In 1993, an NDP member rose in the Legislative Assembly to state clearly that the Port Mann Bridge needs to be twinned. The transportation minister Art Charbonneau said:
“…we need to twin the Port Mann Bridge…When we are able (to do this)…then we will have resolved the traffic congestion problems around that area, while allowing a safe and efficient transportation system.”
But back in the present day of 2009, the NDP transportation critic Maurine Karagianis continues to reject the new Port Mann Bridge and the 8,000 jobs that will be created during construction. In fact, in Question Period this week she called the Port Mann Bridge project “…a colossal waste of taxpayers' money.”Gee, has traffic congestion eased in the past 15 years? We certainly keep seeing more cars and trucks queuing up to get into or out of Surrey over the Port Mann. Do the NDP have special rose-coloured traffic cameras that show them a different picture? Or are they trying so hard to distance themselves from the 1990s that they lost sight of common sense?
Carol James and the NDP. Wrong party. Wrong leader. Wrong time.
www.votesmartbc.com
Posts
Thank you from the Coalition
14 years ago
You people are so full of lies!
ReplyDeleteAnonymous says - "I can't argue against you, so I will just call you names."
ReplyDeleteAnother NDP kool-aid drinker.
I'm pretty sure that the NDP are not rejecting the proposed Port Mann Bridge project, as the emailed newsletter stated.
ReplyDeleteDidn't Carol James support the bridge in the media a few days back?
By the way, the bridge, though needed, is still a colossal waste of taxpayers' money. The project ought to be scaled back big time. Still expand the damned bridge, but 10 lanes and $3 billion is ridiculous.
Tony said: "Didn't Carol James support the bridge in the media a few days back?"
ReplyDeleteShe did say that. The question is 'Why did she say that?' What changed from 'wrong bridge, wrong time'?
The answer is that nothing has changed. There aren't new facts of which she became aware; there isn't a single thing different today than when she opposed the bridge.
I'm left to believe that her first statement ('wrong bridge') is the truth. Any play towards supporting the bridge is merely a cheap political stunt in a desperate bid to be on both sides of an issue.
Carole James is a phenomenally weak leader. She would at least have some credibility to stick with her opposition to the bridge, and justify it.
My bet is that win or lose in May, she is GONE as leader of the NDP.
Well at least P3s have been exposed as inheritly risky and more expensive then public funding.
ReplyDelete