Crit, fine by me you cheeky devil. I understand the CBC will be releasing a poll tomorrow to the effect that Canadians overwhelmingly don't believe the Cons on this issue. A tongue-lashing, if you will.

Crit_Reasoning, how do elections have any bearing here? The issue raised is Con credibility. Let's see, the Cons promised no election, and we got one. Fixed election dates. Whoops. No recession, no deficit and no Senate appointments. Whoops, whoops and whoops again.

To be open, transparent and accountable! The biggest "Whoops" of all!

The Afghan committee proceedings today were a sham. The three defence ministers each gave long and largely irrelevant opening statements, themselves interrupted by Con delaying tactics. Finally, the Libs and the Bloc got to ask a few questions, which the Cons didn't answer. Then it was over.

So, where are we?

1. The critical period is February 2006, when the Cons assumed power and August(?), 2007, when they finally upgraded Canada's prisoner transfer agreement with Afghanistan, allowing Canada to monitor the condition of those prisoners once transferred.

2. Mr. Colvin was muzzled, while the other witnesses were coached. Documents were not handed over to the committee until the last moment, and they were incomplete and heavily censored. The Cons continue to ignore that there is no need for "specific, credible" evidence before acting, not that there was any shortage of that. They ignore that the Prime Minister himself was stating in the House, "No problem," when the Brits and the Dutch put in place a monitoring program right from the start. And, repeatedly, the Cons fall back on steps taken AFTER the period under review.

3. Mr. Colvin's lawyer advises that his client is working on a submission to the committee to correct the many "inaccuracies" that have arisen due to the government's refusal to come clean. Former ambassadors are clamouring in Mr. Colvin's support.

4. The Afghan committee apparently will not let this die during the recess (until end of January). It may hold hearings (presumably after receiving Mr. Colvin's submission).

This isn't about military failure. It's about the government's failure and, as contradictory evidence mounts, it appears to be serious.

I'm signing off now. You've lost me with your nonsense and rudeness.

This is getting circular. I'm not comparing. I'm saying upper income Canadians should pay more.

Not as progressive as we used to be. The GST is a regressive tax. And corporations used to pay a far bigger chunk than now.

Look what you put up. A person with taxable income of $41k to $126k pays 22% and 26%. Anyone with taxable income from $126k to a billion pays just a few per cent more. Not that they do, because of all the tax "minimization" schemes there are out there.

Check out other countries where the rich really do give back. The more egalitarian societies in Europe. especially, with far better social services, present ways we could do better.

http://www.worldwide-tax.com/

It's not out of context to disagree. Why is inequality between the middle class/poor more important than between rich/poor? This is surely illogical and immoral.

The gap is obscene and has been getting worse for a couple of decades. Make the rich pay their fair share, that's all. Mr. Coyne dismisses this out of hand.

Nope. Although the dirty tricks pulled off by the security agencies of American, Israeli, Russian and a host of other countries would, if known, rock this planet.

Yes I did read the article, s_c_f. Mr. Coyne stated: "The inequality that matters here is not between rich and poor...."

There is a huge difference between stating income inequality is not the problem (Mr. Coyne) and that it is not what he's talking about (you).

No offence, but you and Mr. Coyne are both wrong.

Joy, I believe it is a question of program funding and taxation and I refer you to Scandinavian countries as prime examples. We used to believe in progressive taxation in this country, until the neocons took over. We had a child care program accepted by all provinces, a remarkable feat, until the Cons scuttled it. We had Kelowna and other deals with First Nations, until (fill in the blank).