04.17.2022 06:44 AM

Mercer on Pepe le Pew – from a decade ago!

7 Comments

  1. Warren,

    Politicians are pretty much always first in line for political shots or satire, humorous or otherwise. It comes with the job.

    All I can say is I wouldn’t want that job in a million years. Just the relatively constant separation from close family would be more than I can take. I admire those who can do it. I certainly can’t.

    • And while I’m at it, who exactly again was Mercer’s employer? Oh right, does that mean HE should be denied his pension, that is if he was in fact there long enough to earn it?

      As they say, everything’s relative.

  2. Steve T says:

    Well, yes – but this critique applies to every single MP who receives the ridiculous gold-plated pension.

    The thesis of Rick Mercer’s satire seems to be one or both of the following:

    1. Pierre is less deserving because he hasn’t held any other jobs. So it’s OK to subsidize the pensions of other MPs, who’ve held other non-Parliamentary jobs, because somehow the Canadian taxpayer should cover their prior employment? Tell me any another career, private or public sector, where your benefits have any relation to your prior job(s)?

    2. Pierre is less deserving because Mercer doesn’t like what Pierre has said. Hmmm…. so now we are going to have a sliding scale of pensions, where those who are deemed to have the “correct” views are more deserving than those who don’t? Irrespective of the fact that every MP was democratically elected?

    Don’t get me wrong – the entire Parliamentary pension structure is asinine, as is the gold-plated benefit package of our GG. But that applies universally – not just to politicians we don’t happen to like.

    • Ron Benn says:

      … or you could view Mercer’s video in the context in which it was put together – humour.

      PP is someone who had not held a job of any responsibility or consequence prior to being elected. The pension plan part of the piece is just icing on the cake. That PP has the temerity to lecture the residents of Canadians about the need to work hard and contribute to society is ironic, at best, and thus he is open to criticism. In this case, as is oft the case with Mercer, with a degree of cutting humour.

    • Sean says:

      M.P.s should get a pension based on their pension plan in the job they vacated to become an M.P. / IE would return to after serving as an MP. If you had no pension before becoming an MP, then you shouldn’t get one as a result. The purpose of an MP’s pension is to soften the blow from having to quit an already lucrative job… Not to CREATE a lucrative job as if winning a life long lottery ticket. The idea is to attract qualified candidates. How’s that working?! It’s not.

      The truth is about 75% of these people make absolutely no difference at all in terms of their own election. You become an MP only by winning a nomination meeting. The leader’s tour / performance during the campaign is usually the only decisive factor and is the scratch and win ticket for a free ride for life.

  3. Sean says:

    The best way to salute Pierre Poilievre’s masculinity is by duct-taping some hockey sticks to the back of your pick up truck and stapling some confederate flags to the hockey sticks and then doing some wheelies in the parking lot of a small town hospital all while honking at complete strangers and screaming aloud about your 28th amendment rights which were handed down to us through George Foreman at the first Easter.

Leave a Reply to Ronald O'Dowd Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.