CBRM Equalization Supporters Can Score A Big Win Tonight At 7 PM

Joe Ward Follow Me

Posted this 2018-07-30 2:57 PM ADT (updated 2018-07-30 10:11 PM ADT)

UPDATE: As expected, tickets sold out in just a few minutes.

Tonight at 7 PM, tickets for the PC leadership debate in Sydney are open for limited seating reservation online.

This is an opportunity for local Equalization Fairness supporters to disrupt the Kool-Aid.

And here's what I mean by that. Cecil Clarke's supporters are very organized. The one thing he certainly pulls out every stop for is political campaigning. What this means is that his supporters are going to be logging on at 7 PM and doing their best to reserve as many tickets as they can.

They want to pack the room on debate night with his supporters. They'll try to sit as close to the front as possible. And they'll cheer him on regardless of what he says. And, for those of you not familiar, that's what the "drinking the Kool-Aid" reference is all about: Political supporters who act like fans just willingly believe whatever they're told and pull the fuse from the critical thinking part of their brains.

Equalization Supporters Can Score a Big Win Tonight at 7 PM

They just need to get online and reserve a ticket to the PC leadership debate. Don't let Clarke supporters dominate the room, and cheer on-command like a sitcom laugh track to influence the impression left on the media about how the candidates performed.

Remember that Cecil Clarke doesn't support Equalization. He never has. In fact, of all of his misuse of the term bold in his campaign collection, the only truly bold promise thus far was him actually telling the CBRM that he wants to eliminate the provincial Equalization transfer.

He fought hard against John Morgan and even mocked Mayor Morgan (as recorded in the media of the time). He said Cape Breton was already getting their fair share. And now we have to refuse community organizations of the funding they ask for, put a "pathetic" road repair budget on the books for the 2018-2019 budget, and see the cancellation of Clarke's own blossoming program he taunted about keeping upon his reelection...

Despite all of the above, Clarke still thinks that taking away our Equalization transfer and handing more authority over to the province he thinks he'll be leading soon is a good idea. They will decide where and when and how many hoops we have to jump through to get resources back here in the CBRM. And that's his plan for us?

Equalization Advocates are the strongest politically active group in Cape Breton

And they need to consistently show the force of their commitment.

Despite their strength, local politicians are sitting down with the NSEF group and telling them they won't do anything. They either pass the buck or even insult their intelligence suggesting that they don't know the difference between Federal and Provincial Equalization.

As such, Equalization supporters don't have any reason to stay hands off politically. As a lobby, they need to use their full might to influence (and even terminate) political careers. Cecil Clarke's plans to become Premier can be snuffed out with the power of the NSEF and their Equalization supporters.

If Equalization is not a dedicated question at the upcoming debate in the CBRM, the entire PC party should be ashamed of themselves for avoiding the most politically active discussion that's happening here, rivalled only by the healthcare crisis.

There are two politicians that are willing to make commitments to us here in the CBRM. MLAs Tammy Martin (NDP) and Tim Houston (PC).

Tim Houston has made a commitment of immediately doubling the provincial Equalization funding which means approximately $15 Million more in resources for the CBRM.

Many Equalization advocates will point out that that is only a fraction of the hundreds of millions that the NSEF group suggests is due. But it's so much more than any other politician in a position of power is willing to offer.

We may very well see a PC government formed in the next provincial election.

Imagine the difference between a province lead by Tim Houston who is on record saying our Equalization system is unfair and is committed to immediately increasing it in year 1... and Cecil Clarke who has always opposed it, even though he's from Cape Breton and has been our mayor for the last 6 years.

It will be a small travesty if that debate room is packed with Clarke's Kool-Aid-drunk supporters who are going to cheer his every word. He'll boom up his voice, channel his inner Alfie MacLeod, and do his best to look confident. It's what he does during election times. He's good at it, and his supporters are going to try to pack the front row to cheer him on.

But maybe the Equalization supporters may just decide that they don't want cheerleading. They want answers. They want commitments. They want fairness for the CBRM and all underfunded municipalities.

Click this link at 7 PM tonight and reserve your seating. Seats will likely be reserved quickly.

NOTE: The views expressed above are my own and do not represent lokol (goCapeBreton.com). Read more

Posted by Joe Ward
Receive news by email and share your news and events for free on goCapeBreton.com
SHOW ME HOW

Like 5 Dislike 1

FOLLOW 18

2,629 48

Gov Political Commentary

48

Depth
Mike Johnson Follow Me 2018-07-30 3:25 PM ADT Reply 3 0 Houston reiterated his Commitment to the NSEF again at the Rally in North Sydney.
Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-07-30 9:59 PM ADT Reply 0 0 As expected, tickets sold out very fast. I've heard it suggested they were gone in 5 minutes. Shirley MacLeod Follow Me 2018-07-31 5:02 PM ADT Reply 0 0 Anything free goes in five minutes here.
Shirley MacLeod Follow Me 2018-07-31 3:48 PM ADT Reply 0 1 Cecil believes in changing Equalization to something that works better ,taking into consideration that rural & urban districts have different needs. Give him a chance to show what equal really means. Do you think 2 cities ,Halifax & Sydney are being treated equally?? Not a chance. We.ve been getting the dirty end of the stick for years. This group has a hate on for Cecil because Rankin lost to him. Aren't most of you his supporters. I have nothing personally against Mr. Mac Sween .He's well respected by people who know him well. That's one reason I find your comments hard to take. To people like me ,who don't know him,we feel this is demeaning to him. I was contacted to do a survey by a group & it only listed 2 choices for mayor. He was one . Why were there not 5 or 6 or more . ? Apparently it was put on by New Dawn . Is he president of New Dawn.? I'm sure I don't have all my facts straight but I'm sure people get the jist of what I'm trying to say, That there is so much hate in your message,and it's unfair for you to do this because I'm sure it's not the feeling of all Cape Bretoners. I think it would be to our advantage to have one as leader of the PC Party of Nova Scotia. Even if they don't want to vote for him in a General Election . Maybe they are Green Party or always Liberal voters. They could still like a Caper as leader of a party instead of a mainlander that forgets Cape Breton doesn't end at the causeway.!!!! Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-07-31 4:07 PM ADT Reply 1 0 There's much to unpack in your comment. I'll do my best. "something better that works": Equalization hasn't failed. The key issue that starves municipalities is the Equalization transfer is simply too low. This province just ran a surplus of $230 Million, minus $110 Million provided to the Halifax Convention Centre. Don't buy into "something". What Clarke has described is giving more control of municipal spending to the province, not increasing the funding provided to municipalities. If the "group" you're talking about is the NSEF (Nova Scotians for Equalization Fairness), firstly you should be aware that I'm not a member, and I do not speak for them. However, if they dislike Cecil, the most obvious reason is that Cecil Clarke opposed Equalization and fought back against Mayor John Morgan when he tried to get more for us. It has nothing to do with Rankin MacSween or the mayoral election. I don't know who you were contacted for regarding a mayoral survey. The media reported that the New Dawn telephone survey had 5 candidates. I should note that this really isn't relevant to the topic of my article. I dislike Mr. Clarke as a political leader. However, my article isn't about hate. It had a clear goal to encourage people to attend the debate so that his political supporters wouldn't pack the room and cheer him on in a prearranged manner. I appealed to people to combat that manipulation by showing up and reminding them of what is at risk with Clarke's anti-Equalization platform. I assure you that there is absolutely nothing unfair about exercising your right as a citizen to engage in a political discussion. I do not intend to speak for all of Cape Breton. Although Clarke declined in popularity and received over 5,200 less votes in his mayoral re-election, he was, in fact, re-elected and clearly still has many supporters in Cape Breton. Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-07-31 4:14 PM ADT Reply 1 0 If your only criteria for Premier or PC leader is being from Cape Breton, you're using a very haphazard way of choosing someone who could be the leader of this province. Tim Houston has pledged to double Equalization funding across the province in Year 1, and that would result in $15 Million more in funding pouring directly into the CBRM. Meanwhile, consistent with always opposing Equalization Fairness, Cecil Clarke wants to eliminate Equalization, and give more control over distributing resources to municipalities from the province. Clearly, from a resources standpoint, the one that is looking out for the CBRM is Tim Houston. Mayor Clarke hasn't been a successful mayor or a strong champion for the CBRM as mayor, and I see no reason to expect that he'll suddenly become our champion when he's back in Halifax where he wants to be. P.S. The debate tickets were gone in under 5 minutes. Clearly, some organization was underway. Mike Johnson Follow Me 2018-08-01 9:39 AM ADT Reply 2 0 Shirley, I really don't think that there is a 'group' here; goCapeBreton is more of a quasi-news and Community Information site that is available to anyone. However, there is a fair bit of political commentary posted and IMO, most of it is objective and factual. As for Cecil Clarke, I have nothing against him impersonally, and it has nothing to do with Rankin MacSween. I actually voted for Clarke as Mayor initially, but became so disillusioned with his operating methodology, constant 'political' decisions, and ineffective governance that i campaigned against him in the last. I cannot support anybody who has a reputation for a complete lack of transparency (more 'in camera' meetings than all CBRM Mayors prior...31 in 22 months), and more dubious 'deals' than I can mention here. (SHIP, Heddle Marine, Archibald's Wharf, Staff Hires, etc.) His singular focus for the last 6 years has been Container Port Development, which is a 'long shot' at best, has accomplished nothing, and has been marked by 'non disclosure' and 'Confidential' at every turn. Anybody who has actually worked in international business in a public environment knows that this is bogus and is only possible because we have 8 completely ineffective Councillors. Clarke has become a professional politician who is more interested in maintaining his own career than representing his constituents. Having said that I can hardly think of a single politician in CB with his length of tenure who is still energetically representing the people who put them in their position. One of the positive 'by products' of NSEF is that this is becoming blatantly apparent to many voters who I hope will remember at subsequent elections. Unfortunately, several with much shorter tenures, such and Mombourquette and MacLellan, fall into that category as well. Mike Johnson Follow Me 2018-08-01 9:40 AM ADT Reply 2 0 Btw, I support Tim Houston for the PC Leadership because of his reputation in Pictou East (largest plurality in the Province), his innovative ideas (Chronic Care Program, Youth Tax Incentives), support for NSEF and because he has a background in business and finance that is sorely needed in Government. He is also NOT a professional, long serving Politician. We cannot move forward in CB and NS by re-electing the people who created the situation in the first place. Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-08-01 12:39 PM ADT Reply 3 0 Shirley MacLeod: Having a leader from Cape Breton has not worked to "our advantage" as you think it would. That act has played many times and Cape Breton has not benefited from any of the political parties when they attained the power of government. Even in opposition, the Cape Breton MLAs have not spoken firmly in support of being fully transparent with the distribution of these federal Equalization payments. Cecil Clarke has made his bed regarding his opposition to the Equalization issue and it is well documented. The best three of the Conservative sitting Cape Breton MLAs (Alfie MacLeod-KeithBain-Eddie Orrell) could do was call for the Liberal government to do an audit on the Equalization payments to this province - nothing more. You must have read that piece in the Cape Breton Post a short while ago. They did not commit to such an audit if they attain the power of government again because they also want to have the power to manipulate it as they did before and as the Liberal party in the past and as it is doing now. Even the NDP failed to correct this under funding of the municipalities and Frank Corbett was deputy-premier as I recall. As for New Dawn, it can answer for its own behaviour.
Shirley MacLeod Follow Me 2018-07-31 4:57 PM ADT Reply 1 0 Thanks for clarifying,I haven't been following politics like I used to. But you are correct regarding the survey. Midway through there were 5 or 6 names mentioned for a comment on a particular subject. I can't remember the topic. But the final Question was Who would I pick for Mayor ,Mr. MacSween or Amanda MacDougall.
Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-08-01 10:09 AM ADT Reply 1 0 Does Tim Houston’s Equalization promise of doubling the provincial Equalization grant also cancel the current clawback by the provincial government that exceeds the current provincial Equalization grant ($15 million) to the CBRM? Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-08-01 11:02 AM ADT Reply 1 0 I do not believe it cancels the clawback, but the doubling would result in a net increase of around $12 Million to the CBRM, for autonomous spending (and use for leverage). In full recognition that the NSEF suggests that millions per year are due (~$250 Million), so far this offer has the highest expected value. Here's what I mean by that: The PCs are in line for a possible majority win, unless the PC members erroneously choose Clarke to lead. With Houston as the leader, this would make the doubling of Equalization highly likely to happen in the near future with a PC win. The NDP via Tammy Martin have made the highest dollar amount offer for Equalization. I believe the request was for $50 Million a year for the CBRM (correct me if the amount or region receiving it is inaccurate). The challenge is that the NDP is unlikely to form a majority government or gain the power to make this happen. The Cape Breton United Party (CPUP), at present, is not far enough along to have candidates secured and would seemingly have no off-island representation. All other politicians are giving the NSEF the runaround, and are almost completely unlikely to change anything whatsoever. Thus, the Houston campaign commitment has the highest expected value of more resources for the CBRM in the near future. We should take it, and then continue fighting for more. Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-08-01 12:09 PM ADT Reply 2 0 So, accepting your figures Joe, Houston's promise amounts to $12 million, which really is about 4.86 percent of the amount CBRM should receive in the 2018-19 Equalization transfer of $1.898 billion. I pose this question: if Houston wins the party leadership and then government, would he consider accepting only 4.86 percent of his salary until he fixes the federal Equalization transfers to what is provided for the municipal units? Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-08-01 12:58 PM ADT Reply 1 0 By the numbers, his promise is $15 Million more than what we are receiving at present time. The clawback is something that is present now, not something that would be introduced. Hence, the $15 Million would be enough to cover the clawback and add an additional $12 Million in autonomous spending, but it's entirely new resources for the CBRM that we don't have now. Your question is rhetorical, of course. I'm sure he'll be accepting his full salary as premier, just as he does now as MLA. So, you assert that Houston's promise is 4.86%, based on the NSEF number of $247 Million due to the CBRM. It would actually be 6.1%, but that's a minor math error. By that math, NDP Tammy Martin's ask for $50 Million would be 20.2% of the NSEF's full ask. For reference, what is the percentage commitment of Equalization increase that you have from (a) Cecil Clarke, (b) any of the other PC leadership candidates, (c) any of the local PC MLAs, (d) Derek Mombourquette, (e) Geoff MacLellan, or (f) Stephen McNeil? Are any of them beating Houston's 6.1% or Martin's 20.2%? Or are they all zero percent increase? Of the PCs or the NDPs, which do you predict has a greater likelihood of winning a majority government in the next election? If we ignore who is likely to win the election, then Martin's 20.2% is the high water mark. If we pay attention to who has a strong opportunity to win the election, Houston's 6% is the high water mark. And clearly, everyone else is just working against you. Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-08-01 1:19 PM ADT Reply 1 0 There is no error. Using your figure of $12 million, the value of Houston promise is only 4.86%. When you are promoting Houston, you want to inflate his promise’s worth. Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-08-01 1:46 PM ADT Reply 0 0 There's a very clear math error. He isn't committing $12 Million more than we get now. He's committing $15 Million more than we get now. You're just subtracting the clawback that exists now, as though he's introducing it that too, and that's incorrect. So I'm describing it accurately, and you're understating the commitment. Either way, whether it was only $12 Million or $15 Million, it represents the only commitment that has a potential likelihood of going into effect. The NSEF has clearly demonstrated that other politicians aren't cooperating. There's just Houston and Martin. Martin offers more than Houston. Houston is more likely to be in a position of power to fulfill his commitment. All others are write-offs. By comparison, just imagine what an anti-Equalization premier such as Cecil Clarke would be like if the declining popularity of the Liberals leads to a PC government in the next election and Clarke somehow is leading it. If there's some commitment out there that brings the NSEF closer to their goal, I'm not aware of it at present time. Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-08-01 3:08 PM ADT Reply 2 0 I disagree. Houston’s value of his promise is $12 million- your figure. Again, in your promoting this promise, you are trying to imply Houston will not claw back when he has not stated anything on that matter. Your implying such is an incorrect assumption to imply to the viewers/readers. Even if Clarke were to win, his position was always opposed to a fair, transparent accounting for this federal transfer. That’s been the behaviour of all parties once in power. Promises by political aspirants while in Opposition have been made before and remained just that:a promise! I don’t hold the same hope as you do in a political promise by a politician, who, at this time, is powerless to deliver. Further, I am not as supportive as you of the value of such a small sum of what is federally supplied for the municipal deficiency in tax capacity related to property. It’s long past the time all these politicians were made to be accountable and transparent about their manipulation of so many Equalization billions of $$$$$. I have no confidence in any of them (politicians) to be that transparent with our money! Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-08-01 3:35 PM ADT Reply 0 0 Ok Charles, if you're insistent that we have to subtract the clawback that's already in place, let's adjust the numbers for some reason. Houston: $15 Million more. $12 Million left over after covering the current clawback. Martin: $50 Million more. $47 Million left over after covering the current clawback. Note: The above is without regard of who is more likely to actually be in a majority government situation, setting the platform for the party in power. Objectively speaking, I'm acknowledging the offers that I'm aware of, regarding increased Equalization. As I understand it, only Houston and Martin have made offers of more funding for the CBRM (or other municipalities) that increase the provincial Equalization transfer. Neither Houston nor Martin's offer meets the expectations of the NSEF (which seems to be $247 Million). The rest of the politicians the NSEF has lobbied have made no commitments of increased resources. If you don't have the same hope as I do that someone will follow through on an achievable commitment, what hope could you ever have that: (a) a much greater amount ($247 Million) will be achieved, from (b) some unnamed politician that has yet to be found that would pledge it? Here is how much value I place in a commitment of $15 Million: $15 Million, any additional monies it can leverage, and the precedent for recognizing underfunding and providing something more. Do you realize believe you're going to go from $0 to $247 Million with no acceleration? Would you really turn down $15 Million because it's not $247 Million? Do you have any forseeable path to an improved outcome, whatsoever, in sight? Is the principle of the matter and the fight itself more important than the results? The CBRM will certainly welcome an additional $15 Million, even if they ultimately need more. As a matter of logic, is your preference for the PC leadership Cecil Clarke or Tim Houston? Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-08-01 4:38 PM ADT Reply 2 0 Joe, I know what Clarke has done when in power. I don’t have that information about Houston. A starving person will likely accept a small serving of stale bread too. Your reference to the CBRM’s willingness to accept $15 million. They likely would accept less too. You continue to say my position is $0 or $247 million? Why? Having politicians obey the law and being truthful and transparent about their manipulation on Equalization needs to be the practice first before deciding on the number of Equalization $$$$ that should fund the eligible municipal units. Put everything on the table for ALL Nova Scotians to see. Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-08-01 4:53 PM ADT Reply 1 0 Joe, is Houston about to expose all this political manipulation of the Equalization scam if he wins power? Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-08-01 5:00 PM ADT Reply 0 0 You'll have to ask him, Charles. I haven't heard anything statement from his campaign of intent to "expose all this political manipulation of the Equalization scam if he wins power". Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-08-01 4:58 PM ADT Reply 0 0 Do you believe that there's a chance that Houston could possibly be a worse option than Clarke on the issue of Equalization based on what you know? I suggest your position appears to be all or nothing because of your readiness to reject the idea of more resources ($15 Million) for the CBRM as though it has no value. I haven't seen any indication that you've offered a starting point you would deem acceptable, though your most recent message makes it appear as though you would prefer that they hold off on sending more money until they've exposed all of the data. Refusing to suggest that $15 Million is the right amount is a logical action. Refusing $15 Million, if it's the best offer on the table, isn't. Strategically, if you think the NSEF's goals will be better achieved with Cecil Clarke as the PC leader, I would encourage you to advocate for that. Ideally, the NSEF's objective should be getting the most pliable/agreeable people in every party in position, and the ones who are resistant out. If this is your prerequisite: "Having politicians obey the law and being truthful and transparent about their manipulation on Equalization needs to be the practice" Do you actually think it's possible to achieve anything? The Houston commitment of $15 Million isn't a decision about Equalization Fairness or the appropriate amount. It's a recognition that the municipalities are underfunded, require more resources urgently; and a commitment to provide 100% more than is currently allocated, in year 1. Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-08-01 5:50 PM ADT Reply 1 0 Jumping for the first promise from an aspiring politician running for the leadership is similar to the Liberal Resolution passed at their AGM to do an audit. Nothing more. Apparently, you do not demand transparency or any other democratic trait such as accountability, promise me a $15 milllion one-time payment and I will support your party. Really, you accept the $15 million is a recognition of under funding. Given the amount of under funding, the $15 Million promise is not a recognition of the years of under funding or that there will be any more than that - if he wins the leadership and later government. Houston could represent change - if that was his intention. Apparently, he wants what other politicians want too. So far the achievement has been that the public is more aware of the corruption of all parties. The politicians have decided to ignore the public on Equalization. After that, elections happen and we will have to see if any of these unrepresentative politicians will pay a price in not being re-elected. Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-08-01 6:43 PM ADT Reply 0 0 I don't support the PC party. I support putting my preferred PC leadership candidate in place as their leader, as an insurance policy. I'll decide who I vote for during the next election. If Clarke is declared their leader, they have zero chance at my vote. I may end up voting for Doucette (if she were to run) merely for the opportunity of helping to eliminate Mombourquette for not advocating for Equalization on our behalf. If she doesn't do enough to deserve it by that time, I may abstain from casting my ballot altogether. You're right. The $15 Million is not compensation for underfunding in prior years. It is also something that he could change for the worse (discontinue, reduce, or increase only marginally) after year 1. But... it is $15 Million in additional resources for the CBRM and represents progress towards recognition of underfunding. If Houston wanted what other politicians wanted, he'd be doing exactly what all (spare Martin) of the other politicians are doing/saying to your group: no changes. The NSEF lobby achieved the $15 Million Houston commitment whether it wants to accept responsibility or recognize the move forward or not. Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-08-01 6:43 PM ADT Reply 1 0 The NSEF has the opportunity for influence that they can either accept or squander. Here's how: Choose whichever candidate you think is going to be the most pliable by the NSEF as either PC leader (platform development, opposition) or Premier. Let's say you choose Cecil Clarke (it's up to your group; you can choose anyone you prefer). Then you do a public endorsement of the candidate the NSEF feels they most prefer negotiating with in the future, as per whatever your demands are. It's up to you to define them as you choose. You ask your supporters to get a PC membership, and for them to help you put in place your preferred leader (whoever it is). Your supporters could help the NSEF influence the PC leadership selection and demonstrate its power (send a message to all politicians in the process). Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-08-01 7:13 PM ADT Reply 1 0 You are free to play your politics the way you want. I don’t regard party politics as serving the interest of most Canadians. Houston’s $15 million promise or the NDP’s offer is a political reaction to NSEF’s efforts to inform the public of the manipulation by the political parties with this federal transfer. Will there be more reactions...time will tell. Houston is doing what the other politicians are doing: promise only the minimum amount that will get votes. Never mind the past or the actual amount of under funding today. NSEF does NOT involve itself in any political party’s behaviour regarding leadership or to supporting any in election campaigns. All political parties have been a failure on the Equalization issue to be above manipulating the funds for political gain at the expense of too many communities. Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-08-01 7:46 PM ADT Reply 0 0 Then, once again, you have no end game. Politics for me is about results, not the fight. Politicians are creatures of habit. Don't wait around until one of them has a sudden $247 Million epiphany. By carrot and by stick, drive them into the direction you need them to go. Houston isn't doing what the other politicians are doing. You've talked to them all. Their commitment is $0.00. Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-08-01 9:02 PM ADT Reply 1 0 The commitment is written in the Constitution. Houston has made a promise like the Liberals’ promise to do an audit. Dexter and Corbett attacked premier Hamm in Oral Question Period on May 5, 2005, over the Conservative manipulation of the Equalization distribution using the UNSM report. They were correct in their attack but once in power did what Hamm and the Liberals have done in under funding the municipal units. Politicians follow their orders too when in government. Because you cannot see an end game, doesn’t mean there isn’t one. Politicians’ “habits” will change when enough pressure from the public forces their habits to change. Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-08-01 9:56 PM ADT Reply 0 0 Just make sure you're applying pressure in the right direction. We can't afford to measure progress in decades. I don't see evidence of the existence of your end game. As you've made clear from your comments: The politicians who tell you they won't do anything, won't do anything. The politicians who tell you they will do something, still won't do anything. So what are you doing wasting time talking to politicians you're certain will never do anything? http://epistle.us/inspiration/godwillsaveme.html Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-08-01 11:04 PM ADT Reply 1 0 Avoiding the politicians would not have convinced the public these people do not represent them. That had to be shown. The people’s response will determine will determine the end game - as it should. Mike Johnson Follow Me 2018-08-01 9:05 PM ADT Reply 0 0 Charles, I share your general cynicism on party politics and politicians, and the NSEF has 'outed' a number of them. However, every once in a while, we get a chance to vote for a good Candidate who represents Change, and when that happens we need to take advantage of it. Unfortunately, all too often, we fail to do that and re-elect the same old retread; your own Councillor is a classic example of that. I have spoken with Tim Houston at length re his stand on Equalization He understood the issue and the numbers (Westville $750k, etc.) in depth and his $15 million to CB was NET, and with no strings, or claw back involved. He also understands that the system does not work for the Municipalities, but that will require a longer period to fix. IF we are smart enough to elect Houston, there is no question that he will face an uphill fight on many things vs the bureaucracy and the status quo; but I don't think he increased his plurality in Pictou East by 50% through breaking a lot of promises. Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-08-01 11:24 PM ADT Reply 1 0 Mike, I don’t share your faith in a politician to take on the entrenched power that has created this Equalization mess. As you acknowledge, he will face stiff opposition from within his party as well as the bureaucracy and the corporate interests. I see no redeeming qualities in our political parties, which have transformed their role from being a servant to the electorate to that of being their executive overlord. The difficulty NSEF has encountered from the politicians reflects that attitude of an executive boss. Mike Johnson Follow Me 2018-08-02 7:42 AM ADT Reply 1 0 Well, in this case, Houston will be the "Executive Boss", with its inherent authority, and thus the ability to affect change, and we need to hope that he will not have the "attitude" of his predecessors. In the mean time, and despite a growing cynicism, I will vote and work for good people like Houston, MacSween, and Earlene MacMullin every chance I get.
Nova Scotians for Equalization Fairness Follow Me 2018-08-01 12:43 PM ADT Reply 2 0 Hello Shirley MacLeod. Let me start by saying that the NSEF is a nonpartisan organization who is committed to educating the general public about the under-funding and the grand scam by the Nova Scotia Provincial Government has going to keep the rural areas in the province impoverished so that they can continue to get more and more "Equalization" funding every year. It is outrageous that you say publicly that we are doing all this because Cecil Clarke beat Rankin MacSween in a mayoral election. That is plain and simple nonsense. What has Alfie Macleod done to stand up and fight for Cape Breton in the past 20 years? This is the issue at hand. We have the highest commercial taxes in the country. We have one of the highest child poverty rates in Canada. We have 15.8% unemployment and HRM has 5.4%. We pay 87% higher residential taxes than HRM. These are the issues that we are fighting against and the reasons we are fighting so hard. The sad part of all this is that Ottawa is sending us the funding to address all these concerns but our local politicians are not standing up to the provincial government and seeing that we are getting our fair share. Please keep us out of your comments regarding municipal politics as it is taking away from the big picture......our future. Regards, The NSEF Shirley MacLeod Follow Me 2018-08-01 6:08 PM ADT Reply 0 0 NSEF , COULD OUR FEDERAL MP MARK EYKING not help to have the funding directed to CB directly, instead of Halifax .I know they tried before bbut aare they all useless.we are not being represented well.By the way, I'm not Alfies Shirley.Sorry if I offended anyone Nova Scotians for Equalization Fairness Follow Me 2018-08-02 12:01 PM ADT Reply 2 0 Hi Shirley. Thanks for your reply. We do not get offended any more by anyone's comments and we are glad you are engaging in the discussion. We have met with Mark Eyking and Rodger Cuzner recently but we do not seem to be getting the support from the Federal Government that we hoped for. From our perspective, we seem to have some sympathy from Rodger Cuzner with regards to our fight and we think he understands what we are going through. Mark Eyking is another story. We met with him and educated him on our findings and provided him with a list of questions we needed answers to from Ottawa and we never heard from him again. After many phone calls to his office regarding the answers we seek from him, still nothing. The NSEF is committed to continue to dig deep until we are able to get to the bottom of this mess. I just wanted to assure you that the NSEF is in no way associated with any political party and we do not even discuss party politics in our meetings. The mission of the NSEF is to educate and continue to educate the general public about what our own provincial government is doing to the citizens of this province with regards to under-funding. The supreme law of Canada as well as the Human Rights Act are all being broken by our own government and this is what we are seeking help from Ottawa with but as we all know party politics is getting in the way as usual. Political parties will always protect the party members at any cost. Thanks again Shirley for replying and please continue to be involved in the discussion as this is how we all learn. Regards, The NSEF Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-08-02 12:13 PM ADT Reply 0 0 Sympathy from a well-paid politician staring down the barrel of a video camera isn't at all unexpected or worth a whole lot unless it's accompanied by a tangible commitment toward action that advances you towards your objective. I watched the video and observed Cuzner disagree on points and describe how the Federal government's hands were tied. He even went so far as to refute the idea that Cape Breton has among the highest rates of child poverty, casting statistical blame towards First Nation's communities as though they weren't also Cape Bretoners, or should be considered separately from everyone else. Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-08-02 1:05 PM ADT Reply 2 0 Exactly. MPs work for corporate Canada and not the citizens. Veterans and others have run head on into that situation. When you take on the government, it will use all of it taxpayers resources to fight you. [comment deleted] Posted 2018-08-02 2:26 PM ADT Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-08-04 10:31 PM ADT Reply 0 0 Joe, what was the reason Amy Watts’ comment was deleted? goCapeBreton.com Team Follow Me 2018-08-04 11:38 PM ADT Reply 0 0 Charles, that was a fake account created by a known troll. [comment deleted] Posted 2018-08-05 11:03 AM ADT
Lloyd Allan MacPherson Follow Me 2018-08-05 3:32 PM ADT Reply 2 0 It's one of the issues I have with this and any site that does not accept anonymity - if you are going to moderate comments for content, why should it matter if it is coming from someone who wishes to remain anonymous. In a direct, competent democracy, retaliation for voicing one's truth doesn't exist if this truth is expressed in a non-violent manner, yet here there are no guarantees that something you say that you put your name on, won't result in retaliation down the line. By all means, moderate for content but those "fake accounts" and "known trolls" labels could very well be "anonymous subscribers" from equally "concerned citizens" who fear "retaliation". The transparency you seek on this site doesn't filter into everyday life for the posters. [comment deleted] Posted 2018-08-05 4:43 PM ADT [comment deleted] Posted 2018-08-05 4:46 PM ADT Mathew Georghiou Follow Me 2018-08-05 6:28 PM ADT Reply 0 0 Lloyd (and others) ... the comments deleted on this post and others is from a known troll who repeatedly attempts to attack people by spreading lies and misinformation on this site, Facebook, and presumably other sites. This type of troll-like behaviour adds no value to our community and is damaging to Cape Breton Island. As to allowing anonymous comments, we have never, and will never, allow such contributions on goCapeBreton.com. That's a decision we made when we first started building the technology many years ago based on our deep experience with online communities. You are likely aware that many online services have since adopted the same policy of not allowing anonymous comments (although most do a poor job of moderation). If anyone wonders about such a policy in Cape Breton, you only have to look back at the anonymous comments that used to be allowed on the Cape Breton Post website --- full of personal attacks, racist remarks, and people impersonating others. It was an embarrassment to all Cape Bretoners that the Post allowed to happen for many years .... we will not risk duplicating that on goCapeBreton.com. The Post no longer allows any commenting on their website, so there is no opportunity for any type of conversation. If someone has important information to share but needs to stay anonymous, they can find other ways to share their story. goCapeBreton.com helps solve a number of community challenges, but we can't solve everything, particularly when there are trolls with personal and political agendas trying to disrupt meaningful community conversations. Lloyd Allan MacPherson Follow Me 2018-08-05 7:07 PM ADT Reply 2 0 I get the rules Matthew and I understand why they are there and I understand how taxing full moderation must be. I participate in blogs in Ireland and each site is 100% moderated by volunteers which allow for important information to be posted regarding subject matter that is sensitive to some; others might find threatening to their own agendas. They require a first and last name to publish and follow strict guidelines on content. I've never anonymously provided information on that site yet it was of such a personal matter, there's not a chance in hell I'd ever let it be known here - distance can provide that luxury in circles outside our own. Within these closed circles, without 100% moderation, you are censoring thoughts and ideas that could be asking important questions of the status quo. Just my 2 cents and nothing against this format - you obviously know I'm a fan of the concept - the execution, well that's completely up to you. It would be nice if an option were available where comments could be directed to moderators, anonymously - content verified and then posted via moderator (posted as a "concerned citizen"). That consent could be an amazing tool and could possibly increase social capital numbers. We never run out of options on this internet of things. Cheers. Mathew Georghiou Follow Me 2018-08-05 7:25 PM ADT Reply 1 0 Thanks for sharing those ideas. Things always evolve so we will see where this all takes us. Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-08-05 9:19 PM ADT Reply 2 0 Lloyd, an excellent suggestion. I do agree, however, with Matthew’s explanation of what happened at the CB Post’s online comment policy. He cannot allow that to happen here. Lloyd Allan MacPherson Follow Me 2018-08-05 11:46 PM ADT Reply 1 0 I personally know someone who was getting destroyed on the CB Post site for airing her opinions, a few years back. I convinced her to start her own blog and within a year she amassed over 20K unique visits on her entries. It seems she's left the wordpress format - I may just convince her to start publishing here.
Joan O'Connor Follow Me 2018-08-11 1:22 PM ADT Reply 0 0 I have seen the Amy Watts comments and I can't see where she said anything inflammatory or the least bit wrong headed. Why delete such a comment? Bill Fiander Follow Me 2018-08-11 2:06 PM ADT Reply 1 1 I don't think had anything to do with the comment per-se. I think it had to do more with anonymity as Mathew explained.