Canadian Taxpayers Don't Pay for Gov't Advertizing

Newsflash: Canadian taxpayers don't pay for government ads. No, really. Vic Toews said so during Question Period on Monday so it must be true.

The issue: Tories spend 5 times more on ads than H1N1 prevention

The confrontation:

Martha Hall-Findlay (MP-Willowdale): Mr Speaker, I tried last week to get some answers on government advertizing but got no answer - no numbers. So I'll try again and I'm going to ask the President of the Treasury Board because, after all, he is the one responsible for the spending and he should know. So, how much - exactly - have Canadian taxpayers now paid for this partisan, pat yourself on the back advertizing so far?


Vic Toews (Treasury Board President): Well, in fact, the Government of Canada does not bill the taxpayer for that kind of advertizing. What the Government of Canada does is get out key messages that reach a large number of Canadians on important issues - and they laugh - H1N1, elder abuse, the home renovation tax credit, Canadian forces recruitment. That's what the role of government is and we will continue to do that.


Martha Hall-Findlay (MP-Willowdale): I'm not exactly sure, Mr Speaker, who the President of the Treasury Board thinks actually pays for government spending if it isn't the Canadian taxpayers. I'm not sure which is worse: the fact that he doesn't have the numbers, he doesn't know them or he's trying to hide something...

When Hall-Findlay once again asked how much the Cons had spent on advertizing for their Economic Action Plan, Toews responded by talking about H1N1 advertizing.

Pathetic.
 

Steve's Ode to the NDP

Maybe Harper is having (momentary) second thoughts about treating the NDP party like a battered spouse every chance he gets. Or maybe this is just a very public thank you to Jack et al for propping up his government.

Whatever it is, it's definitely cringe-worthy (although not as nauseating as watching Tom DeLay on Dancing with the Felons Stars).



 

I'm redecorating the blogstead...

 


Hopefully, nothing unexpected will ensue.
 

Would you like some fries with that?

Our Canadian military: hard at work and apparently quite hungry:

Investigation launched after military helicopter touches down for burgers

KENORA -- A spokesman for Defence Minister Peter MacKay said Saturday an investigation has been launched after a Canadian Forces helicopter pilot landed in Kenora recently -- apparently to pick up some cheeseburgers.

“The matter is under investigation to determine what happened. As such, I can’t say much more until all the facts are gathered,” wrote Dan Dugas, the minister’s director of communications in an e-mail.

On Thursday, employees at an A&W fast-food restaurant were surprised to see a military pilot walk in and make a takeout order — while his helicopter was parked outside.

Michelle Patterson, who has worked at the restaurant for 16 years, said Friday she was shocked to see flying dust when the helicopter landed on a baseball diamond across from the eatery.

The pilot joked about wanting to go through the drive-thru but apparently said he wasn’t able to fit.

He ordered enough food for six people, and told her he was on his way to refuel at the airport before flying to Thunder Bay, Ont., and eventually back to Quebec, Patterson said.

The minister’s spokesman said there were no public safety concerns surrounding the landing.

“First of all, at no time during the landing or takeoff was there a danger to the public,” he said in the e-mail. “The Forces thank the local police for securing the sports field for the helicopter’s landing.”

He could not comment on how often military pilots touch down in public spaces to get dinner or what protocols need to be in place.

Kenora is 500 kilometres northwest of Thunder Bay.

To be fair, everybody knows that A&W doesn't offer home delivery.

What's wrong with this picture?

As MP Hedy Fry noted during Question Period today, the similarities are striking:

The Conservative party logo:



The Vancouver Olympics logo as rolled out By Hudson's Bay Co. today:



Side note:

All of the athletes' clothing will be made in Canada, but some of the apparel that will be sold to the public is being manufactured overseas.

It's not like Canadian manufacturing companies need the jobs or anything...

“Our orders are down 30 per cent on average, but they're not falling as sharply as they were,” said Jayson Myers, president of Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters. Weak U.S. demand and little business investment mean “I'm still not seeing any signs of a sustained recovery, based on new orders coming in.”

Stuff a cork in it, Corker

Via the CBC:

U.S. senator slams 'parasitic' Canada over drug prices

An American legislator called Canada "parasitic" on Wednesday for siphoning U.S. dollars to Canada with low prescription drug prices while his country does "all the innovation."

Canada benefits financially from America's role as a world leader in medical advances, Republican Senator Bob Corker charged in an exchange with a Liberal MP as she testified before a U.S. Senate committee.

"One of the things that has troubled me greatly about our system is the fact that we pay more for pharmaceuticals and devices than other countries, and yet it's not really our country so much that's the problem, it's the parasitic relationship that Canada and France and other countries have towards us," the Tennessee lawmaker told Carolyn Bennett.

"Meaning that you set prices and unfortunately all the innovation, all the technological breakthroughs, just about, take place in our country .… You benefit from us, and we pay for that, and I resent that."

Bennett, a family doctor and one-time minister of state for public health, was one of five people testifying before the Senate special committee on aging. The panel, chaired by Democratic Sen. Herb Kohl and including newly minted Sen. Al Franken, was examining how successful health-care systems keep their costs low while maintaining quality care.

She seemed puzzled by Corker's remarks, reminding him that drug pricing was a global concern, not part of a plot by Canada.

"It's the drug companies, sir, and they're multinational — it's nothing about the United States of America," she told him.

If Corker wants to know why American drug prices are so high, maybe he should talk to some of his health care industry/pharma manufacturing campaign donors - not to mention his fellow senators who are also on the take.

While he's at it, he might want to learn about about how Big Pharma actually spends its money:

marcia angell
Former editor in chief, The New England Journal of Medicine

[The pharmaceutical companies'] R&D costs are very high, in absolute terms. But they're quite small relative to their other expenditures and profits. The drug companies spend on average, by their own figures, last year, 15 to 17 percent on R&D. And that's a lot of money. But their profits are higher. Their profits are 18.5 percent. And what's really interesting is what they spend on marketing and administration, by their own figures, is on average 35 percent. That's over twice as much as what they spend on R&D. So if they point to their R&D costs as some sort of justification for the high prices, what on earth can they say about their marketing costs, which are over twice that much? ...

...

Companies argue it's important to keep this a largely private market to protect innovation, and that's why drug companies in other countries are less innovative. Over half of all drugs are produced here.

This is like Holy Roman Empire: It's not holy, it's not Roman, it's not an empire. This question has many of the same problems. Almost every element of what you just said is wrong. Let's look at the big drug companies first. Of the 10 top drug companies, five are European and five are American. Their innovation is much the same. Their turnout of new drugs is much the same. Their marketing budgets are much the same. Their profits are much the same. This, in fact, is a global industry.

All of them have the lion's share of their sales here, because prices are so much higher in the United States than they are in Europe and Canada. So it's sort of good public relations to portray themselves as quintessentially American businesses. They're not. Even in countries where there are price controls, these companies are doing extremely well. So that's the first thing that's wrong with your question.

The second is the implication that these are innovative businesses. They are not innovative businesses. They are giant marketing and PR machines that turn out predominantly "me too" drugs, and whose truly innovative drugs are based mainly on taxpayer-funded work. So they are not innovative. ...

What is going on here, when the pharmaceutical industry insists that they should be essentially left alone, is a threat. It's a threat to the American public. They are saying, "Don't mess with us. Do nothing about our obscene profits. Do nothing about these unsustainable increases in prices, or else we will not give you your miracle cures." Well, guess what? They're not getting them the miracle cures in the first place. But that is their very successful PR pitch. "We are the source of all miracles. Don't mess with us." ...

...

One argument [is that] he Canadians don't invent the drugs. They're parasitic on our R&D. It's unfair.

In fact, the pharmaceutical industry is what's parasitic on publicly funded research. The pharmaceutical industry likes to depict itself as a research-based industry, as the source of innovative drugs. Nothing could be further from the truth. This is their incredible PR and their nerve.

In fact, if you look at where the original research comes from on which new drugs are based, it tends to be from the NIH [National Institutes of Health], from the academic medical centers, and from foreign academic medical centers. Studies of this, looking at the seminal research on which drug patents are based, have found that about 15 percent of the basic research papers, reporting the basic research, came from industry. That's just 15 percent.

The other 85 percent came from NIH-supported work carried out in American academic medical centers. In one study, 30 percent came from foreign academic medical centers. So what we know about the numbers indicates that the foreign academic medical centers are responsible for more new drug discoveries than the industry itself.

- Frontline

The Dalai Lama Comes to Calgary

Related: Dalai Lama talks peace in Calgary
 

Quote du Jour: Recession? What recession?

July 23, 2009 - Recession over, Bank of Canada says

Sept. 21, 2009 - Harper says recession over only in technical sense

Sept. 30, 2009 - ‘Okay, this is a shocker'

It's economic report card time again...

It was time for yet another episode of Steve's Dog & Pony Show today:

Speaking at the Southern Railway, Mechanical Shop & Administration Office, Harper used the announcement of his economic update to say that trying to force an "unnecessary and wasteful election in the middle of a global recession is not in the country's interests."

That's right, peasants. Only Steve is allowed to break his own election law to call unnecessary and wasteful elections during a recession. We should all know that by now.

Apparently unwilling to wait for the upcoming "fruit" that Action Plan Steve is waiting to harvest, Ignatieff huffed and puffed and threatened to blow the house down - again. But that won't be happening any time soon.

As expected, a loud yawn was heard all across the country.

Dogs, ponies, fruit... all in a day's work in Ottawa.
 

Coderre Steps Down

Denis Coderre has stepped down as Ignatieff's Quebec lieutenant.

The controversy, according to CTV's Robert Fife:

The rift between Ignatieff and Coderre broke open last week over who should be nominated as the Liberal candidate in the Montreal riding of Outremont.

Former justice minister Martin Cauchon, who left politics in 2004, has signalled his intention to return to Parliament Hill and reclaim the riding he held for 11 years.

However, Ignatieff announced last Monday that he would appoint businesswoman Nathalie Le Prohon, who was selected by Coderre, as the Liberal candidate in Outremont,

The decision seemed to end Cauchon's hopes of a political comeback, but Coderre announced later in the week that another riding would be offered to Cauchon.

Meanwhile, a number of Liberal MPs, including Bob Rae, rallied around Cauchon in his bid for Outremont.

By the end of the week, Ignatieff had reversed his own decision about Outremont to allow for an open nomination contest in the riding.

"We do know that Mr. Coderre has been very angry at Michael Ignatieff, who overruled him -- had first supported him when he said that Mr. Cauchon could not run for the Liberal party in Outremont -- and then changed his mind and then supported (Cauchon)," Fife said. "So over the weekend, Mr. Coderre...has been mulling over his plans."

According to Fife, Cauchon would likely emerge as a rival to Coderre to replace Ignatieff in a future Liberal leadership contest.

But an immediate concern, Fife said, is that should Coderre step down, the move would cause turmoil "and perhaps open warfare in the Liberal Party."

"In the long-term here, nobody in this country who wants to lead a party can win if he can't control his own party," Fife told CTV News Channel. "Voters don't elect people who can't run their own party. More important than that, this is happening in Quebec, where the Liberal Party needs to win seats if they are going to have any chance of beating the Conservatives and forming a minority government."

The riding was a onetime Liberal stronghold until New Democrat Thomas Mulcair grabbed the seat in a 2007 by-election upset victory.

During his press conference today, Coderre stated that he felt he had lost the "moral authority" to do his job. He has not resigned as MP.

If there's one thing that you can count on with the Liberal party, it's the fact that eventually the circular firing squad will go very public with the injured then licking their various wounds in front of the microphones.

Popcorn!