Tuesday, September 21, 2010

Meeting World Leaders, Just a Photo-op?

Having listened to some of the Liberal dialogue since Parliament has resumed, I have heard repeated reference to the G8/G20 summits as nothing but an expensive photo-op. Really? Has hosting world leaders always been viewed with this much cynicism? Canada's financial sector in this last recession has been a glorious example that we should absolutely share with the world, and if introducing them to the Canadian model at a time of financial crisis is considered a waste then we need to examine this negative stereotype. If any one of the world's top 20 economies collapses, the effects will be felt in every other nation. We have a globalized economy where our fate as a nation is tied to those of other nations. Gathering these leaders together to talk provides real value beyond what Liberals want to call a photo-op. When even a tiny country like Greece boarders on collapse, it ripples throughout global markets. The answer for all our allies looking to avoid a collapse of their banking system would be advised to become more Canadian. To call it nothing more than a photo-op is an insult to world leaders.

I suppose in the unlikely event that Iggy one day becomes Prime Minister, it will be fair game to call all his meetings with world leaders photo-ops, because by Liberal logic, international conferences can't accomplish anything else, right?


  1. What would the media and libs call the trip Paul Martin made to have his photo taken with Clinton or Bono or someone at the aids conference held in Canada. That my friends was a real photo op. Or how about Dion pounding a gavel saying adjourned.
    And how about iggy insisting on a photo op with POTUS when he come to Canada, and putting up a pic in Times square.
    How insulting can the coalition and their libvision media be.

  2. The media is failing to take the Liberals to task for the venom they spout.

    It appears us bloggers not controlled or paid for can ask the questions.

    Was his entire tour a photo op? Did he sign any documents or international agreements?

    I remember seeing him buying some cheese and riding a bike, what economic benefit did the taxpayers win through his carbon emitting tour?

  3. And yet Iggy's meeting with Obama and subsequent photo blazed across Time Square was "brilliant strategy"!

    Go figure.

  4. I don't care what the Liberals say or what they do or what they said or did back in the day.
    All I care about is what the current Government does and YES it was nothing but an expensive photo-op .
    Both useless and insulting.
    Give me a Billion Dollars and I guarantee that the country will get a lot more for its investment than a collection of 'leaders' sitting around being 'leaderly'.

    These useless summits were almost as disgraceful as the Harper systemic non-approach to immigration problems.
    This Government is on its death-bed, and the people who will most be celebrating its demise are those who actually had hopes for it.
    Bring on that election and then a new leader for the Party.

  5. DougF ,You are the disgrace for your idiotic ranting.Your beloved Liberals are the only ones going down the toilet.Despite idiots like you,Canada will survive & PM Harper will be there to lead it without your vote.Don,t slam the door on your way out loudmouth.

  6. Well then dougf , you must agree that the taxpayer doling out over $1 Billion per year,
    to subsidize the CBC,
    watched by 3% of the Canadian population, is a disgrace!

    Just think of what the $BILLION wasted on the CBC could buy.
    65 fighter jets, every 10 years!

    How would you spend the wasted CBC billion doug?

  7. Scrap the CBC and use all the money saved to buy jets and fix pension.

  8. "Well then dougf , you must agree that the taxpayer doling out over $1 Billion per year,
    to subsidize the CBC,
    watched by 3% of the Canadian population, is a disgrace!"

    Yes I do as a matter of fact, and I would be happy had the Government at least had tried to impose an annual 5% reduction in the monies directed at the CBC. I didn't care if it lost Commons votes. I just wanted it to do something useful and stand for something. And not for photo-ops, and tactical politics.
    It hasn't.
    And I think in their heart of hearts, most people commenting here know it hasn't. It particularly hasn't been fiscally conservative.
    Now it must pay.

    ps --And simply because money is 'saved' in one area does not mean there is a need to spend it somewhere else just in order to spend it. How about TRYING to live within our means for a change ? You know just for a change of pace.

  9. ''And simply because money is 'saved' in one area does not mean there is a need to spend it somewhere else just in order to spend it.''

    Agreed, but then doug, perhaps you should be railing on LibDip blogs,
    because that 'is' EXACTLY their platform.

    -Don't need jets, need national daycare.
    -Don't give business tax cuts, give the unemployed EI 360

    Our military was stripped to the bone,
    Trudeau and Chretien would have been happy if our military had nothing except bugles and blue berets.
    A large chunk of the deficit is the promised spending (before the great recession) to drag our military out of the Decade of Darkness.

    This govt deserves credit for keeping that promise to our brave men and women, while talking a beating from the Opps and the home team, over the deficit.