# We get the governments we deserve, don't we?



## Edward Campbell (9 Feb 2014)

I was tempted, first, to put this in the _Grand Strategy for a Divided America__ thread, but, based on recceguy's cri de coeur about the state of our, Canadian, politics, I decided that it belongs in a new thread in our Canadian Politics page.



			
				recceguy said:
			
		


			Unfortunately, at this time, there is neither a good candidate in some ridings, or a good political party.
		
Click to expand...


This article, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the Economist, shocked me a bit. "How," I asked myself, "could any sane, grown up legislator oppose free(er) trade?" "It is intuitively obvious," I said to myself, "to anyone who has passed even the most basic history courses, that free trade works for everyone. Only fools oppose free trade." "Wait," I reminded myself, "about half of Canadians (and Americans) do oppose free trade." "Yes, yes, yes," I agreed with myself, "but we know that that's the half of the people who are too f'ing stupid to breathe without adult supervision, much less vote."

All that being given as truth ~ and, yes, I know some people here on Army.ca oppose free trade and I affirm that they are fools who ought to be denied the vote ... as well as going out, alone, after dark ~ then what gets into Harry Reid?









When Harry mugged Barry
*Harry Reid threatens to impoverish the world by at least $600 billion a year*

Feb 8th 2014

From the print edition

IN HIS state-of-the-union address Barack Obama asked Congress to give him “fast-track” authority to negotiate trade deals. Shortly afterwards his most important ally on Capitol Hill hinted that he might block it. As Senate majority leader, Harry Reid can do just that: no bill gets a vote without his say-so. But would he really stiff Mr Obama? Much depends on the answer.

Studies suggest that proposed deals with Asia and Europe could generate global gains of $600 billion a year, with $200 billion of that going to America. And that understates the benefits, since the deals would spur competition in the market for services, which make up most of rich countries’ output but are seldom traded across borders. Opening industries like finance and transport to greater competition could bring great savings to consumers.

Mr Obama has never been an ardent free-trader, yet his second term got off to a promising start. The Trans-Pacific Partnership, a deal with large Pacific-rim economies, is close to completion; America and Japan are hammering out the rules for farm goods. European and American trade wonks continue to meet regularly, hoping to wrap up a “next-generation” trade agreement as early as next year.

To make all this happen Mr Obama needs “trade promotion authority” (usually known as “fast-track”), which would let him negotiate deals and then present them to Congress for a simple yes-or-no vote, with no chance for lawmakers to rewrite the details. Without such authority, America’s trading partners cannot take the White House seriously as a negotiator. Fast-track was last granted to George W. Bush in 2002 and expired in 2007. Since Republicans are generally pro-trade and Democrats are generally loyal to Mr Obama, most people in Washington at first assumed that Congress would give it to him without a fuss.

But with elections looming and lawmakers in a populist mood, that is far from certain. Late last year roughly half the members of the House wrote to Mr Obama declaring their opposition to fast-track; most were from his own party. In early January a bipartisan group of senators introduced a fast-track bill. Mr Obama spoke up for it in his state-of-the-union address, but only in passing and in mercantilist terms. The aim is “to protect our workers, protect our environment and open new markets to new goods stamped ‘Made in the USA’,” he said; without mentioning that cheap imports raise living standards.

Barely had he left the podium when Mr Reid mugged him. Answering questions from reporters, he reiterated his opposition to fast-track and advised its backers “not [to] push this right now”. Insiders doubt that Mr Reid would kill the bill outright. Haggling in the Senate may yield a new version with enough about labour standards and the environment to satisfy the protectionists. If so, Mr Reid will probably allow a vote, and the bill should pass. The White House remains publicly optimistic.

Yet damage is already being done. Michael Froman, Mr Obama’s trade representative, says negotiations have not been affected by the politicking in Washington. However, even if Mr Reid’s rebellion was partly for show (his seat is at risk in 2016), it still worries America’s trade partners. Shinzo Abe, Japan’s prime minister, may be reluctant to offend voters at home for the sake of a trade deal that America’s legislators might promptly torpedo. Similarly, the French, who have been a constant pain in talks between America and Europe, could argue that since America’s leaders seem determined to attach conditions to a fast-track bill, France’s demands for carve-outs deserve consideration, too.

At home meanwhile, Democratic opposition could harden. Some lawmakers may see an opportunity to put daylight between themselves and their Republican foes ahead of November’s elections. With corporate profits looking healthy and wages still stagnant almost five years into the recovery, some may be tempted to portray Republican backing for free trade as support for fat-cat corporations.

Mr Reid’s surprise rebuke suggests that Mr Obama needs to communicate better with his allies. And if he wishes to prevent two of the most promising trade deals in a decade from unravelling, he will need to make a far more full-throated case for the benefits of free exchange.
		
Click to expand...



Sen Reid is appeasing (shades of Neville Chamberlain) his political base which, being left of centre, is afraid of free trade because it (the political left) always puts the possible immediate and short term costs ahead of the guaranteed* mid to long term gains and he is appealing to the spirit if American exceptionalism, which still resonates with many (most?) Americans: the notion that America is special and it need not, should not, even must not compromise with foreigners (those lesser breeds without the Law).

My guess is that Sen Reid, with his cynical stab in the back to free trade negotiations, better understands the American and Canadian political calculus than do I. He knows that his appeal to the lowest common denominator, his decision to pander to the uninformed ~ rather then to inform them, his plan to sacrifice the common good for his own, narrow, partisan political advantage, will produce good results for him, for the Democratic Party and for Hillary Clinton in 2016.

The Americans will, I am 100% certain, get the government they deserve in these, 2014, mid-term elections and in 2016. And it will, I am 95% certain, be a substandard government; but it will be, in that, one that reflects the level of political discourse in America.

I'm also absolutely sure that we, Canadians, will get the government we deserve in 2015. I know, also with absolute certainty, that I will oppose some/most or all (depending on which party "wins") of the government's policies. I will get a government that thinks people like Ken Lewenza, Jerry Dias and Sid Ryan have views on e.g. free trade that deserve a full and fair hearing ~ they don't. I will get a government that believes in buying your and my vote with attractive, carefully targeted tax breaks and regional corporate welfare prgrammes. I will get a government that is timid. But I will get a government that appeals to a plurality of my fellow citizens ... and I will weep.

But we will get the government we deserve; in fact we will get the government most of us want. We will get the government we elect ... freely and fairly.






_____
* Any fair, objective reading of the historical record says that free grade always does the most good for the most people._


----------



## pbi (10 Feb 2014)

Funny how Americans can talk about free trade and never mention their biggest trading partner and their biggest energy supplier.

That aside, you are right that we will get the government we deserve. Maybe, if more people would put down the remote or the mouse and go out to vote, we might deserve a better government. But as long as only about half of the population (give or take) bothers, then we need only a portion of that half to vote in a government.

The rest of the electorate sits at home and whines about it, saying stupid self-fulfilling prophecies like "my vote doesn't matter anyway".  

So maybe the end result is that WE end up getting the government THEY deserve.


----------



## mariomike (10 Feb 2014)

pbi said:
			
		

> So maybe the end result is that WE end up getting the government THEY deserve.



Reminds me of the old joke that one day the people ( of Louisiana, but could be almost anywhere - even Toronto   ) would elect "good government, and they won't like it!"


----------



## Edward Campbell (29 May 2014)

In a column in _Maclean's_ magazine Paul Wells explains _how_ Prime Minister Stephen Harper is changing Canada in ways that may be irreversible.

He has, cut _revenue_ and _spending_ and he may have painted the Liberals and NDP and all of Canada into a Conservative corner because,Wells says:

     "... the NDP and Liberals have foresworn personal tax increases. Tom Mulcair calls this “a contract with the voting public on our behalf.” Justin Trudeau says “Canadians are struggling…there is no reason to raise taxes on them
       now.” In fact he goes Mulcair one better and promises he won’t raise individual or corporate taxes.

       Two things about this.

       First, Mulcair is fooling himself if he thinks corporate taxes can be increased to make up for the shortfall in personal-tax income Harper has engineered. As the PBO points out, “Personal income tax and the federal portion of the GST/HST
       account for 75 per cent of federal tax revenues.” There’s way less room to make money off rich fat cats than Mulcair pretends. I mean, he’s welcome to keep pretending, but if he keeps his word an NDP government will remain short of
       cash. And a Liberal government, more so.

        Second, this is why Stephen Harper is in politics. I wrote a book about that. He may one day stop being prime minister, at which point the real fun begins, because his opponents are promising to run a Pierre Trudeau government or
        a Jack Layton government at John Diefenbaker prices. It can’t be done. Their inability to do it will be Harper’s legacy."

There has been an impact on national defence. The PBO report Paul Wells cites says that government revenues are down by $30 Billion, or 12%, over the past nine years. That's about $3 Billion per year that could not be spent, on anything, because it simple wasn't there. Even 10% of that $30 Billion would have bought a few ships, LAVs or SAR aircraft.


----------



## Coastalchaos (29 May 2014)

"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." - Winston Churchill


----------



## ModlrMike (29 May 2014)

On the subject of raising taxes, France illustrates that simply increasing taxation does not lead to increased revenue:

France in 14bn-euro tax black hole

The French government faces a 14bn-euro black hole in its public finances after overestimating tax income for the last financial year.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (29 May 2014)

Anyone who has tried importing or exporting to and from the US will know that the US is a highly protectionist state. For them Free Trade means open up your markets to us, but not ours to you.


----------



## Tibbson (29 May 2014)

I dont believe for a second that we get the government we deserve for I feel Canada deserves the best government in the world.  

I'd refine the statement to "we get the government we elect" in that if we elect crap, due to appethy and neglect, that is what we get.


----------



## Brad Sallows (30 May 2014)

To be fair, at least part of the time every voter can claim he suffers from having the government those other guys deserved.


----------



## Journeyman (30 May 2014)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> "... the NDP and Liberals have foresworn personal tax increases. Tom Mulcair calls this “a contract with the voting public on our behalf.”


I've now heard the new NDP promise at both the Toronto Mayoral- and Provincial-candidate level -- "we'll save more than we spend."  

Obviously they've caught on that the voting public doesn't trust them, knowing they'll run amok with the piggy bank, so they're promising they'll somehow now start governing with fiscal responsibility at the forefront.






    :


----------



## GAP (30 May 2014)

It's not hard to see....the voting public just have to look next door to see what the NDP have done to Manitoba.  :

And isn't it amazing what has happened to Saskatchewan once the NDP were turfed out.....


----------



## Fishbone Jones (30 May 2014)

GAP said:
			
		

> It's not hard to see....the voting public just have to look next door to see what the NDP have done to Manitoba.  :
> 
> And isn't it amazing what has happened to Saskatchewan once the NDP were turfed out.....



Or what Bob Rae and the NDP did to Ontario,


----------



## Edward Campbell (30 May 2014)

Just a (slightly) historical note: the old CCF was a mix of socialist, prairie populists (a breed that never dies but shifts allegiances on a fairly regular basis), unions and farmers and it had, amongst other policies, a pretty firm - and very acceptable, even to Conservative - view about fiscal prudence. The big shift came in the early 1960s when David Lewis and the _labour_ faction, heavily supported by the Canadian Labour Congress, displaced the _prairie co-op_ faction and shifted the newly formed NDP away from its roots and onto a new, fiscally irresponsible path.


----------



## Edward Campbell (29 Oct 2015)

:weird:

I'm resurrecting this thread because of this article which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the _Ottawa Citizen_ that discusses a fairly important report (in my opinion) about the _organization_ of our _government_:

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/politics/public-institutions-need-reboot-to-rebalance-power-says-report
My _comments_ included


> Public institutions need 'reboot' to rebalance power, says report
> 
> MARK KENNEDY, OTTAWA CITIZEN
> 
> ...




I oppose trying to legislate the functions of the public service. As with written constitutions, such a proposal wilkl do more harm than good.We have nearly 500 years of very solid _convention_ to guide the public service and the relationships between politicians and public servants. The way to solve the perceived problem (I think it's only a symptom) is to hold politicians and political staff fully accountable ~ when staff screw up ministers resign (or are fired). _Adscam_ would never have happened had Jean Pelletier stayed within his lanes ~ instead he was allowed to intrude into the day-to-day business of government, dealing, directly with e.g. Chuck Guité and the result was _crime_ that was traced, clearly and directly to Jean Chrétien's outer office ... no one, except M Guité, was ever held accountable because they were _political_ staff and politicians. That, with the politicians and their staffs, is where the problem lies.


----------



## ArmyRick (29 Oct 2015)

Interesting read. To truly fix DND, one needs to look at how the entire government functions.


----------



## Brad Sallows (29 Oct 2015)

Drilling down, the most insufferable problem is the power of the unelected temporary political staff.

>Good governance is not an end in itself, but a means towards achieving a robust democracy for the benefit  of all citizens.

There's always at least one statement that makes me go "WTF"?  Democracy is a means of obtaining good governance.  Good governance is a means of securing ... fill in whatever you think appropriate; I'd start with "an environment in which people may live their own lives with the blessings of liberty".  "Democracy" is overused as shorthand for "institutions and associations and customs".


----------



## c_canuk (30 Oct 2015)

I feel democracy's biggest advantage is that is pits the power hungry authoritarians against eachother in a perpetual contest for the population's approval, rather than team up to extract more power from the people.


----------



## Baz (30 Oct 2015)

Is anyone else concerned that the earlier Trudeau brought a lot of power to the PAO?


----------



## Colin Parkinson (3 Nov 2015)

They are to busy with the current lovefest that is going on, except for grouchy old men (or up and coming grouchy old farts like myself)  like ourselves who are cursed with a smattering of history and memories of political scandals past.  ;D


----------



## Colin Parkinson (3 Nov 2015)

just arrived in my inbox,  don't recall getting one when the Liberals left? 

Over the last nine years, my team and I have worked very closely with the Public Service of Canada to improve the prosperity, security and well-being of Canadians and improve Canada’s position in the world. 

I am very proud of the remarkable work we have accomplished together towards meeting these objectives. 

I would like to thank each and every one of you for the support you have shown my team and me over three successive parliaments and for the dedication you have demonstrated in delivering for Canadians. 

It has been an honour to serve as Prime Minister of the greatest country in the world and I will always be grateful for the support of Canada’s world-class public service. 

Stephen Harper
Prime Minister of Canada


----------



## Edward Campbell (3 Nov 2015)

Colin P said:
			
		

> just arrived in my inbox,  don't recall getting one when the Liberals left?
> 
> Over the last nine years, my team and I have worked very closely with the Public Service of Canada to improve the prosperity, security and well-being of Canadians and improve Canada’s position in the world.
> 
> ...




And the _Ottawa Citizen_ reports on Prime Minister Harper's letter and the PSAC's churlish, low class response ... so typical of the public service union culture ... not of the public service, _per se_, nor of trade unions, in general; "churlish," "low class" and so on just apply, specifically, to the leadership of public service unions.


----------



## OldSolduer (3 Nov 2015)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> And the _Ottawa Citizen_ reports on Prime Minister Harper's letter and the PSAC's churlish, low class response ... so typical of the public service union culture ... not of the public service, _per se_, nor of trade unions, in general; "churlish," "low class" and so on just apply, specifically, to the leadership of public service unions.



One of the most churlish rude things I read was that when Margaret Thatcher died, unionist said "The witch is dead". No class.


----------



## jollyjacktar (3 Nov 2015)

Hamish Seggie said:
			
		

> One of the most churlish rude things I read was that when Margaret Thatcher died, unionist said "The witch is dead". No class.



Agreed.  But she did have the hate of the Miners, that's for sure.


----------



## jollyjacktar (3 Nov 2015)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> And the _Ottawa Citizen_ reports on Prime Minister Harper's letter and the PSAC's churlish, low class response ... so typical of the public service union culture ... not of the public service, _per se_, nor of trade unions, in general; "churlish," "low class" and so on just apply, specifically, to the leadership of public service unions.



I would have been shocked if they had responded like adults.  Their response is true to form.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (3 Nov 2015)

I left this reply in the comments section of the Ottawa Citizen :facepalm:

I now await unemotional, factual and educational responses from members of PSAC. :warstory: [/sarcasm]

_"Hmmm, how soon PSAC forgets those rosey times under the Liberals. When they had to sue them for stealing their pension trusts. Discriminatory employers, public and private, that had been given confidence to continue pay discrimination by the actions of the Chrétien Liberals, even after writing to PSAC president Daryl Bean promising to abide by the tribunal decision. Chrétien wrote: “Equal pay for work of equal value became a right with the passage of the Canadian Human Rights Act, a right that does not begin and end on the whim of the Tory government.” Another Liberal lie affecting PSAC. These aren't one offs. The misappropriation of funds, the broken promises and outright lies are massive and legendary..

Guess what PSAC, those same guys are back in charge as the PM designate's handlers, policy and speech writers as well as spokespersons for the Liberals once again. You failed to learn from history, you're now doomed to repeat it. Have fun."_


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (3 Nov 2015)

recceguy said:
			
		

> I left this reply in the comments section of the Ottawa Citizen :facepalm:
> 
> I now await unemotional, factual and educational responses from members of PSAC. :warstory: [/sarcasm]
> 
> ...



Nice fire across the broadside I must say!  :warstory:


----------



## Fishbone Jones (3 Nov 2015)

Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> Nice fire across the broadside I must say!  :warstory:


----------



## Jed (3 Nov 2015)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> I would have been shocked if they had responded like adults.  Their response is true to form.



Yep, low class. I doubt that the next 4 years of government by the Liberals will be enough to alter the mindset though. One can only hope.


----------



## jollyjacktar (3 Nov 2015)

Jed said:
			
		

> Yep, low class. I doubt that the next 4 years of government by the Liberals will be enough to alter the mindset though. One can only hope.



Not likely in my personal opinion.  They are blind to reality, after all they did vote in their Liberal ancestors time and time again.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (3 Nov 2015)

It appears my comment was deleted, so I reposted it and also sent it to my FB page ;D


----------



## cavalryman (3 Nov 2015)

recceguy said:
			
		

> It appears my comment was deleted, so I reposted it and also sent it to my FB page ;D



Shame on you, contradicting the narrative like that.  >

BTW, I had to spend some time with the PSAC president circa 2007 - a Marxist Scotsman of the finest vintage.  Probably immigrated to Canada during the Thatcher years.  Still had a Glaswegian accent thick enough to create its own smokescreen.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (4 Nov 2015)

cavalryman said:
			
		

> Shame on you, contradicting the narrative like that.  >
> 
> BTW, I had to spend some time with the PSAC president circa 2007 - a Marxist Scotsman of the finest vintage.  Probably immigrated to Canada during the Thatcher years.  Still had a Glaswegian accent thick enough to create its own smokescreen.



You mean like every top position for almost every union in B.C. ;D


----------



## Edward Campbell (4 Nov 2015)

The _Toronto Sun_ says, "Today's The Day!"






Source: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CS-NmDkUsAAd3I9.jpg:large


----------



## Colin Parkinson (4 Nov 2015)

recceguy said:
			
		

> I left this reply in the comments section of the Ottawa Citizen :facepalm:
> 
> I now await unemotional, factual and educational responses from members of PSAC. :warstory: [/sarcasm]
> 
> ...


I also remember closing of the fish hatcheries, SAR vessels tied to the dock for lack of fuel to name a few. I also remember the relief by many of the PS when those thieving bastards were kicked out of government.


----------



## jollyjacktar (4 Nov 2015)

Colin P said:
			
		

> I also remember closing of the fish hatcheries, SAR vessels tied to the dock for lack of fuel to name a few. I also remember the relief by many of the PS when those thieving bastards were kicked out of government.



I am sure that when the day comes that everyone is tired of our new alien overlords, they'll be happy to see the back end of them too.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (4 Nov 2015)

I accept a change in government, i just find the current lovefest and amnesia of the crowd nauseating.


----------



## jollyjacktar (4 Nov 2015)

Ach, for them it's the arrival of spring once more.  I can understand their glee at seeing their version of sunshine and warm temps.  They've not seen the blackflies, mossies, slugs and hurricane seasons start just yet.  That will come in due course and they'll maybe love spring and summer a little bit less.


----------



## cavalryman (4 Nov 2015)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Ach, for them it's the arrival of spring once more.  I can understand their glee at seeing their version of sunshine and warm temps.  They've not seen the blackflies, mossies, slugs and hurricane seasons start just yet.  That will come in due course and they'll maybe love spring and summer a little bit less.


I feel a song coming on..... here it is:

Springtime for Justin and Canada  

:nod:

(With apologies to Mel Brooks)


----------



## a_majoor (4 Nov 2015)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Ach, for them it's the arrival of spring once more.  I can understand their glee at seeing their version of sunshine and warm temps.  They've not seen the blackflies, mossies, slugs and hurricane seasons start just yet.  That will come in due course and they'll maybe love spring and summer a little bit less.



Since we are the ones paying for the warm sunshine etc, I suspect that it is we who will be subject to blackflies,mossies, slugs and hurricane seasons. The political class has become very adept at insulating themselves and their favoured clients from the effects of their policies.


----------



## OldSolduer (4 Nov 2015)

Will we have to pay for rainbows and unicorns?


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (4 Nov 2015)

Hate to rain on your parades Jollyjacktar and Thucydides, but hurricane season is fall! Not spring or summer (unless you count the last little bit at the end of the summer, from time to time).

Just saying.  :dunno:


----------



## Furniture (5 Nov 2015)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Hate to rain on your parades Jollyjacktar and Thucydides, but hurricane season is fall! Not spring or summer (unless you count the last little bit at the end of the summer, from time to time).
> 
> Just saying.  :dunno:



Atlantic Hurricane season runs from June 1st through November 30th, so spring into fall...   

Though I predit this first season will be mild, but come 2017 the cycles of blatent corruption and unkept promises will return us to some typical political storms.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (5 Nov 2015)

I thought this thread was about the government, but we can keep the weather analogy going  ;D

First, Weatherdog, some vocabulary: What you refer to  (starting June 1st each year) is what the NOAA and other weather orgs call the "North-Atlantic Tropical Storm Season" because that is when they start to monitor the revolving type depressions along the tropics from Africa and across the Atlantic. If they get big enough to be Tropical Depressions or Tropical Storms and above, they get a name. But in practice, very few of these develop into a hurricane before September*. Rare exceptions exist, like Bob in 1991, which occurred in the last two weeks of August. I think there was another one in the late 1800's that occurred in August also. 

The analogy is clear here: This new government will gather little whiffs of scandals and corrupt practices here and there in the summer of their existence and these will slowly develop into larger and larger storms, until by the end (their Autumn, as in their "Fall"), they will be full blown hurricanes that will sweep them away from power.  :nod:

*: Just for info value for people: This year, for instance is a relatively mild Tropical Storm Season. Started with a small one, weak Tropical Storm Andrea on June 5, with first actual hurricane, Henderson, occurring on September 16.


----------



## Furniture (5 Nov 2015)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> I thought this thread was about the government, but we can keep the weather analogy going  ;D
> 
> First, Weatherdog, some vocabulary: What you refer to  (starting June 1st each year) is what the NOAA and other weather orgs call the "North-Atlantic Tropical Storm Season" because that is when they start to monitor the revolving type depressions along the tropics from Africa and across the Atlantic. If they get big enough to be Tropical Depressions or Tropical Storms and above, they get a name. But in practice, very few of these develop into a hurricane before September*. Rare exceptions exist, like Bob in 1991, which occurred in the last two weeks of August. I think there was another one in the late 1800's that occurred in August also.
> 
> ...



I knew exactly what terminology I was using when I refered to it as Hurricane Season... It's the same terminology used by the NOAA's National Hurricane Center... Weather and by extension weather terminology is a bit of thing in my job


----------



## Kirkhill (5 Nov 2015)

Colin P said:
			
		

> I accept a change in government, i just find the current lovefest and amnesia of the crowd nauseating.



Simple solution - Start reading the Brit, or Polish or Azerbaijani news. 

Even their tarts are more interesting.


----------



## Edward Campbell (5 Nov 2015)

Chris Pook said:
			
		

> Simple solution - Start reading the Brit, or Polish or Azerbaijani news.
> 
> _Even their tarts are more interesting._




Always were ... back in the 1970s and 80s pretty much every Brit Officers' Mess had multiple subscriptions to _The Sun_ ... which, to be fair, had excellent sports coverage, but also had ...

     
	

	
	
		
		

		
			











          ... the charming Ms Samantha Fox.

Of course everyone stopped by the table in the Mess ante room to check the cricket or rugby scores, not the well endowed Ms Fox.  :nod:


----------



## my72jeep (5 Nov 2015)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Always were ... back in the 1970s and 80s pretty much every Brit Officers' Mess had multiple subscriptions to _The Sun_ ... which, to be fair, had excellent sports coverage, but also had ...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'll admit I skipped the scores and went straight to Ms Fox.


----------



## Edward Campbell (5 Nov 2015)

my72jeep said:
			
		

> I'll admit I skipped the scores and went straight to Ms Fox.




Well, no, not really; I mean, the scores were farther back, from about P. 10 and beyond, so Ms Fox was just "on the way," so to speak, and one just happened to stumble upon her, uhhh ... attributes.


----------



## cavalryman (5 Nov 2015)

There were scores in the Sun?  ???


----------



## Edward Campbell (5 Nov 2015)

cavalryman said:
			
		

> There were scores in the Sun?  ???




So I'm told  :nod:  ... rumour has it they were somewhere after the bountiful Ms Fox.


----------



## Kirkhill (5 Nov 2015)

Dammit. Keeps happening... always being misconstrued.

People assuming Austrian when I meant Corsican and now this.....

Tarts, People!  Tarts!


----------



## GK .Dundas (5 Nov 2015)

Chris Pook said:
			
		

> Dammit. Keeps happening... always being misconstrued.
> 
> People assuming Austrian when I meant Corsican and now this.....
> 
> Tarts, People!  Tarts!


 That's his  story and he sticking to it !   :nod:


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (5 Nov 2015)

Well, these tarts are sticky (especially the Austrian honey-covered ones - don't know about Corsicans  ;D).

There's another word that could be misconstrued: Honey!


----------



## Edward Campbell (27 Nov 2015)

Adam Vaughan is the MP for Spadina-Fort York, in downtown Toronto, a very well know city councillor and a bit of a "giant killer" in that he defeated Olivia Chow; he seemed like a "shoo-in" for cabinet, but ...

Rumours are floating about, spread by Jane Taber in the _Globe and Mail_ that "the federal government quickly shut down any chance of [Toronto Island Airport] expansion to appease Mr. Vaughan for not naming him to cabinet." 

Ms Taber goes on ...

    "Earlier this month, and just a week after being sworn in to cabinet, Transport Minister Marc Garneau quickly tweeted his decision: “I confirm that GofC position is same as LPC commitment: we will not reopen tripartite agreement for YTZ.”

     He gave no reasons or an explanation why he wouldn’t even wait for the studies on the effect of jets and the expansion of the runway to boaters, the harbour, noise levels and the environment."

Depending upon who you believe this decision is either what the residents of downtown Toronto want and need or it is economic vandalism that will cost Toronto thousands of good jobs and hundreds of millions in growth, year after year after year.


----------



## dapaterson (27 Nov 2015)

While a fan of Toronto's Island airport, I do understand (in part) the rationale behind not expanding it.  The land-side infrastructure is barely up to the task of supporting passenger movements now; it would likely cost in the low nine figures to reconfigure the land side to support larger aircraft and a significantly increased passenger throughput.  While the optics of appeasing the raving NIMBYs of Toronto is bad, the infra demands of Toronto to support an expansion of the airport might have tipped the scales.

More importantly, a little more than four years from now, once the government has a better sense of where they need support for re-election, this could become a "we support growing Toronto's economy" announcement; what's politics if not a series of 180 degree reversals for tactical advantage?


----------



## dimsum (27 Nov 2015)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> While a fan of Toronto's Island airport, I do understand (in part) the rationale behind not expanding it.  The land-side infrastructure is barely up to the task of supporting passenger movements now; it would likely cost in the low nine figures to reconfigure the land side to support larger aircraft and a significantly increased passenger throughput.  While the optics of appeasing the raving NIMBYs of Toronto is bad, the infra demands of Toronto to support an expansion of the airport might have tipped the scales.
> 
> More importantly, a little more than four years from now, once the government has a better sense of where they need support for re-election, this could become a "we support growing Toronto's economy" announcement; what's politics if not a series of 180 degree reversals for tactical advantage?



I wonder how that balances with the voters in Quebec that will be affected with Bombardier's sales (or not) to Porter that were predicated on the expansion of the airport?


----------



## dapaterson (27 Nov 2015)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> I wonder how that balances with the voters in Quebec that will be affected with Bombardier's sales (or not) to Porter that were predicated on the expansion of the airport?



I suspect Robert Deluce has a plan "B" for Porter.  (And likely a C and possibly a D to boot)  For example, what if Porter established a second hub in Montreal to fly C-Series jets?


----------



## NavyShooter (27 Nov 2015)

Or what would happen if the CAF ended up with a dozen of them for FWSAR, with the ability to reconfigure them for refugee rescue and humanitarian aid delivery?  Nevermind if it's what we need, its pork-barrel politics...


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (27 Nov 2015)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> I suspect Robert Deluce has a plan "B" for Porter.  (And likely a C and possibly a D to boot)  For example, what if Porter established a second hub in Montreal to fly C-Series jets?



You can have ten hubs in Montreal if you like, it doesn't make any difference if you are stuck landing at Pearson in Toronto. TO is where a second hub is needed.

On top of that, more numerous hubs won't be the issue in Montreal over the next four to five years: road infrastructure will be, as we are simultaneously rebuilding the main central road interchange in the City (the Turcot) - thus making east-west circulation a nightmare (meaning huge extra lead time required to go to Dorval airport) while rebuilding the busiest bridge in Canada and main South shore access from Montreal (the Champlain bridge) - thus making circulation to and from the South shore a nightmare (meaning huge extra lead time to go to Saint-Hubert airport). And of course, Mirabel is being demolished, so ...


----------



## George Wallace (27 Nov 2015)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> You can have ten hubs in Montreal if you like, it doesn't make any difference if you are stuck landing at Pearson in Toronto. TO is where a second hub is needed.
> 
> On top of that, more numerous hubs won't be the issue in Montreal over the next four to five years: road infrastructure will be, as we are simultaneously rebuilding the main central road interchange in the City (the Turcot) - thus making east-west circulation a nightmare (meaning huge extra lead time required to go to Dorval airport) while rebuilding the busiest bridge in Canada and main South shore access from Montreal (the Champlain bridge) - thus making circulation to and from the South shore a nightmare (meaning huge extra lead time to go to Saint-Hubert airport). And of course, Mirabel is being demolished, so ...



I can't figure out why they could not find another use for Mirabel......Like a processing center for all these refugees coming in......or something like a Freight Handling Center......

I am not looking forward to more traffic on the 30 than there already is.  Already it can't handle the volume from the 15 to the 20.


----------



## dapaterson (27 Nov 2015)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> I can't figure out why they could not find another use for Mirabel......Like a processing center for all these refugees coming in......or something like a Freight Handling Center......
> 
> I am not looking forward to more traffic on the 30 than there already is.  Already it can't handle the volume from the 15 to the 20.



Mirabel is a freight handling centre; they're demolishing (have demolished?) the passenger terminal.  It's also used by Bombardier  and various other aerospace companies.


----------

