DTM has a tough time transitioning to online world

Oh, do we pine for precision and professionalism! The problem with turning the DTM into the Online Media is that the important role of editors and copy editors gets cut from the process. What you wind up with can be prose that’s utterly rancid, or at least so wrong that you understand less about the story than before you started reading. Try to figure out what a Globe and Mail journalist is trying to say in the following (oddities are highlighted for your ease of review):

Question Period was a little vertigo inducing today: out of nowhere, Prime Minister Stephen Harper turned the tables on Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff’s campaign to overhaul employment insurance.

Mr. Harper appears to have had quite enough of Mr. Ignatieff asking him almost daily to adopt the Liberal plan for a universal EI benefit of 360 weeks, which is a not so subtle way to present Liberals as champions of the tens of thousands of recently unemployed.

Oddly, the Prime Minister and other Conservatives have refrained from challenging the merits of the proposal. No longer.

Mr. Harper told the Commons that Mr. Ignatieff’s plan would undo changes made by Jean Chrétien. The Prime Minister risked future accusations of heartlessness by saying the Liberal proposal would allow people to claim a year’s worth of benefits for a mere 45 weeks of work. Oh, and the plan would lead to higher payroll taxes, according to Mr. Harper.

If Mr. Ignatieff wants to wage war over EI, the Conservatives are “ready to take him on,” the Prime Minister said.

Here’s an abridged version of the exchange:

Mr. Ignatieff: “Mr. Speaker, the entire country is suffering the effects of a worsening economic crisis. Bankruptcies were up 60 per cent in March. Unemployment is up 83% in Alberta and 68 per cent in British Columbia. There are more people in Western Canada than anywhere else in the country who paid into EI but cannot get benefits. We have proposed a 360-hour national standard of eligibility for EI. Will the Prime Minister act on our proposals before the end of the parliamentary session?”

Mr. Harper: “Mr. Speaker, as you know, Canada has a very generous employment insurance system that we, in fact, enhanced in the most recent economic action plan. Over 80 per cent of those who are paying into it are receiving benefits.”

“The fact of the matter is that this is very transparent. The Liberal Leader wants to change long-standing Liberal policy and we all know why he wants to do it. Having denounced the coalition, he now wants a proposal that he thinks can pull the coalition back together. It is simply another proposal to raise payroll taxes.”

Mr. Ignatieff: “If I had their record on unemployment, I would want to change the subject too. However, this is not about my record. This is about their record. They are the government. I ask again: What does the government propose to do to fix the eligibility problems with EI? There are a lot of Canadians waiting for an answer.”

Mr. Harper: “We all know the motivation of the Liberal Leader in making such a proposal. Let us be clear what the proposal is. The proposal is that a Canadian could work 45 days and collect employment insurance for a year. That would be the system in every region in perpetuity. That would do nothing for the economy or for the recession today. It is simply a completely unwise, un-thought-out proposal to raise payroll taxes to the roof in perpetuity for workers and small business.”

Mr. Ignatieff: “I would like to have the Prime Minister say that to the 150,000 people who would be eligible under EI if our proposal went through…”

Mr. Harper : “… If that leader wants to go out and tell Canadians that he thinks they should pay higher payroll taxes so that people can work 45 days and then collect EI for a year, every single year in every single region of the country, we are ready to take him on.”

Is it 360 hours, 360 days, or 360 weeks? Is it 45 days or 45 weeks? I’m confused.

Where are the copy editors?

MRM