Showing posts with label Mark Holland. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mark Holland. Show all posts

Monday, June 21, 2010

Yo! Mark Holland!

Kady writes:

Liberal MP Mark Holland heads back to the National Press Theatre for yet another press conference on "Conservative waste" at the G8/20 summits, although at this point, it's not clear whether he has any new tidbits to share or simply wants to keep the $1 billion security cost in the news cycle for another day.

And, as Imp notes this is the kind of security a $1,000,000,000 buys you:

1. The G8 security team moves fast! Exposed as a major security breach, a "doozy" was one word used, in reference to the Deerhurst Inn's floor plans being available online. They're still up after being on the national news last night (fast forward to 7:00 min mark). Good work security team!

I see synergy!

PS. Presumably the lake the lakeside rooms are beside is a real, and not a fake, lake.

Monday, June 07, 2010

Bill C-391 Stalled?

Looks like it. You can read the story through the link for a sense of the whole procedural song and dance, but bottom line is that Mark Holland's motion seems to have thrown a spanner into the works:

If Holland's motion is defeated, the bill is referred to report stage and then amendments can be introduced. After that, the bill goes on to third reading.

"Everything hinges on this concurrence motion," [Tory MP] Dave MacKenzie said. "Nothing can happen until that vote occurs."

And MacKenzie said it's unlikely the vote will occur before summer recess.

Go Mark Holland.

Although, if this rumor is true and we are heading for a government-triggered fall election, it would make sense for the Tories to stall their own bill so as to run on it again.

Saturday, February 13, 2010

Press Release Re. Stanstead Border Installations

Conservatives block access to border installations

Stanstead, Feb 12, 2010. The Harper Conservatives reached a new low in their attempts to subvert democracy when the Public Safety Minister intervened to block a Member of Parliament's access to the Stanstead border installation, said William Hogg, Liberal candidate in Compton-Stanstead today.

Mr. Hogg was hosting MP Mark Holland, Liberal critic for Public Safety and National Security, and vice-chair of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security, for a public forum on border issues, from 2pm-4pm in the Stanstead Town Hall.

Immediately prior to the forum Mr. Holland and I were to meet with the Canadian Border Service Agency for a tour and discussion about border issues in the region." said Mr. Hogg "The meeting had been set up through official channels and had been confirmed by local officials over a week ago. Yesterday, the Minister of Public Safety's office abruptly contacted Mr. Holland to tell him that our visit had been cancelled."

The Minister's office could give no good reason for the tour's cancellation nor could they explain the inconsistencies between the messages at the local and ministerial levels.

"It is clear that the Minister interfered for one of two reasons - either for pure partisan politics or to block our access to federal bureaucrats who may have helpful information, especially for me in my capacity as vice-chair of the parliamentary committee that oversees the border," said Mark Holland. "Either motive is an abuse of power and just serves to remind Canadians that the Harper government will stop at nothing to stifle criticism."

Combined with Conservative efforts to block access to information regarding Afghan detainees and the recently reported efforts on the part of Christian Paradis' staff to stop access to information requests, there seems to be a pattern of interference at the ministerial and prime-ministerial level in the management of public institutions. Stated Mr. Hogg,"the Conservatives continually push their transparency and accountability agenda in public, but behind the scenes they do everything in their power to undermine it."

-30-

http://williamhogg.blogspot.com/2010/02/conservatives-block-access-to-border.html
Justine Villeneuve, Office of Mark Holland, MP

I'm not around much today. This may be all you see. Cheers

Friday, February 12, 2010

Tomorrow's News Today


Holland is talking about the Seaway International Bridge Crisis, natives have been protesting armed guards at a bridge that runs across the U.S./ Canada border through Akwesasne. Since Vic Toews took over public safety, the locals have been waiting for him to step in and do something about the issue. He hasn't, and apparently doesn't want anyone else to either.
More here.

Thursday, November 05, 2009

Sunday, April 29, 2007

Coyne's Horrible Car Metaphor Goes Viral, Destroys All Reasoned Discourse In Its Path

...to the point where politicians of every stripe are declaiming bad poetry in the very halls of government. Witness Liberal MP Mark Holland criticizing the Tories do-nothing approach to Climate Change:

Yesterday, the minister laid out a road map that takes a wrong turn and drives Canada into a climate change ditch.

Yeah, but can't Mark Holland shut the fuck up? And, Andy, can't you at least switch back to that freaky wolf metaphor you were using at the beginning of the week, so I can entitle a post "Does Coyne's Wolf Metaphor Shit In The Woods"? Or on the other hand, maybe you could just stick to the elegant economic number crunching that is your specialty. That's why people love you: you're the Conservative that knows how to add.

PS., this is crap:

The Tories’ newfound enthusiasm for fuel-efficiency standards is even stranger. How many times does it need to be said? The main effect of legislating fuel efficiency is to reduce the cost of driving. At more miles per gallon, you can drive more miles at the same cost.

Andrew, I hate to tell you this, but your analysis here is based on a false assumption. For the vast majority of Canadians, sitting in traffic is not at all like sex. Its not the kind of thing you would do more of if you just had more energy. If the kind of economists you like to hang with think otherwise...well, we know what they need more of, don't we?