Category: Politics/Liberals

Ignatieff lays out Liberal expectations for new Parliament session

On January 12, Prime Minister Stephen Harper sent a letter to Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff (and sent similar letters to other party leaders presumably) asking for suggestions of measures that Ignatieff's party could support in the 3rd session of 40th Parliament, which begins March 3.

Ignatieff gave his reply today in an eight-page letter [PDF] and made that letter public. You can review that letter for yourself, of course, but I've included some excerpts below:

The first item that we can cooperate on would be the creation of a special committee to review and recommend reforms related to prorogation. It would be a positive sign of good faith if your party joined with ours in supporting such an initiative at the start of the new session.

To create jobs …

  • Support for manufacturers – boost job-creating productivity and competitiveness through a cash advance on the Accelerated Capital Cost Allowance to help manufacturers purchase new equipment;
  • Jobs for young Canadians – reduce the worst youth employment in a generation by introducing a temporary financial incentive to hire young Canadians such as new graduates from college, university or apprenticeships; and
  • Encourage investment in start-up companies – create new jobs by introducing additional tax incentives for Canadians who invest in Canadian entrepreneurs and start-up companies in emerging sectors such as clean energy and life sciences.

We will support these proposals if you bring them forward.

[A climate change plan with] the ambitious target of quadrupling Canada's production of renewable energy by Canada's 150th birthday in 2017. Such an investment will allow us to build a cleaner, more prosperous new economy that will create the jobs of tomorrow and improve our quality of life. This plan would also include a binding and verifiable cap-and-trade system with hard caps leading to absolute reductions that are fair to all regions and industries and compatible with other systems for international carbon trading .

[A pension reform initiative that would include the following:]

  • A Supplementary Canada Pension Plan (SCPP) to help Canadians save more;
  • Giving employees with stranded pensions following bankruptcy the option of growing their pension assets through the Canada Pension Plan (CPP);
  • Protecting vulnerable Canadians on long-term disability by giving them preferred status as creditors in case of bankruptcy.

A staggering 520 Aboriginal women and girls have been murdered or gone missing since 1970, including 223 since 2000 alone. Despite these terrible numbers, we still have not seen a comprehensive, national investigation into this horrendous tragedy. This is surely something that we can all agree on. We must not treat our First Nations people like second-class citizens. There is perhaps no issue that you will find a more willing partner on than this: please give this issue the attention it deserves and take all the necessary steps to call a sweeping investigation into this ongoing national shame.”

[On the issue of Afghanistan detainees:]

  • “First, you should agree to immediately reconstitute the Special Committee on Afghanistan so it can resume its hearings into this matter.
  • Second, you should instruct the Conservative members on the committee to cooperate fully with the study. No more boycotts. No more obstructionist tactics. You don't have to agree with our position but you should at least have the courage of your own convictions to allow this study to go forward without procedural games.
  • Third, you should respect the will of Parliament and hand over the unredacted documents that you have been ordered to produce. We are all reasonable and responsible Parliamentarians. We are prepared to discuss how best to protect legitimate claims of national security. But this is a decision we should make together as Parliamentarians.”

Ignatieff also includes a separate page, at the end of the letter, specifically on prorogation. Notably, Ignatieff concedes that “prorogation is a legitimate tool for bringing one session of Parliament to an end, after the bulk of the work laid out for that session has been completed. This clea rs up Parliament's agenda for a new Speech from the Throne to launch a new session.”

But he and the Liberals say Harper has used prorogation “to evade transparency and democratic accountability.

And so, the Liberals will present the following ideas to restrict or limit any prime minister's powers when it comes to prorogation, to wit:

  1. Require the Prime Minister, before making a request for prorogation, to provide written notice of his intention to do so at least 10 days in advance, together with his specific reasons for seeking prorogation;
  2. Require the Prime Minister to bring the issue of prorogation, and his reasons for seeking it, before the House of Commons immediately for a full debate;
  3. Unless the House otherwise consents, prohibit a request for a prorogation within the first 12 months of any session;
  4. Unless the House otherwise consents, prohibit a request for a prorogation that would last longer than one calendar month;
  5. Unless the House otherwise 'consent s, prohibit a request for a prorogation when a vote of confidence has been scheduled in the House; and
  6. Allow the Committees of the House of Commons to continue to function during the period of time that Parliament is prorogued .

The Liberals summarize the letter themselves in this press release.

, ,

SRO for Ignatieff in Vancouver

Liberals are pretty excited this evening. Not only is there a new poll out that shows that Prime Minister Stephen Harper may have miscalculated that Canadians don't care much about Parliament being prorogued — EKOS Research says a 15 point lead the Conservatives had a few weeks ago is now a lead within the statistical margin of error — but, this afternoon at the University of British Columbia, 200 people had to be turned away from the hall Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff was speaking in because 800 had already filled it up. Those numbers, by the way, are provided to us by Ignatieff aides and we do not have independent verification.

“Waiting for Michael Ignatieff's arrival at the UBC town hall, line-ups around the building. Anticipation is high!,” Vancouver-Quadra MP Joyce Murray posted on Twitter.

IMG00193-20100115-1540.jpg

Still, the Libs did send along a pic (left). Still, as Vancouver Sun columnist notes, the Liberals still have a lot of work cut out for them despite this bump in the polls. And EKOS main man Frank Graves reminds Libs that, “The Liberals continue to be stuck in the sub-30% zone. They are well within reach of the Conservatives now, but the movements in public opinion seem to be driven more by repulsion to Conservative tactics than attraction to Mr. Ignatieff and the Liberal Party.”

New Liberal ads ask: What is Stephen Harper hiding?

The Liberal Party of Canada, hopeful that it can parlay dissatisfaction with Prime Minister Stephen Harper's decision to prorogue Parliament last month into weakened voter support for the Conservatives, released a series of new radio and print ads this morning.

The print ad is to the left.

You can check them out at the Liberal Web site. They're pretty simple.  One says proroguing was Harper's Christmas gift to himself to avoid having to answer questions about allegations of Afghan detainee torture, climate change and job loss. No politicians, Liberal or otherwise, are featured in the ads.

Meanwhile, a new poll is out this morning that, despite the prorogation issue, voter support does not appear to be shifting a great deal (except, perhaps in Quebec). Angus Reid, in a poll done for La Presse, finds that 36 per cent of committed voters would cast a ballot for the Conservatives, compared to 29 per cent for the Liberals and 17 per cent for the NDP. In Quebec, the Bloc Quebecois has the support of 36 per cent, the Liberals have 26 per cent, the Conservatives have 19 per cent and the NDP has 11 per cent. La Presse does not provide information about the poll's methodology or its accuracy and the poll does not yet seem to be posted at Angus Reid's site.

Tags: , , , ,

Liberal lines on H1N1

The federal Liberal Party was distributing the following this afternoon:

1.“Canada has the highest per capita availability of the vaccine of any country in the world”.

*Wrong. Australia has the highest per capita availability in the world – not Canada.

2. “We are ahead of schedule in getting the vaccines to the provinces and the territories”

*What schedule? Experts say that H1N1 is beginning to peak now and we haven’t even begun vaccinating the general public. We’re months behind other countries, including China.

3.“Every Canadian who wants the vaccine will be able to receive the vaccine by Christmas.”

*Christmas is 6 weeks away. We have 30 million people to vaccinate, which would mean 5 million people a week. Where are the additional doses coming from when at best, the government has said they will ramp up to 3 million per week?

4.“Next week there will be an additional 1.8 million doses available, which will bring the total to 8.5 million doses.”

*1.8 million is less than the 3 million they promised earlier this week. How can we count on a government that can’t count?

5.“The vaccination program is being run under the national pandemic plan, not under the emergency response plan”.

*Both the Auditor General and the Chief Public Health Officer have said that pandemic planning falls under general emergency preparedness. The Conservatives have failed to plan and this is a national disgrace.

What a (Liberal) Woman Wants: The Pink Books

The Liberals will release Pink Book III tomorrow at 1145 at an event on Parliament Hill. The Pink Book is the policy ideas developed and advanced by the Liberal Women's Caucus and forms part of the party's platform during a federal election.

Here's a look back at the first two Pink Books –

Pink Book I

  • Produced in the summer of 2006, Belinda Stronach, Chair, National Liberal Woman's Caucus.
  • “While our discussions in 2006 were broad-ranging and detailed, the Liberal Women’s Caucus decided to focus on three broad policy areas where the impact on women and families can be the most far-reaching and profound. They are early learning and child care, income security and improved maternity and parental benefits.
  • The Liberal Women’s Caucus recommends that a new Liberal government honour the previous bilateral agreements with the provinces and territories for $1 billion a year over five years in early learning and child care.
  • To fully meet the needs of working women and young families, a new Liberal government needs, as a long term goal, to devote federal financial support equivalent to one per cent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to early learning and child care.
  • To ease the burden on women and other caregivers, a new Liberal government should invest $1 billion over five years to develop a national caregiver agenda. The provinces and territories need to be partners with the national government to move forward in this area.
  • The Liberal Women’s Caucus is committed to the reinstatement of the Court Challenges Program.
  • The Liberal Women’s Caucus has been and continues to be a strong supporter of the national gun registry.
  • Honour the bilateral agreements signed with provinces and territories to provide a system of early learning and child care across the country. These agreements should be protected by legislation. The original Liberal commitment was for $1 billion a year for five years – this level of support must be reinstated as a minimum starting point.
  • As a longer-term goal, establish a schedule for federal funding of child care so it reaches one per cent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as recommended by the OECD report, Starting Strong II.
  • Re-invest the $1,200 per year, per family, provided under the Conservative government’s policy in the Canadian Child Tax Benefit (CCTB). The Canadian Child Tax Benefit (CCTB) is already in place and works efficiently and effectively. By increasing the base benefit by $1,200, the overwhelming majority of Canadian failies would receive – and keep – a $1,200 increase in their Canada Child Tax Benefit (CCTB).
  • Direct the value of the Spousal Credit – the tax deduction for a spouse at home – to be paid directly to the spouse, who, in most instances, will be a woman.
  • extend the Canada Pension Plan drop-out provision to unpaid caregivers. This measure will address the future economic security of those who drop out of the labour force to provide care.

Here's the highlights from Pink Book II:

  • The proposals in Volume II deal with violence against women, housing, Aboriginal women, immigrant and refugee women and rural women.
  • Book II released in 2007 when Stronach was still chair of the women's caucus.
  • Change Divorce Act to protect woman and children from situations where divorce is precipitated by acts of violence.
  • Recognizing that women and girls form a disproportionate number of homeless, Liberals should develop a National Housing Strategy. “One solution to this persistent problem is a portable shelter subsidy20 that is tied to need rather than to designated units. The portability allows a woman to choose where she would like to live, be it closer to family, social support networks, schools, etc. It also avoids the stigma that can come with living in social housing. This change would significantly increase the number of women who could receive the assistance they need to live in adequate, affordable housing.”
  • “Women’s Caucus endorses the creation of a Liberal taskforce that would travel across the country meeting with organizations and individual women from rural Canada to discuss their concerns and priorities. … The National Liberal Women’s Caucus re-affirms their commitment to the policy options proposed The Pink Book: Volume l to provide a system of early learning and child care (ELCC) across the country.”
  • “To address the rising number of Aboriginal children in care, Women’s Caucus recommends the approach proposed by the National Council of Welfare. The council states that Aboriginal peoples are best positioned to make decisions about Aboriginal children and youth. To do this, there is a need for adequately funded, Aboriginal controlled, culturally-based models.”
  • Women’s Caucus supports changing the work permits under the Livein Caregiver Program from employer-specific to sector specific. The Program allows workers from overseas to provide support for children, elderly and disabled persons, and enables approximately 3000 to 5000 caregivers to work in Canada each year.

Since that document was released in 2007, we've had a general election and the national Liberal women's caucus has new leaders and new members (and, of course, there's a new Liberal leader).

Stronach, Lucienne Robillard, Colleen Beaumier, Brenda Chamberlain, and Nancy Karetak-Lindell did not seek re-election. Sue Barnes, Bonnie Brown, Tina Keeper, and Karen Redman were defeated in the fall of 2008.

There are several new members of the women's caucus, elected for the first time in 2008: Siobhan Coady, Bonnie Crombie, Kirsty Duncan, Judy Foote, Alexandra Mendes, Michelle Simson, and Lisa Zarac.

Missouri Republican Williams wants Ignatieff "guarding our northern flank"

200908301730.jpg

Yancy Williams (left), is a thirty-something Republican from Jefferson City, Missouri who worked on Rudy Giuliani's presidential run in 2008, collects a paycheque for a Republican senator from Missouri, and has recently volunteered to be his state's chairman for Republicans For Ignatieff. As in Michael Ignatieff. Leader of the Liberal Party of Canada.

” I want that guy guarding American’s northern flank,” Williams told me in a telephone interview last week. “I think he’s spent enough time in the U.S. that he’s got a firm understanding of Americans, American policy and I’m comfortable with that.”

Williams is perfectly aware that the guy who is prime minister right now, Stephen Harper, leads a party called the Conservative Party of Canada.

“I have no particular criticism of your current prime minister. I just don’t feel that he has the tie to the United States that Ignatieff has. Ignatieff lived here. From what I’ve seen — I don’t know that he considers it his home but he certainly considered himself one of us while he was here. He spoke very fondly of us, defended our actions when we were defending ourselves,” Williams said.

Of course, that last quote from Williams dovetails nicely with one of the attack lines of Canada's Conservatives: That Iggy is “Just Visiting” and that he really wishes he lived somewhere other than Canada.

That meme or talking point repeated by Williams is one reason why many in Ottawa — reporters, Conservatives, Liberals, and others — thought that RepublicansForIgnatieff.com was, in fact, just a spoof site set up by one Iggy's Canadian political opponents. It may yet be. Williams has no idea who “The Colonel” is behind the site but, when he first ran across the site in early August, it felt legit to him and so, after reading up a bit on Ignatieff's positions, he signed on with the goal of helping a Canadian liberal, Michael Ignatieff, become the next Prime Minister of Canada. So if it is a spoof then the joke's on me and, it appears, on Williams.

“I have to admit, I was not fully educated on your [electoral] race,” Williams said. “But I signed up. And I got an e-mail back. They asked a little bit about me. I said, I work in politics. I’m a Republican. What do you need? And they said, “We’re not 100 per cent sure, right now but go try to talk to others and see what sort of support you can find and that’s what I did.”

For Williams, Iggy is the right man to lead Canada because of his views on North American security and on energy security:

“I mean this with no offence to any Canadian because I understand we are wonderful partners,” Williams said. “[But] when we were attacked on Sept. 11, it changed us in an unbelieveable way. We now look at the world differently and every person has to meet the standard: Are you going to be able to protect us? And I think [Ignatieff] does.

“Secondly, I come from a family who’s in the gas and oil business and the tar sands are a huge issue with me. There is a pipeline that is going to run from Hardisty, Alberta to Wood River, Illinois, and that will run straight through the state of Missouri. It will come within a few miles of my home. It’s not yet complete but it will be soon. That is jobs for folks in Missouri. It has Missouri businesses involved. The tar sands are the second largest oil reserve in the world and they happen to be on our continent. When you combine them and ANWAR, we have the ability to seek true energy independence from the Middle East.

“When Sarah Palin came out and said, drill, baby, drill, it hit a nerve with folks here. It really caught on. If we can get the Canadian version which is “Drill, Iggy, Drill”, or whatever you want to say, we need to utilize that source not only for our energy needs but for our national security needs. I think [Ignatieff] is well-suited to run the Canadian government.

, , ,

The latest Conservative attack that taxpayers get to pay for

quarterpage.jpg

A correspondent brings to my attention the latest “ten percenter” issued by Conservative MPs.

You may recall that in June, the Tories sent out ten per-centers attacking Liberal Michael Ignatieff, saying that he'd raise the GST and that he liked a carbon tax.

A new version is now being sent out to thousands of Canadian households — at public expense — which takes on the same format but adds a new twist, a kind of soft-sell on the “Just Visiting” idea.

The copy that came to me was sent out by Edmonton MP Laurie Hawn. You can download a two-page PDF here. I've reproduced the bottom half of one of the pages on the left.

The copy in the ad attacks Ignatieff for his time spent outside Canada but, perhaps sensitive to backlash from first-generation Canadians that someone ought not be criticized for spending part of their life outside Canada, the Tories try to soft-pedal the criticism by suggesting there's nothing wrong or illegal with working outside Canada – unless you want to be prime minister. Here's the Conservative wording:

There's nothing extraordinary about Michael Ignatieff working in the United States or the United Kingdom. Many Canadians, at one point or another in their career, leave to pursue other opportunities. The problem is that Mr. Ignatieff was gone for more than three decades before he decided he wanted to come home and try to be Prime Minister. While he was gone, he called two other countries home. By his own admission, he basically paid no real attention to Canada in his absence. That was his choice. There's no Canadian law that said he had to take an interest. But then, he turned up in 2005 with the intention of becoming Prime Minister. Why should Canadians believe he suddenly cares about what happens to Canadians after ignoring them for so long?

A quick refresher on the rules for these things: Under House of Commons rules, every MP can send out a newsletter four times a year to every household in the MP's riding. The cost to produce and distribute these is borne by every taxpayer and comes out of the notoriously opaque House of Commons budget. The partisan sniping in these so-called “Householders” is usually pretty low-key.

But there's another type of mailing MPs get to make — again, at taxpayers' expense. This one is called a “ten percenter” and the partisan sniping in them is generally at a fever pitch. MPs can send out an unlimited number of these things every year, the cost of which has never been published by the House of Commons Board of Internal Economy but is believed to be about $7 million a year. The only restriction on these mailings is that each separate newsletter can only be sent to maximum of the equivalent of 10 per cent of the households in the MP's riding but cannot be sent to households in the MPs riding. So Tories tend to send these to non-Tory ridings, particularly in areas they think they can win in the next election. Liberals do the same thing, sending highly partisan ten percenters into ridings held by opponents.

, , ,

The Queen likes the little guy from Shawinigan – a lot apparently

No one tells the Queen who deserves to get the Order of Merit. It's a gift that is hers to give and apparently she likes the little guy from Shawinigan enough to give it to him. Here's what it says at the official Web site for the Queen:

The Order of Merit, founded by 1902 by King Edward VII, is a special mark of honour conferred by the Sovereign on individuals of exceptional distinction in the arts, learning, sciences and other areas such as public service.
Appointments to the Order are in the Sovereign's personal gift and ministerial advice is not required.

I do believe, looking through the current list of recipients, that Jean Chrétien will be the only living Canadian (and certainly the only Quebecer) to have this honour. (Helpful readers have mentioned other Canadian recipients of the O.M) Other recipients include Her Majesty's (controversial) portrait painter Lucian Freud, Tim Berners-Lee (he invented a little software application called The World Wide Web) and playwright Tom Stoppard.

The Liberals are very happy about this, as they should be:

Statement from Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff on the appointment of the Right Honourable Jean Chrétien to the Order of Merit:

It is with great pride that I congratulate the Right Honourable Jean Chrétien for being named a member of the Order of Merit, a prestigious honour bestowed by Queen Elizabeth II.

The Order of Merit – a special mark of honour on individuals of exceptional distinction in the arts, learning, sciences and other areas such as public service – represents a fitting tribute to this truly great Canadian. From his first election to Parliament in 1963 until his retirement from politics in 2003 as one of Canada's longest-serving prime ministers, Mr. Chrétien left an unequalled legacy of distinguished public service.

The winner of three consecutive majority governments, as Prime Minister of Canada, Jean Chrétien is remembered for slaying the deficit, presiding over a period of sustained economic growth, and strengthening Canada's national unity.

He joins an impressive list of members of the Order, including Nelson Mandela, Margaret Thatcher and Tom Stoppard. Past members include Mother Teresa, Dr. Albert Schweitzer and Sir Winston Churchill.

On behalf of the Liberal Party of Canada and our entire Liberal Parliamentary caucus, I once again offer my congratulations to Mr. Chrétien. He has made Canada very proud.

, , , , ,

The Colonel Behind Republicans for Ignatieff

I, too, got pretty much the same response as Kady to my query, submitted via an online form, when I asked who was behind Republicans for Ignatieff. On Sunday we both get on e-mail from “The Colonel” behind the site. I've put the version I got below. (I don't think there's much difference between, the responder has a bit more at the top here, saying his group is small but growing, but the other stuff is pretty similar to Kady's)

Now, when I first saw Republicans for Ignatieff, I strongly suspected that the Conservative Party of Canada was unofficially behind it and/or responsible for it. I based that hunch on the fact some Conservative operatives have been known to do some stuff like this before; when do they stuff like this it tends to be a little more sophisticated; and, most of all, the point of the site fits right into the narrative currently being pushed about Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff, warning Canadians that he is “Just Visiting”.

The group has a “press release” scheduled for tomorrow morning at 9 a.m. and this week, it says at the site, “Republicans for Ignatieff will be making the case – using Michael's own words – for targeted assassinations and coercive interrogations.” Now that can't be for real, can it?

I used to think it wasn't for real but I'm less inclinded to think so after reading the e-mail reply from The Colonel behind the site. Tell me what you think and, more importantly, if you were a politics reporter, what do you do with this? Thoughts on tracking down the real people behind this?

From: semperficolonel@aol.com
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2009 09:00:01 -0500
To: dakin@canwest.com
Subject: Republicans For Ignatieff

Thanks for your e-mail and interest in the site.

I should tell you right off the top that I am not a media savvy individual nor do I crave media attention for myself. This is not about me it's about Michael Ignatieff. Our group is small (but growing) and members live in both the United States and Canada.

The site is what it is: a modest attempt to show why Republicans want Michael Ignatieff to become Prime Minister of Canada.

We've received several thousand unique visitors – more than we imagined.

Speaking for myself, I can tell you:

– I live in the United States.

– Everyone, except my Mother, calls me The Colonel.

– I am deeply invested in foreign affairs.

– I believe energy security is the single biggest foreign affairs challenge facing America.

– I first discovered Michael Ignatieff when I picked up a copy of Blood and Belonging in 1994.

– Although I don't agree with everything Michael Ignatieff stands for, particularly on social policy, I strongly support him on energy security and the war on terror, the two issues that matter most to me.

I suspect this is the case for most other Republican supporters of Michael Ignatieff.

– I also admire Ignatieff for his willingness to admit hard truths that many Canadians are unwilling to accept, particularly the strategic importance of the tar sands, the need for coercive interrogation as a tool in the war on terror, and the irrelevance of Canadian foreign policy under the Chretien and Martin administrations. In challenging the conventional wisdom of his own party, he reminds me a great deal of Tony Blair who took on the trade unions and the peace movement and re-invented the British Labour Party, culminating of course in his courageous support of President Bush in Iraq.

At this point, we have not, as a group, decided on an official spokesperson.

Over time, we hope to inform, educate and recruit more people to join us in backing Michael Ignatieff.

Thanks again for your interest.

The Colonel

semperficolonel@aol.com

, , , ,

For the record: Harper's misguided attack on Ignatieff

At his closing press conference in Italy at the G8, Prime Minister Stephen Harper was asked about the future relevance of the G8. Here is an unofficial transcript of the question Harper was asked and his English-language response. (He responded somewhat similarly in French). The attack on Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff came, unprompted by reporters I should point out, at the end of his comments to a question about the future of the G8:

Reporter: I would like to hear you speak about the future of the G8. What do you feel about the pressure that has been exerted by some countries to broaden the group to G5+1 to make it a G14 given the fact that year-in and year-out we see power from emerging economies and, with this in mind, how do you expect the Muskoka summit to unwind? Will there be as many participants there as there are here?

Rt. Hon Stephen Harper: The G8, in our judgment remains, an important forum. It is a forum of the major developed countries in which we get together, countries with much in common in terms of their economic structure, their values, their history. And we get together in a very intimate setting where we are able to discuss the major questions of the day.. that can drive a wider consensus. I think we reached at this particular g-8 meeting very important discussions on climate change and on Iran for example, things that I think will have a lot of impact going forward.

So I think it is an important forum. Some people say well the G8 is not a representative body in the modern world. It is not representative of the power. It's not representative of the economic realities of the modern world. It's not an appropriate forum for global governance. I agree with that. I don't think those of us who continue to support the importance of the G8 suggest that it is a body of global governance.

Obviously we have to have, we have to develop a wider body that will be more representative. What we've had recently, what we've had at this forum as I mentioned earlier — I counted at one point a G8, a G9, aG14 or 15, we had a G18. At one point a G19 and a G25 and finally ended with a G28 and of course we also have the G20 process going on around the world which is now up to G24 last time I counted. So I think our challenge for the year will be to try and use our presidency of the G8 to bring some coherence to this as we move forward.

I think it's important that the G8 continue to be a forum where we have the discussions among the major developed economies. At the same time, we do have to develop an institutionalized, more representative forum. We listened carefully at this summit to what other countries had to say and will be taking some decisions in this regard as we move forward towards Muskoka.

If you don't mind giving me a moment to address the comments of Mr. Ignatieff. The leader of the opposition suggested very recently in the last day or two, I gather, that it's possible — I’m not sure if he's saying it's desirable or should happen or could happen — that there will be a group come to the fore, a group of major countries that will exclude Canada. I don't know where he's getting this idea. Nobody but Mr. Ignatieff in the world has suggested excluding Canada from a meeting of major countries. Nobody. It's the first anybody has heard of it. I think it's an irresponsible suggestion, Mr. Ignatieff is supposed to be a Canadian. I don't think you go out and float ideas like this that are so obviously contrary to the country's interests when no one else is advocating them. So I would suggest that he look carefully at his comments and withdraw those. Frankly they would be irresponsible coming from anybody but particularly irresponsible coming from a kean Canadian Parliamentarian.

Immediately after those remarks were made, Dimitri Soudas, the prime minister's press secretary, told reporters that Harper's remarks on Ignatieff were incorrect and that he had misinformed the Prime Minister about them. The prime minister's staff said the remarks they misattributed to Ignatieff may have been made by an academic during a television interview.

For the record, Ignatieff, in London, England, earlier this week, said something about Canada's presidency of the G8 that was remarkably similar to what the prime minister said. Here's Ignatieff:”Huntsville should be a plce where we will make substantial progress redefining and refocusing the G8 itself.”

My colleague Peter O'Neil was at the press conference and filed this report.

, , , ,