Don’t think it is all about junior

Here is an alternate theory regarding juniors E Mail and the Russians.

Daddy Trump attends the G-20 and things are going not too bad until the Putin meeting after which the President became a bit curse did what he had to do then jumped on air force one without so much as have a good day see you again.

Heidi thinks maybe perhaps Mr. Putin laid down the law about one thing or the other and used the release of juniors E Mail as an example of what could happen to the Trump White House if things don’t change.

Are these E Mails just the tip of the ice burg?
Just a thought from Heidi and it appears only from Heidi.


Since this post the number of people at the meeting between baby Trump and the Russians has grown and so has the profile of the these people. Not only this but now we understand that  POTUS had a one on one with Putin with out any other American. In both these cases only the Russians are in a position to leak this information.

What is next?????

Omar Khadr was screwed over

Matters not if we think Omar should get the settlement or not he is getting it because the Harper government apparently did not believe in the rule of law and did everything in its power to keep him in detention and out of Canada.
When people like Jason Kenney tweet that Omar should still be in prison it is proof positive that the previous government totally screwed this file up because again they did not govern using the rule of law but the wishes of parliament.
Had the Harper government taken control of a minor child with a valid Canadian passport and brought him back to Canada and treated him like any other minor there would be no large payout. Instead the Harper government apparently did everything they could to keep Omar in lock up. It was only until the Americans wanted to close down the Cuban jail and only when public opinion changed and when Omar got a lawyer did Harper agree to take Omar back to Canada.
Even when Omar was brought back Harper apparently did all he could to make his life hell including fighting the Supreme Court on at least three different occasions.
As far as Heidi is concerned the only reason any settlement will be paid out is because the previous government cared less about the rule of law.
If you think the same way let Jason Kenney know.

Conversation between a Canadian sniper and Tom Mulcair

Tom this is Special Forces sniper I am about three and a half kilometers behind the front lines. I have a shot that will save lives, should I take it.
Wait do not take the shot we need to convene a special session of the house and debate it.
Tom lives will be saved
I repeat do not take the shot, this needs to be debated as parliament was not told Canadian snipers would shoot anybody.
So here we have it folks, the leader of a party that doesn’t want him and party that until recently no one else wanted to lead complaining about a Canadian who was over three kilometers away from the action taking a shot that saved lives. Sounds to me that he has no concern about how and why the war is waged but simply wants press time and will say anything to get it
Shame on you Tom
That is how Heidi sees it ,if you see it the same way tell Tom.

wage gap what is it

Today in the house the term wage gap was used in a lot of the questions. Heidi needs to know ,are we calculating this number correctly.
Apparently the formula used goes something like this.
[divide the median earnings of full-time, year-round, working women by the median earnings of full-time, year-round, working men]
This method will only work if there are men only and women only occupations, in today’s world there are women bulldozer drivers and male nurses as well as male and female servers and pilots and cabin crew with men and women  getting equal pay  . In reality there isn’t a wage gap between men and women doing the same work in the western world.
What Heidi believes the issue should be is equal pay for equal work example ,should a person working as part of an airline cabin crew make the same as a restaurant server, or a day care person and a preschool teacher be paid the same.

Will some one out there help Heidi out with this , are we calculating a wage gap that is not there and should we be looking at wage equality a little closer.

More false news out of Ottawa

For some time now a lot of time that should have been used to run the government of Canada in a productive manor the opposition parties have been spreading false news about a working paper on changing the standing orders of the house.
Heidi for one has read the paper and it appears the opposition has not.
Let us look at it.
1) Sittings: The paper suggests that the house not sit Fridays but spread the half day Friday over Monday to Thursday having the work day start at eight or nine rather than ten . This would give the MP a full day at home to talk to the voters. However there is a second option which would make Friday a regular day. Now both these options put the MP’s work week more in line with the average Canadian when it comes to hours in and work out.
PROBLEM is the opposition MP’s claim the paper wants to cut Friday and that’s it no other options
2) Electronic Voting: Many other countries provinces and municipalities  have adopted electronic voting as opposed to standing and being counted and since the house is due for a makeover it would a good time to add this feature.
It appears the opposition has not read this part of the paper as they do not mention it during question period
3) Routine Proceedings: The paper wants a discussion on schedule debate for motions such as opposition motions during routine preceding’s
It appears the opposition has not read this part of the paper as they do not mention it during question period
4) Private members Business: looks at ways to give allocated time for members to introduce their own bills
It appears the opposition has not read this part of the paper as they do not mention it during question period
4) Prorogation: looks at ways to better use prorogation as opposed to the way the last government used it
It is obvious why the official opposition would not like to talk about this. Since the opposition used prorogation to their advantage but to the good of the country while they were in power it is easy to see why they do not want that changed

5) Management of Debate: talks about ways to get more comprehensive answers to questions by allowing more time to answer (up from 45 to cap of 65 days with an upper limit cap)
Talks to eliminating omnibus bills .Bills that hide issues not associated with the theme of the bill such as hiding retroactive gun laws in a budget bill.
Management of debate is addressed by asking that speaking time in committee be limited so that the floor could not be high jacked. Any MP could speak as many times as they feel the need to but only for a set time each time
While in power the opposition would take away questions and never come back with answers. So why would they change this it worked well for them.
Omnibus bills: worked well for the previous government when it came to hiding legislation so again why would they want to change that
Managing debate seems like a reasonable thing to look at ,Heidi cannot see what the issue is , perhaps this is why it never comes up in question period.

Now the big complaint and the largest bit of false news is that the PM will only be in the house one day per week. Heidi hears this time and time again during question period and it is an out and out fabrication.
This is what the paper says:
Question Period is where the Government is held to account for its policies and for the conduct of Ministers. The Government committed to reform Question Period so that all Ministers, including the Prime Minister, are held to greater account. Reforms to Question Period could include instituting a Prime Minister’s Questions time, as is done in Britain, and could also include lengthening the time allotted for questions and answers.

In Britain the PM is in the house as much as their schedule will allow but the PM has a day when they take all the questions. Just to make it simple for all the opposition supporter’s out there who have managed to stay with us. This means one day the PM answers all the questions, it does not mean the PM is just in the house for one day.

In conclusion Heidi hopes that someday the opposition parties will understand they are not in the house to simply go against whatever the government of the days wants to do but are there to serve Canadian’s even it means that the Government has some good ideas.

For more details please see



Nathan Cullen

Today in the house Heidi observed Nathan Cullen stand in his place and call out the PM on not continuing with electoral reform. Nathan went on to say that all but the governing party agreed to a proportional system and therefore the PM had mislead Canadian’s.
What Nathan left out of his rant was that the committee had not continued with their quest to define what system they wanted. Heidi says this because the committee did not say what kind of proportional system they had chosen.
If the committee had presented a complete picture to the government and that was denied then perhaps Nathan would have reason to question the sincerity of the PM.
Perhaps the good folks of Skeena-Burkley Valley should ask Nathan why the committee came up short and why he does not understand just what the real purpose of the committee was.



Conservative MP’s news letter

People in Heidi’s Federal electoral area have been sent a news letter by their MP in this news letter was a section down playing the government , Heidi has commented on this section of the news letter.

1. The Massive Liberal Debt                Of course no mention of the 150 billion the previous government borrowed
2. The Cash for Access Scandal          Is it a scandal or is it sour grapes because no one will pay to hear the Conservatives or NDP speak
3. Refusing a Referendum on Electoral Reform When a committee is struck to bring back a process and only goes 1/2 way what will the                                                                                                           referendum be about when you say proportional system what kind of proportional system do you                                                                                     want , to say proportional is only part of  the story this is like saying I want a new car, OK a VW or                                                                                     a Chev.
4. Reckless Ministerial Spending       OK for the conservatives to spend over 12K at the UN but not OK for the Liberals to spend 6K in Paris to                                                                         take pictures
5. Glowing Praise for Fidel Castro      No more praise given by the Liberals then was given by the Pope
6. Refusing to Call ISIS Atrocities a Genocide   It is up to the UN to attach that label
7. Cancelling Conservative Tax Breaks                boutique breaks removed to give a tax free amount to all families , I know for a fact end the end                                                                                          families got more to spend on what they need
8. Staff Moving Expenses                Liberals went a little over board on this one
9. The Massive Paris Delegation    Which included not only Liberals but provincial leaders as well so all parties involved could see first hand                                                                    what the problems and agreements were about No under the table my way or the highway with this one
10. Not Showing up for Question Period    who or what , if you mean the PM he was traveling to complete trade deals that were not completed or                                                                             do you mean meetings with first nations and provincial leaders


These ten points is what the Conservatives can come with to belittle the government , looks like real government work must be going well

That is all Heidi can say today