper has already assured the civil service that there will be no reduction in head count. An efficient operation would levy a fee high enough to cover the operating cost.
2. Harper and others say that they “know it is ineffective”. They seldom identify what they regard as ineffective although sometimes “preventing crime” is cited as the objective of the registry, which is a straw man. The chiefs of police say it assists them in being more effective and operating with a higher degree of safety for the police. That is good enough for me but apparently not sufficient to overcome narrow doctrinaire viewpoints.
3. I am not competent to personally conduct research into complex matters and usually must rely on others who are more expert. The same applies to politicians. For the long gun registry I consider the chiefs of police more competent than politicians to evaluate what contributes to effective and efficient law enforcement. For the long form census form I consider the views of professional statisticians more relevant than my views. For the value of public dissemination of research findings I consider the views of researchers more valid than mine.
Now observe carefully that in all 3 examples the Conservative leadership and my MP consider their own doctrinaire position to be more valid than those who are more competent in the subject matter.

4. Most serious is that in all 3 examples I find no references to underlying principles. Since my Conservative politicians either have no principles or choose not disclose them, I reveal mine. I lean strongly in the direction of maximizing personal freedom and personal economic choice. Yes the long gun registry and the long form census report impinge on personal freedom but in my view do so in a minor way that is more than offset by my personal benefit and/or the benefit to society. To muzzle researchers is a clear violation of their personal freedom without any plausible rationale.

I close with a challenge.
Present the clear rationale for your position on all 3 issues.

If I do not find rationality in my politicians then they will not find any confidence or support from me.

As usual, I post on my blog and will post any replies there as well.

http://dlmblogmissn.blogspot.com/

FREE TRADE, AGRICULTURE, SUPPLY MANAGEMENT

FREE TRADE, AGRICULTURE, SUPPLY MANAGEMENT.
April 26, 2010

kamp.r@parl.gc.ca
randy@randykamp.com
marc.dalton.mla@leg.bc.ca
randy.hawes.mla@leg.bc.ca

Free trade and dialogue

Hi to my representatives,

2 themes. Free trade and dialogue between constituents and their representative.

First let me introduce myself. I lean heavily toward libertarianism, I believe in the maximum possible personal liberty, I believe in a minimum of government, I believe markets are more efficient and effective at setting prices and allocating resources than are bureaucrats and politicians. I believe in these values more strongly than does either our federal conservatives or our provincial liberals. I claim to be a better economist than Stephen Harper. You can check out my credentials at :
http://ca.linkedin.com/pub/dr-daniel-lumon-mcdonald/18/6a0/1a1

FREE TRADE
Everyone is in favor of free trade. Well not quite, everyone is in favor of "free trade except for x,y,z". I am in favor of free trade full stop.

A National Post editorial of April 16 highlighted the danger that our existing dairy and egg cartels [a.k.a. "supply management"] pose to freer trade.
http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/story.html?id=2913133

At issue is the probability we are inadmissible to the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement.

They rightly say we will not gain admission unless we dismantle our agricultural cartels.

We are hypocrites. We angrily rail at the US on free trade in lumber and fail to acknowledge the timber in our own eye.

This is both a provincial and a federal issue.
I ask for a clear statement from each of you as to your party's stance AND your personal stance on free trade in general and on the agricultural cartels in particular.


[note: the remainder of the communication dealt with DIALOGUE AND TRANSPARENCY and was posted as a blog with title "BLOGS FOR POLITICIANS posted May 19, 2010"]

Sincerely
Daniel McDonald
NOTE: The replies will be posted as separate comments by Daniel. This will keep the thread of communication clear for each of the 3 representatives.
May 21 update note.
Replies from Randy Hawes and Marc Dalton have been posted by Daniel as comments.
No reply to date from Randy Kamp.

AUDIT OF MP EXPENSES

Date:
Wed, 19 May 2010 21:55:22 -0700
From:
Dan McDonald
To:
"GC kamp.r@parl.gc.ca"

Subject:
Audit of MP expenses.


Dear Mr. Kamp,

I despair at my attempts to provide good, albeit, unsolicited advice to you.

Please come out strongly with your personal support for the Auditor General of Canada to conduct a value for money audit of MP expenses.

If possible, persuade the Conservative Party to do likewise.

If you or your party have good reasons to continue to balk at this idea then please send them to me and I will post them on my blog. Do not use the "we are already audited" lame excuse. That is a financial audit and what taxpayers want and deserve is a value for money audit.

This is simply a no win stance that slows you down in getting on with good government.

Act fast, the Liberals or the NDP will soon wake up and reverse their stance leaving the Conservatives as those with something to hide.

Sincerely,
Daniel McDonald
32502 Best Ave.
Mission B.C. V2V 2S6
d._mcdonald@telus.net 604.820.9310
http://dlmblogmissn.blogspot.com/

May 21
Boilerplate reply follows. I wonder if there will be any reply of substance.
Subject:
RE: losing faith
Date:
Fri, 21 May 2010 13:14:03 -0400
From:

To:

References:

Dear Mr. McDonald,

Thank you for taking the time to write to the office of Randy Kamp, Member of Parliament for Pitt Meadows--Maple Ridge--Mission. I will pass your message and link along to Mr. Kamp so that he is aware of your views on this issue.

Sincerely,

Curtis Schoblocher
Parliamentary Assistant
Office of Randy Kamp, MP
Pitt Meadows--Maple Ridge--Mission

BLOGS FOR POLITICIANS

Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 10:17 AM
To: kamp.r@parl.gc.ca; randy@randykamp.com; Dalton.MLA, Marc; Hawes.MLA, Randy
Subject: Free trade and dialogue

April 26, 2010

kamp.r@parl.gc.ca
randy@randykamp.com
marc.dalton.mla@leg.bc.ca
randy.hawes.mla@leg.bc.ca

Free trade and dialogue

Hi to my representatives,

2 themes. Free trade and dialogue between constituents and their representative.

First let me introduce myself. I lean heavily toward libertarianism, I believe in the maximum possible personal liberty, I believe in a minimum of government, I believe markets are more efficient and effective at setting prices and allocating resources than are bureaucrats and politicians. I believe in these values more strongly than does either our federal conservatives or our provincial liberals. I claim to be a better economist than Stephen Harper. You can check out my credentials at :
http://ca.linkedin.com/pub/dr-daniel-lumon-mcdonald/18/6a0/1a1

FREE TRADE [FOR BLOG THIS SECTION IN A SEPARATE BLOG "CONSERVATIVES ON FREE TRADE #2

DIALOGUE AND TRANSPARENCY

This request for response/dialogue leads to my second theme. I do admire the 3 of you for devoting yourself to public service. Both Randy's have corresponded with me and I appreciate that.
You cannot possible spend the time and effort preparing thoughtful responses to all of the issues that are thrown at you.

Take a load off your feet and embrace technology.

I have check all 3 of your web sites looking for the adoption of technology to improve your effectiveness and efficiency.

Blogs are easy to use for both the blogger and those who comment and interact. They can be tremendously effective as a demonstration of transparency and dialogue in action.

Randy Kamp, web site has riding news but no blog. No aspect of site for meaningful dialogue.

Randy Hawes, web site does have reference to the caucus tweets. Tweets are for twerps, too short for meaningful dialogue. No blog for Randy himself.

Marc Dalton web site. No reference to any blog or to any use of technology.

Conclusion none of you three are making effective use of technology to engage with your constituents.

For example, if you had a blog, and wanted to dialogue with me on my free trade issue then you simply copy and paste my e-mail into your blog and then prepare your response. If/when you get similar letters or questions you simply say "been there, done that see my blog of [date]"

There is more than effectiveness and efficiency involved. Governments, legislators, and politicians are not held in particularly high regard these days. Part of it is the lack of transparency.

I realize that you are in the difficult position of having to both represent your constituents and at the same time provide leadership.

On the transparency issue, you may or may not reply to my free trade issue. If you do, you may take the contrary position when you respond to others or when you participate in caucus discussions. If you believe in transparency and straightforwardness you put your position in writing – on your blog. Yes conditions change, yes your position may change, and a blog entry can explain the reason for the change.

Transparency is like free trade; everyone is in favor of "transparency". No quite. Everyone is in favor of "transparency except for x,y,z…"

The cynic in me says that if you air the idea of having your own blog to be candid with your constituents and the public, that the powers that be within your party will advise you not to do it. This applies particularly to you Randy Kamp as Harper has the reputation of not wanting individuals to be open and candid. You will likely accept their view.

I want to end on a positive note.
I am willing and able to spend some time with each of you or your office manager to get a blog set up for you. One of your children or grandchildren could probably do it faster and better and your web master could do it with more style and class, but I will put in the time if you ask.

Sincerely
Daniel McDonald

PS: This 77 year old created and maintains a blog. Might even put this missive on the blog along with your response. If you do not want your response to be posted, then say so now.
http://dlmblogmissn.blogspot.com/