- Pet forum for dogs cats and humans 


Mr. Bryant gets MPP to write star for him....

October 25th, 2004, 11:20 AM
Hmmm...... someone should find out exactly what happened. Following Mr. Bryants own letter to the star Iw ould say he feels the need to defend himself. Atleast we know hes worried about what people are thinking

A-G met experts on pit-bull issue

Pit-bull ban


Several recently-published articles and letters have said incorrectly that Attorney-General Michael Bryant has refused to meet with experts and in particular the Ontario Veterinary Medical Association (OVMA) with regard to the proposed ban on pit bulls. I wish to correct the record.

Since announcing the government was considering a pit-bull ban at the end of August, the Attorney-General has met with, heard from, and considered the views of a wide range of interested parties on all sides of the pit-bull debate. Bryant received and considered the OVMA's submissions and wrote to the OVMA inviting it to contact his officials for a meeting. However, their schedules did not permit an early meeting so the Attorney-General's staff and ministry officials met with them on Oct. 21.

Following all these meetings, the government has decided it will introduce a bill that, if passed, will mean a ban on pit bulls and increased restrictions on other dangerous dogs in order to protect people and make our communities safer.

David Zimmer, MPP, Willowdale,

Parliamentary Assistant to the Attorney-General of Ontario, Toronto

October 25th, 2004, 11:25 AM
I guess everybody else is lying a politician who cant get the facts straight would never lie to us.

October 25th, 2004, 09:39 PM
They lie so much it must seem stange to them when a little truth is spoken . So Bryant met with the vets on the 21st , that was last Thursday , he announced the ban the week before that . Now in the mind of our lying liberals Bryant has met with and considered all input . Sorry I don't quite see it that way . A political Half-truth .GOOD ENOUGH for the public
What I do see though is a one term government with about 3 years remaining . They lied to get voted in . "The people of Ontario will not be paying a penny more in taxes under a liberal government " McGinty the lead liar said that on CFRB before the election.
There will be no increase in healthcare costs {making us pay and for less service like no eyecare cost covered } is another LIE
Smoking " like it or not it is a legal product ban it in the workplace , make smoking areas in resturants but stay the hell out of my car and house {I don't smoke by the way}. DICTATOR
No junk food for the little kids is probably a good idea until after it goes through it will leech it's way to other places . Highschools are next are hospitals and arenas far off . Just like the smoking ban it will spread . DICTATOR
Said he would stop housing development on the vunerable OakRidge Morraine a huge water source for much of Ontario . Then he cuts a deal with the builders to let them proceed .I wonder what the benefit of this backdoor deal was ? Normal proceedure politians have done this for decades
He knew of the deficit before he took our votes and then after they got in are trying to justify all the tax increases and service cuts by saying the info they had was wrong . LIE
Now the ban on pitbulls and possibly other breeds . STAY OUT OF MY BACKYARD, YOU DICTATOR
Mr Mcginty . The info the people of Ontario got was wrong and that is what we based our decision to vote you and your band of dictators in with "wrong information"
In 3 years we will say goodbye to you and your party .It will be as low in the polls as Bob Ray's was after he got the boot .Get used to the phrase" third party status " .

October 25th, 2004, 11:19 PM
they might think the Other Breeds bans were Recommended by the OVMA. :sad:

Well, at least he's fessed up in public to other breeds on the Hit List. I wonder whooooo...? :sick:

("Eeeny Meeny chili beaney, The spirits are about to speak..") Bullwinkle the Moose.

October 26th, 2004, 07:35 AM
back peddling at it's finest. if he had any intention of meeting them, he wouldn't have annouced a ban until after doing so. his supporters may swallow this reasoning, but it fails the logic test regardless.

"ohhh, no i didn't decline to meet with them our schedules conflicted, but seeing as i thought they'd support my ban, i went ahead and announced it without find a time where we could meet anyway. who would've known they didn't like the idea?"

this guy's 'a' piece of work.

there's still more organizations that requested meetings he has not met with yet.

does this mean the ovma submited to a breed ban?